ST Did anyone notice the ST titles are all false?

I’ve known plenty of folks for WAY over a year I don’t consider family. Same for the vast majority of folk.

More importantly, the movies make zero indication that Luke, Leia, or Kylo consider Rey to be family.

ETA:

Technically, Leia was a Skywalker. She was Anakin Skywalker’s daughter, and her being given a different last name doesn’t change that. Similarly, Kylo/Ben Solo was also a Skywalker.

 

A Jedi who wants the Jedi to end because he thinks others could represent the lightside in a better way isn't somehow not a Jedi. A Jedi is a Jedi, even if he doubts himself or the Jedi. So no, the title isn't unfitting at all, and it certainly wasn't trollish. Luke was the last Jedi, and following on him as the last Jedi was Rey.

There are plenty of ways in which you can understand "The Rise of Skywalker", there is nothing about it that made me think Anakin or Luke were coming back. If anything, Ben returning to the light seemed the most likely, and that sort of happens. A title doesn't need to have only one specific meaning, nor does it need to have everyone read it the same way. You may not find the title to be a good fit, I might think that there is something that would have been a better fit, but that doesn't somehow mean that JJ Abrams didn't see something that made him think this title was the right one.

Yeah, no. That doesn't constitute winning. Palpatine was a Sith, he wanted to rule himself, or have the Sith rule through his "granddaughter". He died, the Sith were again wiped out, and Rey not only rejected and killed Palpatine, but also ended up being a Jedi. How could he possibly have won, when his own kin sided with his mortal enemy?
In a way, she is to Palpatine what Anakin was to the Jedi: a supposed hero for one side, who got shaped by the opponent and brings it success.

Beyond that, you don't need to survive to win. You can sacrifice yourself for the greater good. And if the greater good succeeds, while evilness fails, you have won. Anakin wasn't created to establish a long-lasting bloodline that acts as guardings of the light, he was created to destroy a dark influence on the force.

 

Clearly if they give approval to Rey's decision to adopt herself into their family, they accept her as family and consider her as such.

Why do people keep saying this? You have a fundamental misconception of Palpatine as a character if you believe he won in any capacity. If Palpatine's dead, he lost; he doesn't care about anyone or anything other than himself. His goal is to become immortal and rule forever.

 

They did not give approval to Rey “adopting herself” (not a thing, btw) into the Skywalker family, nor did the movie say that’s what Rey was doing.

All Rey did was take the name. That’s it. That - absent any actual indicators that she joined the family - signals “spiritual successor.”

People considering each other family - to the point that they might as well have grown up together - is not a light matter. And even in stories it requires some foundation be laid. And none was here. In fact, this scene was apparently not even supposed to be in the movie so whatever JJ’s intent it wasn’t this.

 

He closed himself off from the Force and spent the majority of the movie bashing the Jedi, and didn't at all seem to identify as one. I think that counts as anti-Jedi. I get he was supposed to be a Jedi in the end, but he wasn't for most of the film.

Anakin and Luke are literally called Skywalkers, Ben Solo isn't. And the previous film ended with Luke Skywalker dying; I find it hard to think the follow-up "The Rise of Skywalker" wouldn't be suggesting a major return for that character in some form, especially given how Luke's character and death was received in TLJ. That they went with that title comes off clickbaity and damage control to me.

 

Where did you gather this? This is news to me.

She looks at them as if for approval before answering the old woman, and they smile upon her. In the novelization, it's confirmed that they grant their approval. So yes, that's what happened.

 

The title The Force Awakens isn't wrong because, as others have said, the Force awakens in Rey, but it definitely isn't intuitive.

The Last Jedi makes sense, it just transfers from Luke to Rey over the course of the movie.

The Rise of Skywalker, I'm assuming refers to Rey becoming a Skywalker and thus "rising". It isn't the best title for the movie though and comes across like it was written by a random title generator for the third film in a Star Wars trilogy. We had Revenge of the the Sith and Return of the Jedi... we need "____ of (the) ____".

