ST The TLJ constructive catch-all analysis and debate thread

I love all the parallels between Rey/Finn/Kylo in both TFA and TLJ. If I'm being honest, I think the TLJ should have stuck with seeing them as the three main characters. Potential unpopular opinion: I love Poe and actually genuinely enjoy and think his story is well integrated into TLJ specifically, but he does overshadow Finn which is I think is a shame because I think Finn is much more thematically connected to the heart of the ST overall. In this sense I question the choice to more or less elevate Poe to main character status.

I wonder how a more Finn-dominated Resistance storyline with maybe more of a Leia-Finn mentor-mentee relationship (with Poe playing a strong supporting role) would have looked. It's interesting to think about nonetheless and I was curious if there happened to be anyone who felt the same way?

 

I don't think with Finn you could replicate the Poe-Leia mentor-protege dynamic, which exists both onscreen and offscreen before TFA.

What they should have done was focus on the Finn-Han dynamic, and how Han's death effected him and should have changed him.

(Finn was the character who spent the most time with Han in TFA besides Chewie)


But of course, they didn't.

Han's death, instead, is touched on with Luke, Leia, Kylo and Rey but not Finn. It doesn't help that Han's legacy of the Falcon and being partners with Chewie went to Rey.

 

I think its fair to remember that "learning to be a force ghost" is something that was retconned into the story almost 2 decades later. I also think that "learning to be a force ghost in a few hours" is different from becoming the most powerful force user ever in a matter of days.

 

Actually that was in the early drafts of ROTJ where Yoda and Obi-Wan say to Vader they will save his spirit from going into the netherworld of the Force. The only time that term was used in the movies was in ROTS. So there was an at the time explanation that simply wasn't worked in.

 

I didn't know that. That may be true, but I'm just going by what made it into the stories presented to us. I do wonder how that scene would've played out had it made it in.

 

When looking at the list of deleted scenes and when in relation to parts in TLJ novel (that weren't in the film), I sense that RJ has missed an opportunity here to give the audience an emotional feast - rather than just the emotional meal. It comes as no secret that I adore this film and I think the story is brilliant, but I feel that these missing aspects would have added even more to the film - if that was even possible.

I will start with the appertiser - the deleted scene of Luke and Leia mourning the loss of Han. This should have been in the film RJ. After the fall of Ben to the dark and Luke blaming himself for this, he sought exile and cut himself off from everyone he loved. Its as if Luke drew a line in the sand with everything and was saying that was then and this is now. But when Rey tells him that Han is dead, this appears to have really hit home. In his head, Luke can distance himself from his past all he wants, but Luke can't lie to himself in what he feels in his heart. This was his best friend and brother-in-law and this guy meant the world to him and it shows. It is very similar in context to Luke wanting to burn the sacred Jedi texts, but never quite bringing himself to do it. For me, a conflict still exists within Luke where he can put on a front to keep people at bay, but his heart is telling him something else. And the audience would have been really drawn to this because it says on some level, he still cares deeply for those others we (the audience) care about. Also, it would have been a very touching moment from that "twin thing" point of view where two people can be thinking the same thing at the same time without knowing the other is thinking the same thing.

I move onto the entree and this course of the meal has a bit to it and all should have been in the movie too because all are relevant in the emotional journey of the characters. Firstly, Rey and the "villager invasion". What that scene would have done for the audience and Luke, is remind them how relevant the Jedi are to the galaxy. Yes arrogance can creep into the Jedi, yes darkness will eventually rise up to counteract the light, yes the Jedi helped create Sidious and Vader and whatever else the novel mentions, but they (the Jedi) also stood for justice and honour and to help defend those that couldn't defend themselves. They played a role in maintaining what is good in the galaxy and Luke lost sight of that in his own plights surrounding Ben Solo and his transformation into Kylo Ren. And Rey's instincts were true Jedi instincts where she could not just sit around and let the innocent suffer. Luke lost sight of this in his "Jedi must end" thinking; he lost sight of the really good things that the Jedi did.
Secondly and following the "Village celebration" fiasco and Rey storming off angrily after she tells Luke that their friends are actually dying, in the novel, Luke finally comes back to the realization that he must physically return to the fray. I didn't get this feeling from the movie. Others have said they have and that is fair enough, but I never got the impression that Luke was going to return. I think that this would have been beneficial to the movie (if it had been in there) because the audience would have seen Luke acknowledging the mistakes that had been made with what happened with Ben, but also acknowledging the bigger mistakes by having simply walked away and distancing himself from everyone. I know Yoda helped Luke see this in the end (in the movie), but I think it would have delivered more emotional punch had we seen Luke come to the realization himself in the movie.
And it would have added that little bit more to the third part of the entree which we did see in the movie; Luke catching Rey and Kylo having a moment (yuck!!) together. Because then it comes all flooding back to Luke why he walked away.
With those three scenes together in a row, the audience would have been on a hell of a roller coaster ride with emotion.

