ST The Development Of The Sequel Trilogy

I know you're being sarcastic, but, I always got the impression that the Jedi were pretty flexible on the matter of killing opponents, they're just not Xena Destroyer of Nations about it. From McGregor's perspective and the film itself, Obi-Wan knows when it's necessary to kill someone and resolving himself to "do what he must" speaks volumes about what he could potentially do to see that through.

From a certain point of view, perhaps he did .

There are enough hits and misses among Abrams and Kasdan's filmography that I honestly get where you're coming from (even if this sentiment is specifically about Star Wars), and I've simply disliked Johnson as a director and storyteller since Brother's Bloom and The Last Jedi only exacerbated that opinion.

 

What's the TMP?

 

Star Wars: The Motion Picture.

 

"some gut instincts" being the key qoute her - we've know since before TLJ came out that before TFA was written they got around a spitballed ideas for what might happen further down the line. But there was no set plan. Abrams himself says later in this qoute that they used a lot of "ideas" that he and Kasdan had from TFA in making TROS.

What he never says is that TLJ veered from his plan (nor, for that matter, does he even say there was a plan). Hell if the movie did to that, then why did'nt he intervene before it was made? Why did'nt he go to Johnson and say "that thing you do with X character in scene Y. That's not the direction I intended for them to take. Please change it."

I don't think TLJ denies it, I just don't think they saw it the way you did. As I've mentioned before when we've had this discussion, the FO does'nt show up until after Finn gets to Han and he only fights becuse he has no choice, so we have no reason to think that, had they not attacked, he would'nt have still left anyway (nor, for that matter, do we have any reason to think he would have gone further and helped the Resistence if Rey had'nt been captured - battle happens, Rey's fine, Finn still leaves; and probobly quicker becuse now he knows the FO is closing in).

Well, fair, but you could make the movie be about really any character if you present the events a certain way.

Watch me

Poe is the reason $#!+ happens in TFA. TFA can be summarized as “Poe saves the Galaxy and ruins Kylo Ren’s day without a hint of irony. He's the reason the plot kicks into motion, he's the reason BB-8 was able to escape and find Rey, he's the reason Finn was able to escape the FO, he's the reason the heros survived Takodona, he's the reason Starkiller Base was destroyed.

The heroics in TFA were a combinded effort by several peaple, and Finn was just one of three hero characters (four if you include BB-8). He made some contributions and has his moments, but so did everyone else.

Well, I don't think it's dull, shallow or bland...

...I just think his story in TLJ is better

I'm actually starting to think you might have missed your calling

Honestly I would have zero problems if the story had ended with Luke and Leia both dead and Kylo dying irredeemed with no other Skywalkers (either blood members of the family or self-adopted) around to carry on the legecy. I probobly would have considered that a bold choice and applauded it for its daring.

That probobly makes me sound like the devil incarnate to you, though

I dunno, she has two hands

And technically she flys a Solo Family ship

Well yeah, and part of the reason I'm only annoyed, rather then actually bitter, over what went down with Rey is becuse Finn has so much promise going forward into the lore.

Abrams was only brought on becuse Johnson turned down the offer, and if they asked Johnson it seems unlikely that they had that big an issue with what he wrote (not to mention why would'nt they have scrapped Trevarrow's script earlier? Or simply have asked him to change things in it to suit what they wanted?)

Deep(ly) infatuated with Rey, maybe...

Disney did that becuse Solo bombed, and Solo bombing was due to a lot more then TLJ.

Not to mention Disney has'nt dumped anything, they've just re-adjusted their plans to face reality. They replaced two of their movies three live-action shows and at last report still fully intend to have Johnson make his spinoff trilogy (which seems odd to do if they hate TLJ so much) and have Faige make an inderminate number of films.

As for the 2005 comment I was actually refering to the PT as a whole, and used that date becuse that is when the entire work became completed.