 

The problem with the title The Rise of Skwalker isn’t that the title couldn’t work in other context, it’s the idea of “becoming a Skywalker”

 

If you’re referring to the last line in my quote, the reddit mod who leaked the entire TROS plot in detail said that the original ending they filmed had Rey, Finn, Poe et al on Tatooine, with Rey and Finn holding hands.

So what we got was a rewrite/reshoot. And given what we’ve heard from the folks who worked on the movie, the rewrites/reshoots were studio-mandated. Some reshoots of scenes in the shooting script are normal for movies. Massive rewrites/reshoots are not.

Approval to take the name Skywalker, yes. I’m not disagreeing with that. Again - taking a name =/= joining a family. Just as me taking your last name wouldn’t automatically make me your sister in any sense of the word.

(I wouldn’t look to the novel to glean JJ’s intention, though; he had nothing to do with it.)

 

Where are you getting this information that the reshoots were studio mandated and that this particular reshoot changed the part about Rey's surname?

For the record, I don't particularly care about--beyond mild curiosity--what J.J.'s intentions were at any point in the production of the film or the trilogy as a whole. My only concern is the finished product and what is considered canon.

 

Through reports of what bts folks have said and talking with folks with general industry knowledge re how things work.

The original ending as described was completely different.

Personally I think she was Rey Skywalker but for different reasons but that’s my guess and wasn’t *directly* suggested by the bts imo.

Good luck trying to determine what’s considered canon. Is Rey Palps’ granddaughter? Daughter of a clone? Did she even kiss Ben before he died?

I don’t think DLF cares at this point. It’s Choose Your Own Canon.

 

Choose your own canon? Rey’s the daughter of one of Palpatine’s strandcasts and therefore his genetic granddaughter. Rey and Ben kissed. What's in dispute here? That's the canon and it's been in every source released in the past two years. Any argument made otherwise stems entirely from a personal disagreement with those facts, and it's perfectly within your right to believe whatever you want, but this is what's considered canon.

 

Technically no, she isn’t. She’d only be his granddaughter if she were the daughter of his son/daughter. Which she isn’t. So she isn’t. The novel directly contradicts what was directly and literally stated in the movie.

Probably because DLF saw how nauseous folks were at the idea that Palps had gotten laid.

I’m not sure in what universe the TROS jr novel counts as “my personal disagreement.” You can literally purchase an official copy and read the scene yourself - there is no kiss before Ben dies.

 

It's hilarious to me when people try to argue that Rey is in fact a Skywalker by claiming "it's in the title".

 

Well there is also the theory that Rey becomes a literal Skywalker because Ben now lives inside her (also the reason for why he doesn't have a Force ghost). I don't make the rules!

 

I don't think that's exactly how that works...

 

The Force Awakened in Rey
Luke is the Last Jedi which he passed the mantle of the last Jedi to Rey
Ben embraced his Skywalker heritage Rey became Skywalker

 

Rey's father is genetically a son, with genes that aren't exclusively donated by Palpatine. Just because he wasn't conceived traditionally does not disprove that Rey is Palpatine’s granddaughter, therefore nothing in the film is contradicted. At no point is it stated that Palpatine got intimate with a woman.

 

No, he’s a clone with some other dna thrown in. Not sure if you’re aware how men becomes fathers irl by donating dna but this ain’t it.

See above re “not traditionally conceived.”

Yes it is. See above.

Because 100% of irl people’s grandfathers got intimate with a woman or *bleeped* into a cup, and because DLF and co - having gotten then “how babies are made” speech and in many cases knowing from personal experience making one (not to mention the experiences of their friends, family, parents, etc) - knew what audiences would take “grandfather” to mean and did not elaborate in the movie (because ofc at the time no one had thought to come up with a convoluted “this is why Palps didn’t REALLY f——!”), and because the novel is not considered necessary to understand the book, when the movie said “granddaughter” it absolutely meant “Palps got with a woman (or *bleeped* into a cup)” no matter how nasty such mental images might be.

