ST Will fan backlash affect development of IX?

One was obvious: making her related and this ST the story of how Anakin's grandchildren deal about his legacy.
Too much obvious, imo, but it could have work.

Or, just to say, let's make the prophecy still misread.
That's a common tool.
It looks like Luke haven't spoke that much (or at all) with the force ghosts.
Perhaps he didn't know everything about his father, etc...
and when he found out about the prophecy he thought "well Ben is the Chosen One".
Ben/Kylo believed that too, but his interpretation was another one (that he have to finish both the Sith and the jedi)
and Rey is here, not because she is another or a true CO, but just because she have to "face" Kylo and show him
(and Luke) that not: Anakin was.

But I'm not a storyteller.
I just think there is/was room to do something else that doens't make the other chapters look weird
(if not pointless to me) in retrospect.

 

I do think it's interesting how before TLJ, it was all about the "Skywalker Saga" consists of nine movies, which end in 2019. We want to movie "past the Skywalkers." And they took a "burn it all down" approach in TLJ.

Now, Pablo says "it's too early" to see if the Skywalker Saga ends with Episode IX. Sounds like a response/damage control to me.

 

That's not damage control. That's perfectly consistent with what KK said before TLJ ever dropped. She said they weren't sure yet whether this trilogy was going to be the last of the Skywalker saga, or not.

All they're made clear with Rey's parentage reveal is that they're perfectly open to having non-Skywalkers serve as lead protagonists, even in episodic films.

And I don't think ST has a "burn it all down" approach. It's looking pretty much like what George said it would, way back in the 80s; a passing on of the baton to a new generation of heroes.

 

It is just a switch in tone from what they have been saying recently.

If you don't think TLJ took a "burn it all down" approach, well, we clearly did not see the same film. Let the past die, kill it if you have to... Snoke, Skywalker, the Sith, the Jedi, the Rebels; let it all die.

 

That's what Kylo Ren, the villain says. He's wrong.

This is what RJ has to say on that theme, taken from the art book. I've bolded the parts that leap out to me:


"A big bedrock thing for me was, 'What do you keep from the past and what do you not? What i the value of the myths you grew up with? What is the value of throwing those away and doing something new and fresh?' For me, that's most prominently illustrated in the Rey and Kylo relationship: her trying to reconnect with the past and him trying to throw it all away. Ultimately, my allegiance has come down with Rey. But it's not that simple, and I think it's a very shaded and interested thing. Yoda expresses some of Kylo's same sentiments. There's also a sin in venerating the past so much you're enslaved to it. For me, it's not just a meta thing of talking about Star Wars - how much do you copy what came before versus throwing it away. It's very much a huge thing in life that I've spend a lot of time thinking about. It felt very germane, something very interesting and prudent to explore right now."

"When Rey shows up, the first and foremost thing she needs is a mentor. In looking at this grand plan from ten miles up in the air, Luke is missing the thing right in front of his nose. Here's somebody who needs you, who needs your help. If you thinking you are throwing away the past, you are fooling yourself. The only way to go forward is to embrace the past, figure out what is good and what is not good about to. But it's never going to not be a part of who we all are. And that includes Rey, who grew up hearing the legends about the Jedi. So, the notion of 'Nope, toss this all away and find something new' is not really a valid choice, I think.

"Ultimately, Luke's exile and his justifications for it are all covering his guilt over Kylo. The big gloss that he's putting over the whole thing is: 'The Force does not belong to the Jedi. This ongoing dynamic between the Jedi and the Sith just keeps renewing itself and just keeps feeding the fire. It's time for this old religion to die so that the truth about God can rise from elsewhere - basically, so that a more worthy god can rise. It's really hard, and it's going to cause a lot of pain, but that's what has to happen. So I'm going to do the hardest thing I've ever done, what I couldn't do in Empire, and not answer the call of my friends so that the Jedi Order dies and something new has to rise and pull the light up.' "

Ultimately the film shows that Kylo is wrong to want to burn the past down, and Luke was wrong to go into exile and wrong not to train further Jedi. It is not time for the Jedi to die. They must be reborn. IMO, the film is about challenging what we know about SW and its heroes, and stripping it all back to its purest essence by the end. It's misinterpretation to see everything that's come before as being torn down - a misinterpretation I made myself on the first watch.

 

Why in the world do people keep taking a line from a character in a Star Wars film and repeating it as the theme for the entire film, and the outlook for a multi-billion dollar franchise?

It ignores the fact that by the close of the film the character who said that is alone, and despondent.

Meanwhile the film's penultimate scene hearkens back to the familiar; the Resistance is officially the Rebellion, and our heroes, many of them the same ones from decades ago, are sitting in board the Millennium Falcon.

 

While Luke mumbles about the same thing for most of the film, trying to show Rey why the Jedi need to end?

Because the main theme was letting go of the past. The quote emphasizes it.

It's a good message, not for one in the middle of a 40-year-old Saga. Perhaps it would have fit Episode IX better.

 

No, the main theme was Failure, and learning from it.

Literally the only person hell bent on destroying the past is Kylo Ren. Rey has to move on from her past, because it's been holding her back for almost two decades.