ALL artists under ALL circumstances make art that way, unless their hired to do a specific thing. Johnson was hired to make a sequal to TFA, that was all, and he did that. His job description only said "make a followup to TFA" not "make a followup to TFA that makes everyone happy."

Basicly everything.

For my part I'm a long time obsessive fan whose been experiencing the franchise since at some point in the early 90s that I can't precisly pin down becuse I was toddler, and the reaction I've seen now regarding the ST is exactly what I remember seeing when the PT came out. I don't tend to put much stock in online outrage and virtually everyone I know/have encountered in real life likes TLJ just fine - in fact my first viewing of the movie had probobly the best energy I've every experienced from an audiance in a theater, and that includes a first night views of Return of the King.

The francise had recovered just fine way before Disney bought it, and honestly I'd say it's already recovered from TLJ - we're on a Star Wars forum, remember, in a thread discussing the ST, so of course it would like like the wounds are still open and bleeding.

And while Disney does'nt have Ford, Hamill and Fisher, they do have Ridley, Boyaga and Isaac, who in fifteen to twenty years will be "the" Star Wars characters for an entire generation of fans.

I'm almost certain it will. Like less then 1 percent less then 100 percent sure. We recovered from the PT, so we'll recover from the ST. We're always getting devided over one thing or another, us SW fans, and once we find something new to be devided over we'll forget all about how much we argued over TLJ.

Perhaps we've confused each other regarding this discussion, are you arguing that peaple had ideas and opinions on were the story would go post TFA, or are you arguing there was a pre-set plan regarding the story that had been put in place that TLJ violated?

I mean, the old canon had already killed two of Han and Leia's three kids (with one of them falling to the Dark Side), killed Luke's wife and two of his ex-girlfriends he had a close post-romantic relationship with, killed Chewbacca and had the New Republic fall apart, so it's not like their happy ending had'nt already turned out to be a bit of a disaster...

Oh come on, you'll make him sad! If there's one thing I know godisawsome likes doing it's writing long, wordy posts about Finn

( becuse we don't have a Finn emoji - did'nt notice that until now but why don't we have a Finn emoji! Or Rey and Poe? We have Kylo and...Phasma? Someone needs to write a memo...)

I can't state of any statement ever being made that such a thing is the case.

IMO I think your might just have an rather too-literal reading of "as long as it does'nt contradict the events of the films." I mean even ANH itself has Luke ask "have you been in many battles" right after learning the droids were with the Rebellion and 3PO answer "a few" so their was definatly more then one battle prior to that point.

Yes, I suppose "King Abraham" would be a better analogy then "King Franklin"

Crumbling could imply many things, true, but the most direct reading of the ROTS text crawl would indicate that the Republic was falling apart.

It can both establish the lore of the universe without having to have that lore be enslaved to a literal reading of it. You don't lose anything from the explanation given by the ANH text crawl if the first victory mentioned is'nt literally the first victory, becuse all that's importent in the context of the exposition your being given in that the rebels is that their downtrodden underdogs who are just starting to harm the big mean, scary Empire.

Can't say I am, but I only joined a few months ago just after TROS came out. As much as it helped to vent though, I try to avoid threads that become echo chambers (I'd much rather have the occasional debate with someone then I would have everyone agree on everything 100 percent of the time, lol) or too negative.

I mean, the fact that the Resistence clearly has grown by the start of the third movie would indicate Luke sacrafice was'nt in vain, no?

The only tracker was on the Supremacy. The later started feilding the tracking technology on other ships per-TROS, but in TLJ it was only on the one. If it was'nt Finn and Rose's mission would be pointless and the Falcon would'nt have been able to escape at the end of the movie.

Why would Poe tell Finn to break off and try to get him to stop if they tought his attack would be sucessful? I get why Rose would, but Poe at that point has learned to make the big decisions and the tough calls, so logically he would the one who resigns himself to it and says "go get 'em buddy..." all teary eyed becuse he reconizes nessesery sacrfices.

Who knows, maybe it would have worked, but the movie is'nt clear on that and, in absance of that clarity, I can only go by what logically should have happened based on the information presented - or, I guess, what seems logical to me.