 

Why are you so belligerent about this? You suspend your disbelief over space monks using telekinesis and laser swords, but you can't get over Rey's father being an artificial creation? Rey's father was begotten of the combined DNA of Palpatine and other sources, making him, scientifically, the progeny of Palpatine. The term clone was used as shorthand for "grown in a test tube rather than a womb." There's ongoing research right now on the production of artificial gametes from stem cells, so why is this such a hard pill for you to swallow? Would individuals birthed from this process be any less valid as children of their genetic donors? Rey's still his granddaughter. If the film doesn't go into detail about the particulars of Rey's relationship with Palpatine, then there's nothing to disprove anything.

 

What you call “belligerence” I call good ole debate/discussion.

And for this forum, this is exceptionally low on the spicy scale.

My problem isn’t with the novel saying Rey’s dad was an artificial creation. My problem is with your claim that the film’s “granddaughter of Palpatine” obviously meant *checks notes* daughter of a modified clone of Palpatine the common term for which, as even young children know, is “granddaughter.”

Canon adaptations contradict each other. This was the case with TLJ and its adaptations. It is also the case with TROS and its adaptations. Not a new concept. The movie is still the primary canon however and it’s never necessary for audiences to read the EU stuff to understand the movies. They’re not dlc or software patches.

I promise you that “clone” or “strandcast” =/= “test tube baby.” Trust me on this one.

…because “clone”/“strandcast” =/= “test tube baby”…”

Please post the part of the TROS novel where the text explains that Rey’s dad was created by Palp’s artificially-created sperm (he had none of his own?) implanted in some poor lady (grandma?) using her natural or artificial eggs?

“Granddaughter” tends to be particular enough for 99.99999999% of folk. Have you ever been in a situation where you’ve said “I’m so-and-so’d grandchild” and the reply was a puzzled “Clone kid or no clone kid”? The idea that any elaboration would be needed in the minds of, well, anyone but you, apparently, other than perhaps “who’s grandma?” is a novel one.

To put it simply: “Granddaughter” has a particular meaning that doesn't require mental gymnastics. If JJ/Terrio had meant anything other than “Palps banged, had a son, he banged, therefore Rey,” it would have been in the movie and “granddaughter” wouldn’t have been used. Moreover, Rey’s dad wouldn’t have been called a “strandcast” - he simply would have been “Palpatine’s son.”

The only readily evident explanation for the new and unnecessarily elaborate connection between Rey and Palps in the book is DLF saw the disgusted reactions and had the author come up with something clever.

Look - whatever lets you enjoy TROS, ok? Just please don’t try to convince me that your coping mechanism is actually totally consistent with the movie. Not sure why just going with the obvious movie intention is so bad; trying to make all the adaptations make sense together is a fantastic way to drive oneself insane.

 

Weird, because when my fiancee took my last name, she joined my family. She became the daughter of my mother and father, and the sister to my brother. That wasn't the case until she took my last name.

It doesn't matter if she had never met my family, liked them, hated them, etc. The moment she took the last name she became a daughter in law, sister in law, etc. She joined a whole family/legacy simply by taking on a new surname.

I think we may have a philosophical (maybe cultural) debate on what makes a family a family.

For example: My kids often refer to my good friends as Uncle or Aunt though we aren't related. This isn't exclusive phenomenon to me, my friends, or family either.

I also disagree that Rey hasn't been shown as being familial with Han, Luke, and Leia. She has.

In TFA, Ren comments on the fact that Rey is clearly looking at Han Solo as a father figure.

In TLJ, Ren doubles down on the idea that she looks at the Solo/Skywalker clan as family and tries to weaponize this against her.

In TROS, Leia is more than just a mentor/master for Rey. She is a surrogate mother to her in the way that, say, Mr. Miyagi is a surrogate father for Daniel in the Karate Kid.

Now, if one wants to split hairs and say that Rey should have taken the name Solo or Organa, that's fine. Yet, as was pointed out, using that reasoning, Luke should be a Lars.

 

The Rise Of Skywalker was always a strange title. Does it refer to Rey? Not sure. Shes not really a skywalker shes a palpatine lol.

The Force Awakens is not that misleading. While the force is always there Reys realization that she has the force and the strength that she possess mean that the force is truly awake. Its something that we never saw in the OT or even PT. The capabilities of the force was much stronger in TFA then previous movies. But it depends on your POV.