Thank goodness all of the main meal was shown - Luke's reunion and closure with Leia, Luke's closure with Kylo and that beautiful moment where Luke passes into the Force. That was brilliant and emotionally engaging for the audience. All were emotionally brilliant in their respective ways.

And then to finish with the dessert. In the novel, Leia finally grieves in the Falcon with Chewie for everyone they have lost (Han, Luke and Ben and so on). JJ made the mistake of not having Chewie hug Leia at the end of TFA. RJ has made the same in not having this scene in the movie. It would have given Leia and the audience a real sense of closure.

TLJ was a brilliant film, but with these emotionally impacting and relevant scenes added, IMO, it would have elevated TLJ that nth degree more. For me, its just the slight difference between almost perfection and perfection.

 

I thought this was a very good review of the film: http://www.thedigitalbits.com/item/star-wars-the-last-jedi-uhd#.WqsfvlHWYL8.facebook

And I had totally missed the idea that Luke is told by Yoda and Old Ben that he should be prepared to sacrifice Leia and Han, if he honours what they fight for. Given they fight for the light, it makes sense that TLJ Luke has finally taken that lesson onboard - even if, again, he is wrong to do so. But he does think what he is doing is the best for the galaxy as Luke sees the light rising again only once the Jedi are gone.

 

That’s probably the review that comes closest to reflecting my thoughts on the film, only much more articulately. I think it’s quite balanced.

 

Yes, it's very good. I disagree with the tracking stuff, but agree on the comedy. I think TLJ is excellent, but it's not without flaws. And that's OK.

 

What I agree with, in addition to the humor, is his comment about going from a ticking clock scenario on the cruiser to ‘To Catch A Thief’ on Canto Bight. We go from high tension to leisure world. For me, that kind of stopped the film in its tracks for a bit, and threw things off a little, more generally, in terms of pacing. What redeems this sidetrip a little is that I quite liked DJ.

 

Very well written review. Has me stoked for the Blu Ray release.

Do not understand why we have to wait in the UK for it


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Having only seen TLJ once in the theaters, my favorite part about viewing it this week was when Kylo tells Rey during the second of their "force skype" interactions, "you're not doing this...it would kill you".
I went into watching the movie in the theaters spoiler-free, so I really paid no attention to that line when I heard it. However, in the intervening months, I've not seen discussion about this line. Really great and subtle foreshadowing without the audience knowing it at the time.
I think this movie and the plots will be properly viewed once we have Ep IX.
I had never seen a Star Wars movie quite like this, with all the new aspects introduced (force projection, seeing how those who profit off of war play while the galaxy faces tyranny). Reading about how members of the First Order despise Hux has been interesting too.

 

That was a nice review. It's funny he mentions how having the FO tracking the resistance through Finn may have been a better choice. When I first saw the film, the cut from Hux saying "we have them on the end of the string" to Finn in the bacta tank (and first appearance in the movie), I absolutely thought that's what was happening. Definitely would have been a better way to tie Finn into the plot (though may have created some inconsistencies with TFA? It would just depend on the in-universe explanation I guess).

See, I don't know if it'd be about trying to replicate the Poe-Leia dynamic. Finn's arc is about struggling to actually commit to a cause. I think Leia, especially considering her past experience with Han, could potentially have a lot to say to Finn about all of that, the cause and everything, if the writers put her in that position.

The Finn-Han dynamic is something I hadn't thought much about before, but you're right that it is kind of unceremoniously dropped. To be fair, I can't really think of a strong thematic connection between that relationship and what Finn goes through in TLJ that could really be explored extensively, but then again, Leia pointing out Han's reluctance to Finn could have been a great character moment. I REALLY hope IX revisits in some way the Finn-Kylo dynamic, because I think that is one of the more understated elements of this trilogy with a lot of interesting potential.

 

He doesn't though. That is the point. He's quit on them (himself and the Jedi) and doesn't fight for anything. He wrongly blames the Jedi Order of old for his own failings and leaves Leia, Han and the Republic behind to Snoke, Ren and the First Order.