The Motion Picture, lol.

I meant to write TPM (it's actually happened a few times, as their both sci-fi movies with the same letters used in their apprevations and a simple difference of how the last two are arranged), my bad

Even the lightsaber battles can't keep me from falling asleep!

 

The reality you speak of is the reality that the massive SW audience that existed after TFA and R1 now suddenly no longer appears to exist. And this new reality came to be directly after the release of the TLJ. I disagree that Solo bombing was due to a lot more than TLJ. I think that completely deflated the fan base. I believe TLJ did well at the box office because it followed two very well liked films, TFA and R1. After people walked out of TLJ, they were no longer excited to see new SW movies from Disney. I know lots of people who felt that way, and I don't believe it was just a big coincidence. I also think you are insane if you think Disney will ever let RJ make another SW movie. It will never happen. Why on Earth would Disney want another SW movie that has caused this kind of divisiveness? It would be bad business, even if they personally loved TLJ. But that's something that simply won't be proven until it doesn't happen, so we will just have to wait and see I guess.

You conveniently try to change the debate into the idea that EVERYONE is supposed to love it. No, not at all. But it should satisfy most SW fans. Not all, but the more the better. And I think you know that's true. Any other result makes no sense, both financially and also creatively. Generally speaking, the better a movie is recieved by the audience, the better it is for everyone. But since you believe only a small loud group dislikes TLJ, of course you would see it that way. I believe it split the fan base in half.

Seriously? You are comparing Ridley, Boyega and Isaac to Harrison Ford, one of the biggest stars in history? Are you actually comparing the legacy of the OT characters to the ST characters? As someone who was around for both the OT and the ST, there is no comparison. The OT actors are Hollywood legends. The OT is the most popular trilogy of all time. Now in fifteen years, if Marvel brings back Robert Downey Jr, Chris Evans and ScarJo, well that might compare to bringing back the OT characters, in terms of audience excitement.

But hey, despite our disagreements, and despite the tone sometimes perhaps coming off as hostile, I actually appreciate your POV on all this, and I appreciate the back and forth. So please know all of this is meant in fun, and sometimes this stuff can come off as harsh, even though it's all meant in good fun. I appreciate your responses and the fact that you have your own opinions on all this stuff, even if they're wildly different than my own.

 

I doubt they've given any statement at all on such an obscure topic, but I'm quite certain if you asked Dave Filoni or Pablo Hidalgo or whoever they would tell you that is the case. Maybe it came up in one of those Rebels Recons but I don't feel like combing through those right now. Again, there's a whole scene where they establish that they will not be getting help from the Rebellion proper, and I'm sure it was included for precisely that very reason, whether you think that's a valid excuse or not. They went out of their way to make sure Grievous and Anakin never meet in The Clone Wars because of Anakin's line about him being shorter than he expected, so trust me they're thinking about these sorts of things. As for 3-PO's line about multiple battles, 1) he could be in prior battles without being in prior victories, 2) those battles could have been against pirates or whatnot instead of the Empire, and 3) prior to the prequels it was pretty strongly implied that he and R2 had previous adventure with previous owners before their time with Princess Leia. Now the prequels do maintain that idea, but they also have his memory wiped so he wouldn't actually be able to reference them.

But the Republic is falling apart. Several of their own planets are unhappy enough to try and leave, and in order to beat that idea out of them they've given Chancellor Palpatine a disturbing amount of emergency powers because the Senate is too ineffective to get anything done on their own. They're only days/weeks away from giving up on having a Republic altogether, with the idea that an Empire will be more stable.

There was no problem with it being their first victory at the time. It's only become somewhat of a problem, if we will call it that, because people who wanted to milk more money out of the franchise decided it would be easier with more battles, even during parts of the timeline where we were told there weren't any(any that the Rebels won anyways). I think it damages the integrity of the universe if things can be retconned for the purposes of making money.