The Last Jedi......Hmmm Luke was probably regarded as the last Jedi but I think the title ultimately refers to Rey who after Luke becomes one with the force is the last Jedi.
That we know of.

 

Not weird. As you have gotten married, you know that taking a spouse’s last name is not the operative action - it’s the actual “getting married” part. I’m sure you know that had she simply legally changed her last name to yours, and nothing else, you would not be married!

She became the daughter-in-law of your parents and sister-in-law of your brother. And I assure you that this would have occurred had she not taken your last name. I know several married women who didn’t take their husband’s last name and they are absolutely married, both legally and in the eyes of their religions.

Again, I’m perplexed by your perspective.

You’re also talking about an actual legal process that is not applicable in the gffa. And since that isn’t applicable, we look instead to familial relationships that require no religious or state acknowledgement. And those were not formed.

Well, there’s “family due to state/religious acknowledgment” (marriage, formal adoption) and “family due to the formation of familial bonds” here. Here, the formal is simply objectively not the case. As for the latter, well, stories tend to lay a foundation for unrelated folks having familial bonds. The easiest example is Leia, who was not blood related to the Organas but who was raised and treated as their daughter so she *was* their daughter. In the PT, Obi-wan and Anakin had a father-son bond, as explicitly stated by Anakin in AotC; they were family, having essentially grown up together.

I believe very strongly that being “family” does not require state/religion sponsorship or blood relation but neither do I think “good friends” = “family.”

My best friend’s little kids refer to me as “Auntie.” I don’t know them well though; they aren’t “family” to me like someonr who had been a big part of their lives for years. But their mom, whom I’ve known more than half my life, IS family to me. But…I’ve been close to her half my life so that really shouldn’t be controversial.

“Father figure” =/= “father.” I’ve had father/mother figures in my life. Not the same.

Neither Rey nor Kylo ever say that. He says she’s looking for her parents and tried to find them in Han then Luke. That in no way meant she saw Han as her father (no indication he saw her as his daughter) or Luke as her father (he definitely didn’t see Rey as his daughter).

Mr. Miyagi wasn’t a surrogate father to Daniel. “Father figure”? Maybe? “Valued teacher” =/= “father figure,” though of course someone can be both. I’ve had close bonds with respected teachers over the years but never considered them to be my mother or father (I was blessed with truly wonderful birth parents). Nor would I have had I grown up without a mother or a father. I think you’re conflating different kinds of relationships.

No, while I’m not happy with how Rey got the name, Rey taking the name as a “spiritual successor” to Luke and Leia is reasonable. In-universe it makes less sense than, say, Organa, but close enough.

See, “spiritual heir” requires less foundation be laid than “the trilogy has been developing Rey as family to the Skywalkers and now she’s finally taking their name.”

That’s not what the trilogy was building up. The trilogy wasn’t doing much of anything aside from being tugged in multiple directions by the writers/directors/studio.

But at least “Rey taking the Skywalker name was her deciding to take up their hopes dreams and ideals” is something I can live with considering the movie itself. I refuse to swallow an explanation the trilogy had no interest in actually developing.

 

The author claims she wasn't responsible for this, so unless you're calling her a liar...

The novelization's revelations are what's considered canonical by LFL and all subsequent material that references TROS includes acknowledgements of these facts. If you're as versed with the film's development as you claim to be, then you'll know that many details weren't decided upon until the very end. J.J.'s "intent"—such as it was—is just as immaterial as George Lucas intending Sifo-Dyas to be a pseudonym for Darth Sidious during production of AOTC. The finished film does not logically contradict anything; what you concluded based upon the scant material provided is not justification for claiming inconsistency where there is none. If the film described an object as blue, and a novelization called it red, that would qualify as a discrepancy. If instead it's further clarified that the aforementioned blue resembles a specific hue with an sRGB value of (45, 89, 128) rather than (0, 0, 255), then that's not a contradiction. You're free to believe whatever you want about a piece of fiction, but your argument that the novel's information—or at least this particular tidbit—runs contrary to what's on-screen is baseless.