But nobody else is burning the past down. Luke, for all his grumbling, comes to see his value is in giving the galaxy back the Luke Skywalker legend. Like he literally returns in the projected form of his PAST self.

Leia, for all her attempts to pass the baton to Poe, closed the film sitting on board her husband's old ship, surrounded by her old friends, and still leading the Rebellion.

The old Jed tree is literally burned down. But the heart of the true, the teachings it housed, ended up with the new protagonist. The antithesis of burning down the past.

It's a myth that TLJ is about killing the past.

 

I don't think the lesson is to let go of the past. It's to learn from the mistakes of the past/present. That's what I took with me, learn from the failures.

 

How can a theme be a myth? That's one of the weirdest comments I have ever seen.

Kylo is trying to move away from the past. He keeps struggling because he is holding on.
He is conflicted about the light in his family. He wants to move on from them.

Rey is trying to move away from the past. She keeps struggling because she is holding on.
Rey wants to get away from needing her family, but she wants to know the truth about them.

Luke is trying to move away from the past. He keeps struggling because he is holding on.
Luke is dealing with almost killing his nephew. He has so much guilt that he exiles himself and disconnects from the force.

Luke finally accepts his forward destiny, and lets go. He comes back and saves the day.
Rey, I don't know, I guess she accepts her parents for who they are and lets go. She comes back and saves the day.
Kylo? I still don't think he's let anything go, judging by the way he treats Luke. And that is why he fails.

 

And what does Luke think at the end of the film?

The Rebellion is reborn. The war is just beginning. And I will not be the last Jedi.

The film is showing us that Kylo Ren is wrong, and Luke Skywalker is wrong to believe that.

That's why, dismayed, he says to Yoda (despite not being able to burn the texts and end the Jedi):

So it is time for the Jedi to end?

Only for Yoda to tell him it's time for Luke to get over himself and get back in the game (therefore not letting the past die, but using the best of the past, with the best of the new to take things further).

Not death. Rebirth.

 

Yoda: The greatest teacher, failure is.
Yoda: We are what they grow beyond.

 

And what I took with me was, let the past die, kill it if you have it to. Which is what the movie did. I respect your opinions, but they are viewpoint, as is mine.

 

That's cool. I respect your opinions as well.

 

@Satipo so much so the movie ends the way it ends.
Luke's words to Kylo and that last scene with the kid.
And sure the kid is Force sensitive...
But he also wears a Rebellion ring.
Those are the two things that have to be born again: the Jedi and the Republic.

And the Skyealker's legacy is about them both.
Padme-Leia.
Anakin-Luke.

 

Exactly - and they are in Luke's sacrifice and the kindness Rose and Finn show on Canto Bight.

It's the exact opposite of torching everything in the previous films, but I see people on both sides of the divide making that mistake. And that's not because it's poorly implemented in the story. It's because, as RJ says, it's a shaded, nuanced thing. Some people hear what Kylo says to Rey, and what Luke says to Rey in the temple and act like that's the culmination of that thematic arc. It's not at all. Who does Broom boy want to be? Luke Skywalker, Jedi knight and hero of the Rebellion. The past is very much not dead or consigned to the trash compactor.

 

How one interprets a film is not a "mistake,"Just because you view a film differently than someone else does not make you "right."

 

I disagree. People misunderstand the intent of a film or book, all the time.

Even without the quotes from the director above, the film is not that opaque on this front.

The villain, not the embittered old mentor in the nadir of his depression are not who the film supports. You have to look at act three to see where the film's message lies.

 

Then there really no point in any further discussion, as it clearly will just be a Battle of "I'm right and you're wrong."

 

I'm fine with that

 

Sure it is. But in all honesty... How do you read the movie finale if not like that? Maybe I'm wrong or there is something I miss...
But I have not other answers to that question, now.
And look, I'm one of those who didn't like the movie (especially as a Saga Movie). There are a couple of things that I just cannot let go...There are some plots and some characters arcs that I didn't like. Sometimes, instead, I liked the purpose, the goal, of a plot/theme not the execution.
One of then being exactly this theme. If so many people don't get it, it's because it's not done that well. Because - IMO - the story is not well balanced. Because there's perhaps too much focus on on other things. Or perhaps because there is just too much in this movie.
I have many problems with it. It's not secret.
But something may be not that clear and still being there.

 

It is absolutely possible to misinterpret a film. People literally do it all the time.

You misinterpreted this film, for example. You took a single line from Kylo Ren and said it's the approach RJ took with the entire film.

Despite there being no evidence to back up that assertion.

 

Subtlety does not equal poor storytelling. Neither does it mean someone is dumb for not seeing it. A lot of art sometimes takes awhile for its deeper layers to become apparent. I totally misread stuff on the first watch. It’s all there though. On this thematic front at least. And objectively, the film’s message is not kill the past.

 

But was that - to make it subtle - the goal? Or was it - making it subtle - the best choice?
When I said that maybe there's just too much focus on other things, maybe there is just too much and overall it's not well balanced, I intented that.
Sometimes less is more.
Or better

 

You wanna point out where though?