Haha, that was one of the biggest problems with the thread, and the one that ultimately was probably responsible for getting shut down. Some people thought it should be an echo chamber, some people thought dissenting opinions should be welcomed as long as they understood what they were getting into, some people thought they should only be allowed to point out posts that were factually untrue, and some people were clearly operating in bad faith and would post things along the lines of "it's factually untrue that any of you people have brains if you hated this movie". Basically different rules would be enforced on different pages and I'm sure it was a nightmare for whatever poor mods were tasked with dealing with it lol. I'm surprised it lasted as long as it did.

Either way I don't think it makes a whole ton of sense but I don't see why the Resistance couldn't have grown at least that much if not more if they had an alive Luke to market to people. And yeah, to some extent in the beginning that would probably involve Luke doing the marketing himself.

No, they specifically say that they can't just blow the Supremacy up because then one of the other Star Destroyers would start tracking them. They have to turn off the Supremacy's tracker without them noticing in order to prevent that from happening.

Poe didn't think it would be successful, and Poe should have been right. However, what he wasn't counting on was that every single walker would just stop shooting for no reason because the movie wanted them to. So again, what logically should have happened is that Poe gets the Luke treatment only he's not a projection so the blasts actually kill him. Once that doesn't happen then really all bets are off, because clearly what the writers wanted to happen trumps logic at this point. Exact same thing applies to Rose's subsequent ramming maneuver and the fact that Finn drags her all the way back to base from directly in front of the walkers once again without getting blasted into a million pieces.

 

Oh sure, I actually partially agree with you. I should say, they're not exclusively mediators. Of course the Jedi try to avoid violent confrontation where they can. At the same exact time, they're warriors. Always have been, always will be. Otherwise, they wouldn't train with lightsabers or in combat. Or in other words, otherwise, they're not Jedi. Jedi don't aid and abet Nazis over the innocent. If some want to see Jedi that are not warriors and that aid and abet Nazis to save their souls over protecting the innocent, cool. I'm not gonna dog those preferences. I just don't want to see it.

No I'm not saying my interpretation is canon. That's you. Only. And you are stating your interpretation, which differs from mine, of a novel is the canon interpretation of a film. Films trump novels. Always have, always will. The film doesn't say your interpretation of the novel, and in the novel, it's super clear to me that Obi believes Anakin will die a slow and miserable death.

I think he would have captured Anakin in that circumstance.

 

But then they went ahead and had Anakin run into Dooku like every other Tuesday or something.

 

I guess we will, though I would point out that it's been over three years and they hav'nt dropped him or cancelled his trilogy yet. As for why they would want "another SW movie that has caused this kind of divisiveness?" Well, maybe becuse the first one made 1.333 billion dollers, was the highest grossing film of its year and was criticly praised?

It might seem callous on their part, but Disney probobly cares far more about making money and getting praised by the critics then they do for pleasing fans.

Perhaps I should have written "that tries to make everyone happy." At any rate that was'nt in his job description and I think doing so would have been self-defeating (a view that TROS solidifies in my eyes) and the opposite of making creative sense. Plenty of fans were pleased by TLJ as it was, and the movie was financially sucessful.

And I don't think the group that likes TLJ is small per-say, I just think that the voices online complaining about it are a small, loud group. And mind you to clarify I'm not talking about you and others here who bring up valid criticisms, I'm talking about Youtube and social media keyboard warriors who rant and rave about how it destroyed Star Wars and act like KK and RJ are the second coming of Satan or something, going out of there way to inject their opinions into every situation and trying their hardest to make a scene.

When I'm talking about the loud voices I'm talking about those voices, and it's become very tiring to listen to those voices.

When ANH came out Ford, Hamill and Fisher were not Hollywood legends, and when the OT ended only one of them (Ford) was a big star. In fifteen or twenty years, come a hypothetical new trilogy, whose to say that Isaac, Boyaga and Ridley would be viewed? Isaac's already pretty established and well-known, and Ridley and Boyaga are both young and at the very start of their careers.

