ST How do you build off the Sequel Trilogy moving forward

Also Leia was very young when her mother died, not *literally* still attached to the womb.

 

That's another thing I found annoying, now that you bring it up - I was'nt expecting some dashing pretty-boy*, but rather some sort of broad-shouldered, tall dark and brooding type.

But that's not my fault, lol - it's Topps, as their the ones who gave us the only pre-PT image of pre-Vader Anakin.


*I was actually expecting that for Palpatine given his clone's physical apperence in Dark Empire.

Leia remembering Padme, how Obi-Wan and Yoda talked about Vader in the OT and that Topps card played a fairly large role in shaping my opinions and persumptions regarding how Anakin "should" have been dipicted in the PT, just like how peaple's interprations of the end of ROTJ, Yoda's "pass on what you have learned" line and, of course, the EU, shaped peaple's opinions and presumptions regarding how Luke "should" have been dipicted in the ST.

Well, as we've discussed before when I look at prior material I see a character to whom I find it totally in-character that he would briefly spend a few seconds simply contimplating maybe killing his nephew to save multipule lives, considering I feel he did much more/much worse then that in ROTJ when he nearly did kill Vader in a blind rage over an implied threat agianst a single person.

That's my take on the character, mind you, and how I interpreted him in the OT. But my point is that said interpretation seems just as valid as an alternate interpration that would lead one to say it would be out of character for him to not consider killing Ben becuase he resisted killing Vader/considered doing so in the heat of combat, so I can't see how Johnson did anything wrong - perhaps he just looked at ROTJ in a similer way as I did and interpreted the character thusly?

I don't think it would be more well-supported to the peaple I was reffering to - who had'nt seen the OT and thus neither knew nor expected the character became a villian.

Ironicly a big part of my issue with Anakin in the PT is A) he was'nt nearly as flawed as I assumed he would be and B) based on what little we knew beforehand I never imagined him as being conflicted at all in what he did, rather I had always assumed he had fallen to the Dark Side willingly out of a desire for power or something.

 

Also an official Anakin action figure was released, as a live Jewish anakin, that looked just like shaw and NOT a young Hayden Christiansen.

 

No, it's not worse at all considering that this was also in a duel in which Luke was literally gambling his life against one of the most credible threats in the entire galaxy. Compared to him sneaking into his nephew's quarters while he was asleep, you can probably understand why people would blow up on you when you make this absolutely ridiculous comparison and try to vainly make the events seem even remotely comparable.

I vehemently disagree when it comes to A and as for B, he ultimately did. However, where that lust for power is ultimately derived from was the question. And frankly, the vision of Anakin that the PT presents is rather consistent with Anakin as Vader on a thematic and narrative level. The OT already makes Vader out to be a broken butcher albeit a fearsome one. The prequels just take it a step further and capitalize on the symbolism. He starts life as a slave and as his fear of loss and lack of control over his own life starts spiraling out of control, his actions simply make him a slave to another master in his position as Sidious' enforcer. Every moment he lives is a monument to his own sins and a visual representation of how his own flaws ended up consuming him and warping him to the point where you can no longer recognize who he was.

I'm not denying that was an odd choice, honestly. Even if I do think that Padme's death at childbirth being juxtaposed with Anakin's painful transformation as Vader proper is a brilliant move.

 

You can only build on it, as it barely created a foundation.

 

Haha, you know how I hate the character and I would be perfectly happy if she completely face-planted. But I`m about 99 % sure most of her fans would hate it if she turned into a cowardly loser who failed at everything in a future story.

I`m only reading speculations on how she will build a Grand Jedi Order. And that she will be known as "Rey the Wise" I read as spec here on the forums.

So, sure, people really would embrace it if she got the opposite treatment. I don`t remotely believe that.

She benefited from Luke getting that treatment because she now has the victories. However, if a new character came along and Rey got thrown into the trash heap so that new character could have it all I would expect very unfavourable reactions. And from a lot of people who cheered when it happened to Luke, mind you.

 

See it's actually worse then what happened in TLJ to me, becuase I don't really take the fact they were in a duel into account as being relevent to Luke's behavior - I look at the two situations and I see one were a man flips out just becuase of an implied threat agianst one person and nearly kills his own father, and I see anouther were a main just briefly thinks about - only thinks about - maybe killing his nephew when multipule peaple (including the one person from before for all we know) were in implied danger.

Now, if some peaple want to take the duel into account and say something like "well, it's in character to actually try to kill your father in a blind rage when he's threatening just one person but it's out of character to just think about killing your nephew when he was a threat agianst multipule peaple just becuase you were figthing one and not the other" then that's their biusness, but I don't see things the same way.

No, actually I can't. I can understand why peaple disagree with me, but I can't understand why peaple flip their #$@$ just becuase I have a *gasp* different perspective on the character and the films then them.

I mean, I'm not suprised, becuase that's essentially what they did to RJ when TLJ came out - becuase god forbid anouther fan have a different view and vision of a character then some other fans - but I can't understand it. And honest question but is it really so hard for you to believe that maybe I don't see the comparison as ridiculous and actually do feel that the situations are comparable?

You vehemently disagree with the opinion I had that was shaped by my own personal perspective of the films? What?

I'm talking about how I personally pictured pre-Vader Anakin based on the way I interpreted what little information existed prior to the release of the PT vs what I actually got in those films. He fell to get power to save the woman he loved, yes, but I always pictured him falling becuase he stright-up selfishly wanted actual power and damn everyone else; his quasi-facist speil in ATOC is probobly the closest the PT got to how I pictured Anakin before those movies came up.