The basic premise of what RJ wanted to do was highly problematic with Luke anyway but setting that aside and going with it Luke's self-exile makes even less sense as his leaving and having no Jedi only contributes to the darkness rising. Snoke, Ren and the First Order are building up power. They want the Jedi gone and want to destroy Luke because without him no new Jedi can rise. Lack of Jedi only helps the darkness while Jedi existing and fighting would hinder it's rise. Luke cuts himself off from the Force so he has nothing to guide him as to what he should do. Anakin, Obi-Wan and Yoda can't talk to him and he gets no intuition from the Will of the Force.

What makes it even more confounding with Luke is that when he left the First Order is still years away from making their power grab moves. Now what he alone can really do is another matter. How could he create a new Jedi Order in a few years when he effectively hadn't in over 20 years?

As MH said Luke might take some time to regroup and come up with a plan but he wouldn't outright quit. If RJ had framed it that Luke was prepared to sacrifice Leia and Han and the Republic because he was off training new Jedi in secret that might take another 10-20 years or more to come to fruition then that would be different. If Luke had determined that the Will of the Force was telling him to waiting around for a sign in the form of a person or persons unknown to train or guide (which is why he went to the first Jedi temple) then that is another thing. Instead what we get is a Luke who blame shifts from his failures brought on by his own arrogance and believing in his own legend. A Luke conceited and prideful (totally unlike the Luke of the OT).

Despite the success of the Jedi Order over a thousand generations he concentrates on their one massive failure like it was brought about solely because of their own intrinsic flawed approach to the Force as opposed to the reality of the ingenious plan of the Sith that used their intrinsic goodness against them. This flaw is less about their approach to the Force then getting caught up in those things that came from their place as guardians of the Republic ie when the Republic was fighting among themselves they had to take side in a civil war. They became soldiers rather than negotiators. What they should have done is not fight. Fighting an outside army lead by the Sith (as happened previously) is one thing but fighting against other Republic systems was another. It makes Luke even worse in the ST as that is what the First Order is. An outside army invading lead by Snoke.

 

The movie and RJ state that the lack of the Jedi doesn't allow the darkness to rise, but rather makes room for a new light. The light is not owned by the Jedi and you might not like the concept but it is the facts the movie lays out.

He concentrating on that failure is because it all stems unwillingly from the Jedi. Without the Jedi there are no Sith, and worse, they failed in their mission statement. I think it's reasonable to be critical of that, even if he's wrong in his solution.

More important is Luke's psychology who is too harsh upon himself.

 

Yeah. And - a key point of the film - Luke is wrong to think the Jedi must end. You do realise George was also showing the PT Jedi to have failed in a major way, right? This is just connecting that idea to Luke’s view on them in the ST (which is massively coloured by his own failure). Ultimately RJ is saying the galaxy still needs the Jedi. It’s ok for Luke to be wrong about that because he sees his error by the end and realises the Jedi are still needed.

 

A thoughtful review, and a breath of fresh air after all the screeching youtube videos.

 

So TLJ won big at the Empire awards: Best Film, Best Director, Best Actress, Best VFX, Best Costume Design.

Kudos. Well deserved.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Critic: "I'm gonna burn it down."

 

Yup, good to see.

 

Along the same line, (I've posed this suggestion in another thread I think..), but Ben turning could be the fulfillment of Yoda's prophecy in ESB:" If you leave now, save them you could, but you would destroy everything for which they have fought and suffered" ... that is to say, Luke's leaving and saving Han directly lead to Leia and Han having Ben, who was instrumental in the destruction of everything they fought for.

 

I think this is the best place for this query.

In TLJ, RJ uses a recurring fist clenching motif. Kylo does it several times - and Rey does it at least once, in the cave standing before the mirror wall.

I think - but could be wrong - that it's a dark side motif. When characters become angry, or afraid or hateful they clench their fist.

And if that's the case, I wonder if that's a very subtle link to the clenched fist symbol of the Son seen in the Rebels Mortis painting.

I don't mean to suggest it's some major deal, just a little visual connective tissue.

Or maybe the two are separate and coincidental.

What do people think?

 

Great spot, I hadn't picked up on that. It does feel like the clenched fist is being used as a symbol of the dark side, whether representative of anger, or power.

 

Yeah, and with Rey it seems to be when she's afraid (ie when facing the mirror).

I think it's too frequent and deliberate in the framing to be purely incidental.