We can't compare the legacy of the ST characters to the legacy of the OT characters becuse the OT came up over thirty years ago and the ST just finished up at the end of last year, so it's not really fair to do so.

Hey, don't mention it. I don't mind the occasional healthy disagreement - not to mention I think we all appretiate the conversation seeing how we're all stuck inside.

I dunno, I'd say it's a sign that the FO just has smarter droids then the Resistence

On a serius not Finn's plot in TLJ was about him growing as a character. However I can see why someone in your camp would veiw it as pointless since, from your perspective, he did'nt need that growth becuse he already had it - to you what happened in TLJ was pointless, but to me it was vital to his character.

Football is overrated. Fishing is real man's sport - and just like Finn's subplot in TLJ you don't usually accomplish much other then seeing pretty sights and having a good time

I mean, Finn's not a dick, so of course he'd go tell Han what was up.

The scene with them going into the basement is after the scene we're shown the FO approching, and the ship he had decided to board had probobly already left, so he would have been stuck there until he could find a new ride. Granted even if it had'nt left I still think Finn would have stayed and fought, I just think that, if Rey had'nt been captured he still would have left.

I think the key difference here is that we probobly have differing views regarding his commitment to the Resistence. Finn will help if he has the chance to and his sympathic to their cuase, but I just don't think (and Johnson seemingly agreed) that by the end of the movie he was actually commited to them.

I mean I the ST had a 100 percent depressing ending I'd agree with you, but if all that happened was a happy ending overall with the Skywalkers dying out and Kylo saying evil, I would'nt consider that to be depressing, just sorta bittersweet, and I don't really mind those kind of endings.

(my only preferable ending for the trilogy if I had written it from the start, as I wrote somewhere else here not long ago that I can't remember, would involve Kylo killing Han (accidently) in TFA, Leia (on purpose) in TLJ and then a simultaneous ROTS-style duel in the third movie were Kylo and Rey kill each other and Luke is mortally wounded killing Palpatine with the aid of Anakin's ghost and then uses the last of his life force to heal Rey)

I've seen worse...

That's okay, they don't let me man the cash registers

Did'nt ROTS end with the Jedi being wiped out, a family being torn apart and a facist state led by an evil space wizard overthowing a democracy?

Nah, just strange

I'm six feet tall and quite happy, thank you very much

Quick! Somebody go tweet Hidalgo or Matt Martin! There probobly stuck inside becuse of the virus and would welcome the company!

I don't think it had anything to do with making money so much as it does not thinking future stories should be held back by floating words, lol.

Regarding what you mentioned about Grevious and Anakin in TCW, don't you think the fact that they put effort into keeping continuity with that but did'nt with the "first battle" mentioned in the text crawl indicates that they did'nt consider the text crawl binding?

Your right, they did say that, and a re-read of the transcript further reminded me that the point was to disable it without the FO being aware, so my bad

"A Jedi uses the Force for knowledge and defense, never for attack." - Yoda, ESB (and put into pratice by Luke in TLJ and Rey in TROS)

Jedi don't train with sabers to fight, they train with sabers to defend themselves (and probobly also for exercise and the benifits to their reflexs and focus - and think of how many peaple pratice boxing or martial arts just for the meditative and "spirtual" benafit)

Jedi can fight, and they can be quite deadly if they want to be, but they are'nt warriors. At best Jedi are just monks who pratice aikido - warrior implies that martial ability and conflict is a part of their mission statement and idealogy.

There's quite a bit of difference between not killing defenless foes or healing your sworn enemies and leaving them alive to reflect on their mistakes (or to be captured by your allies, who are closing in at that very moment) and "aiding and abetting Nazis."

Only when the novels conflict with what's on screen. In this situation it does'nt, since in the film we don't see what's going in Obi-Wan's thoughts.

Hell, even if it was in expanded, spoken dilogue that was'nt in the movie that would'nt consitute a conflict with the film unless the film had said something different - a conflict with the films, in regards to the movie novelizations, are things like Obi-Wan and Owen Lars being brothers, Grievous having a purely organic bridge crew, Palpatine being a powerless puppet who was originally a president, not a chancellor, and Red Squadron being called Blue Squadron instead.

Probably, but then again Rey is'nt Obi-Wan, so even if he would do so with Anakin that does'nt mean she would do the same with Kylo.

"My powers have doubled since the last time we met, count."
"What, you mean last week?"

When would the last time they met be at this point? When he fought him and Obi-Wan on Oba Diah? So earlier that year? Either Anakin grew a lot in that span of time or he was just boasting (probobly the latter, since per the novelization Dooku only lost becuse he threw the fight)

 

Ive talked similarly about Finn's arc and my thoughts on are essentially them going, "What if we take han's arc in ANH and make it 2 movies?" Finn was arguably similar to Han in the TFA, amoral, looking out for himself miainly until he grows to help those he's bonded with and attacks the villainous black clad figure to protect the main protagonist, to me they essentially split the character of Han in 2 and gave roguish handsome charming pilot to Poe and gave the actual character arc to Finn. The thing here is that it was done differently ith Finn than Han, he came from a diffeent place, has different goals in a way.

Now my issue wiith TLJ is I think, to me, it either doesn't know what to do with him, or doesn't want to take the time to do what the story of the character could be, and it says to itself, "Let's take his arc from before and say it wasn't finished and outstretch it into 2 movies." Now, this doesn't mean it was said to be finished in TFA, but why do something so similar twice? It also doesn't mean the movie had to have him not have Rey as a priority, as I think that's a fair reading of TFA, even the end. This doesn't mean it had to do what I think is such a similar arc.

I think it has a similar thing with Rey, where the movie says, "What if we just said her going forward was still her trying to find her parents and gain their approval?" Not inherently bad in concept to me, but again, it's not much different than before, to me, and I think is aking that character's arc from TFA and making it 2 movies long.

I think it bordeline makes them filler arcs. No matter what happens in TROS, I think any version of that movie you'd see, you could come in and you would barely need to be filled in on Rey's arc, as I think the place she's at at the end of the movie is barely different than where she was at the end of TFA/the beginning of TLJ. Similar to Finn. I think Kylo is the one who gets more of the straight story development, I think not necessarily being hugely at a different place as a character, but in being in a different place physically as a concept.

Rey has books. Finn has Rose. Even Poe, I think you'd barely see a differencne, but to be fair I think that may be more contributed to him not getting much to wrap around his character in TFA. He gets demoted at the beginning and I guess may get bumped back up after the movie. I think this story is kinda like the story that could've happened in between ANH and ESB. theoretically, I think you could watch the Kylo/Luke stuff, and not need a lot of other info.

I think it almost like TLJ doesn't just copy story beats from the OT, but also kinda reuses parts of TFA character arcs for the same characters, in some ways.

 

Well keep in mind that Han in ESB, despite being with the Rebels for three years come that point, still is'nt fully devoted to their cuase and would have stright-up left had the Empire not showed up before he managed to do so.

Really the only reason he had stayed at all that whole time was becuse he had fallen in love with Leia.

 

The bolded is super contradictory to me. Agree to disagree. Vehemently. It just sounds like a dishonest copout to me.

Healing and freeing Kylo = aiding and abetting a Nazi, in my book. You can pretty it up by claiming that the point is to scold them so they think about their wrongdoing, and it changes zero to me. If I want to watch a story about a holier than thou preacher scolding bad guys while they actively commit heinous crimes, I won't turn on SW... And for the record, I never want to watch that movie lol.

Since you cut out the rest of what I said on this point, I'll restate it. The novel also shows Obi believes Anakin is going to die. I will not view Obi's actions as interpreted in that novel without that context, because it is clearly paramount. You ignore it and that's cool, but you picking and choosing what to ignore isn't canon. It's your interpretation.

Then why on Earth have we wasted all this time with you trying to rationalize Rey by pointing to Obi's behavior? We are ending where we started - we agree on Rey's behavior. I just think that behavior is wretched and totally unjustifiable, and you think it's fine.

 

Thank God for blessing me with the understanding that something like this would come up.

Han in ESB isn't running from a vague threat. He literally has a bounty on his head. I think it's only practical that he'd want to pay off Jabba. I personally think Han's arc isn't strong in ESB. But in regards to that, I think the movie doesn't feel the need to do something that I think is more similar to the ANH arc.

 

I've never argued that there was a cemented in stone plan for this trilogy, as it's clear there wasn't by how all-over-the-place it is. That's why TLJ felt like it went in a tonally different direction than TFA and why TROS felt very different from TLJ. But that doesn't mean TFA didn't set things up to be explained or foreshadow things the audience expected answers on and then TLJ either went in the completely opposite direction or ignored it altogether. There are many people, fans and cast and crew alike, who have all come out and said it went in a very different and weird direction. That doesn't sound like it was a universally well made follow up to TFA. This is how you feel TROS did with TLJ. It's how a lot felt about TLJ and TFA. That's all I've been arguing.

I'm not talking about Legends. I'm talking about the movies. Legends are even easier to ignore than the PT, imo.

 

How so? Just becuse one knows how to fight and is good at it does'nt make them a warrior.

There was'nt much danger of Kylo getting out of that situation. The physical scar may have been healed, but he still would be suffering from shock and the fact that his his body not yet having time to fully recover, Rey's allies were right on top of them and Rey stole his ship. Now, Rey's allies (for whatever reason) did'nt stop to capture Kylo and Kylo managed to find a ship that both worked after thirty years and had a hyperdrive, but it's not like Rey knew either of those things would happen.

Yeah, but the context of his thoughts indicates his actions would'nt have been any different if Anakin had'nt been in any danger of dying; he spared him becuse he did'nt belive killing a defensless foe was in accordance with the Jedi path, not becuse he believed Anakin would die anyway.

What is it I'm apparently ingoring here?

I'm pointing out Obi-Wan becuse it means her actions (not killing him, which is what started this specific branch of the convesation) is in line with the Jedi path. Obi-Wan and Rey are different peaple who make their own choices, true, but at the same time both are Jedi who follow the same code and moral/ethical ideology, so the root of their behavior, even if different, would come from the same place.

True, but that fact that he really only stayed becuse of Leia and was set to leave altogether (rather then just, say, go pay Jabba and then come back) indicates that he was'nt really that swayed to the Alliance's cuase despite all that time passing.

Okay, so what did TFA set up that TLJ ingored?

Peaple watched the movie and got ideas/notions on were the story might go regarding certian events/characters, but outside of peaples opinions what did the first movie actually, factually set up that was ingored by the second?

All I'm saying is that was what happened in canon prior to the Disney buyout, so it's not like they ever really had that happy an ending to begin with

 

I've already told you I'm not going to list and get into a debate about it because we've argued this constantly and it'd get us nowhere. My point is that lots of people have said they felt TLJ was a poor sequel to TFA, and we're justified in feeling that way, just as others are justified in feeling TROS was a bad follow up to TLJ. The trilogy suffered immensely, IMO, from having two directors who saw Star Wars as differently as Abrams and Johnson do. It needed one vision.

General audiences have no idea about Legends, so their stories would not affect how most feel about the OT.

 

That's a hell of a lot of wasted time training to be a skilled warrior just to not be a warrior. As you and I often reach, this is an agree to disagree point. You're on Mars, I'm on Venus. To me, I don't even know what to debate. The Jedi are super skilled warriors, factually. If you want to debate that, K, but I'm bored of that because they so blatantly are warriors in my mind that I'll just move along. You and I watch Star Wars very differently, that's all.

Again, agree to disagree territory, by a landslide. This is... What? Are you saying Kylo must not be important because Finn and Poe didn't catch him off screen?? Who knows what they didn't. Maybe they had to flee in a hurry. Maybe they didn't know he was alive down there because rationally, Rey healing him and leaving him free was certifiably insane.

That's your interpretation of the context of his thoughts that you already contradicted previously when you agreed he would likely capture non-lava burning Anakin, unlike Rey.

Obi would have captured, not healed and freed, non-lava Anakin. This is fundament different to me. If you think healing and freeing a mass murderer = leaving a mass murderer for dead = capturing a non-dying mass murderer, agree to disagree. They're not the same.

 

I'm not contridicting anything, all I'm saying is Obi-Wan inner monologue states that he would'nt kill and defensless foe and given how its phrased their is no reason to think his stance would change if Anakin was'nt on fire. That's all I'm saying, that he would'nt kill him, I already acknowladged that he would probobly have captured him if possible, but that would have been personal choice in how they interpreted the Jedi way, not a question of following/voilating the Jedi teachings.

Yeah, Obi-Wan would have captured him, but agian Obi-Wan is'nt Rey; they both follow the Jedi teachings but, as I said above, healing and leaving a foe free is'nt a part of those teachings (as far as we know). Different Jedi would have handled the Kylo situation differently - Mace would have killed him, ROTS Obi-Wan would have captured him while ANH Obi-Wan would have either healed him and let him go or just walked off and left him there wounded, Qui-Gon probably would have healed him and let him go, Yoda would have probobly healed him, handed him his weapon and told him to surrender, and then react in accordence with how Kylo acted, and Anakin would have either captured him or, depending on how angry he was, killed him, ect.

Fair enough.

Most of the general audience probably does'nt really don't care that much about whether the OT characters got a happy ending, and plenty probably either saw the other movies once or a couple times, only saw a few of them or had'nt even seen any prior to going to the ST. General audience=/=SW fans.

 

Right. So again. Why are we talking about Obi? They're different and do things differently. I think Rey healing and freeing Kylo makes her a bad person and not a hero. This has nothing to do with Obi, who didn't and almost certainly wouldn't do that.

 

Nothing in Legends bothered me because I didn't read it and I'm definitely a hardcore SW fan. I know a lot of the basic plots (my mother read a lot of the books) and I like some of what I've heard, but I also didn't take it to heart much because I never saw it as a definitive canon, even before Disney. So yeah, not the same as the ST, for me. Besides, I'm pretty sure none of the OT trio die in Legends, anyway, and that would've been a big issue for me. I don't see anything wrong with there being some drama and darkness, as long as it's done well. Having not read them though, I can't judge. I can judge the ST, though.

 

Becuse neither would have killed him in that circomstance, becuse both are Jedi and killing a defenseless foe is not the Jedi way.

And personally I consider peaple who show compassion and mercy and heal critically wounded peaple to be good peaple, and don't judge heroes soley by ferocity and conviction in which they fight their enemies but also how they treat them when their defeated or in need of aid*; many, many things are worth being considered "heroic" for and some of the most famous heroes in the history of our world never lifted a finger to fight or do others harm. But that's just me. Based on our past interactions its fairly clear you have a much more stringent and black-and-white moral outlook then I do and a much narrower definantion of what consitutes a bad or even evil person.

*

True, everyone veiws the SW saga differently and had different expectations regarding the ST, both before it came out and during its release.

 

I'm sure he does blame himself, as any parent would... but it's hardly done in a way that shows liability or the repercussions of Han Solo's behaviour. Ultimately, that's where the drama of these films would have been. That he believes he was a better smuggler, than whatever he was during the Rebellion or the New Republic (something one assumes he would have done for longer than his career pre ANH), is (IMHO) the kind of lazy writing the ST is littered with. It's a prime example of how Abrams wanted to regress his character. I think it would have been much more interesting to see a Han Solo that was a veteran general of the Republic or a Republic diplomat or politician... or whatever development they could have given his character to show he'd experienced new things after ROTJ.

LOL.

 

You don’t really think that a movie is either “divisive” or “playing it safe,” do you...?