Yes, and I think that's a great choice that makes him a compelling character. But it's not how I pictured him before the PT came out and once upon a time I did'nt think it fit with what (admittadly little) information we had pre-PT on the character, that's the point I'm making.

I hated the way Lucas chose to dipict Anakin in the PT becuase it did'nt fit my preconeived notions of the character or my beliefs regarding how he "should" have been dipicted, but Lucas thought it was an interesting take and plenty of peaple (who now include myself, ironicly) saw it as a compelling and interesting choice. If we flip things around that seems like much the same (as in virtually exactly the same) situation as is now taking place with Luke, only I'm now one of the peaple who found it compelling and interesting rather then one of the peaple whose upset becuase it did'nt fit my preconeived notions regarding how the character "should" be dipicted.

By "cowardly loser" I assume the unspoken implication is "like Luke."

But see, plenty of us don't think Luke was a cowardly loser in TLJ, so why would we think the same of Rey assuming she go similer treatment - if one thinks it was good and interesting for Luke, why would one think it was bad for Rey?

You know that plenty of us don't think Luke was thrown into the trash heap so that a new character could have it all and actually do think his character benefited from the treatement, right?

If we don't think it was bad that it happened to Luke, why would we think it would be bad that it happened to Rey? As long as they presented things in a way that I felt made sense and was belivable - as they did with Luke - I can't imagine having an issue with Rey getting the same treatement other then perhaps being annoyed by a lack of orginality if they did it exactly the same way.

 

i don't actually think you would do that but I do believe a lot would be complete hypocrites about it if it happened to Rey. And suddenly that supposedly "great and interesting" character take would be horrible if it happened to her. And then it would suddenly be everything bad that people who hated it for Luke think it was.

Why do I have such a cynical view? Because SW fandom isn't renotely different to any other fandom and I've witnessed such turn-arounds to "but not with MY character" all the time.

 

Well maybe your right, but I don't see why I should assume you are, and it seems a little strange to me to make accusations for how peaple might hypothetically react to some possible future thing that is itself just a hypothetical.

Um, no offense but is'nt that what a lot of you guys who are upset about Luke's dipiction in TLJ are doing? Your mad becuase you don't think the character would act/should be dipicted that way?

Yeah, I know, it's super insane that I don't share the same exact perspective on the fictional events within a series of fantasy films as you do. We can only all view what happens in the films one single way and it has to be the same what you do.

Yeah, I don't really give a flying fig newton that you disagree with me, and I'm well aware of the content of my justification - Luke almost killed his dad in a blind rage in ROTJ over an implied threat agianst one single life, and he spent a breif moment simply considering killing his nephew later on becuase of an implied threat agianst multipule lives, so given the former I find that later to not only be in character but to show devolopment, as in the latter case he showed restraint despite the threat being much later.

When you and others say "but he was fighting in a duel in RTOJ, so it's totally different" I just go "does'nt seem totally different to me" becuase I don't find that at all relevent, as I see no reason to think Luke would'nt have snapped agianst Vader if the threat had occured outside of combat.

No offense, but that's a little silly - I don't remotely agree with a lot of your expressed opinions but it's not really that hard for me to imagine why you hold them, alien thought they are to me.

I just don't view the facts involved in a scene in a thirty-plus year old movie relative to a flashback in a newer film the same way you do. That's all. It's not like I'm suggesting all of the world's leaders are lizard peaple serving as vanguards for an invasion of robots from the Jovian Moons or something.

The Anakin I pictured pre-PT was a sort of imposing, brooding, menacing figure with a great deal of charisma and immense ambition, who rather then fell gradually due to anouther's manipulation willingly and eagerly betrayed the Jedi out of a desire for power or something (maybe out of envy or a hunger for knowledge/influance), rather then an overly-dramtic, angsty pretty boy who fell becuase he wanted to save someone and becuase he was manipulted.

Now, would that be less robust then what we got? Maybe, but not nesseserly, as such characters can actually be compelling and interesting. IMO I like Anakin now, but I think think the way I used to imagine the character as a kid before the PT came out would have been better then what we got.

 

Listen, I hate that I have to be the one to break this to you, but that's actually insane.

I think you're too hung up on the idea that I'm disagreeing with you to actually consider the content of your justification for why Luke is the way he is in TLJ. I think that's the issue here. Though, to answer your question, yes. Kind of.

The problem is that people don't just suddenly want to be fascists, you know? There's usually a couple steps one takes before you end up getting there and Anakin's fear of loss and general lack of control is the foundation for that. So what you're really saying is that your vision of Anakin simply wanted power for its own sake. Which makes me really confused when you say that you wanted a more flawed Anakin. After all, you're just saying that you want the Anakin that actually exists but with a less robust portrayal of his insecurities and motivations.

 

I think the ST tried to make a valiant effort for that with Kylo via lack of giving him real motivations. Of course I thought that writing sucked but the attempt was there.

 

I guess, but in that attempt, they somehow messed up so badly that they essentially made a younger and less entertaining Palpatine who occasionally whines.

 

Well, IMO TFA seemed to set Kylo up as being more akin to a school shooter then a fascist; a person who had a good life and was raised well and right by a loving family but just went wrong; that's not unbelivable as it happens all the time IRL - sometimes peaple just go bad and their is'nt an understandable reason or easy explanation for why.

 

That's not really interesting though, is it. He may as well be a whiny Palpatine then. He sure is rather similar just from looking at the latter's portrayal in Darth Plagueis.

No, I really don't think you thought this through at all. Especially when Luke being in a duel in which he could actually die opposing two of the most dangerous people in the entire galaxy. You know, people who don't exactly make threats that they just don't act on. Luke doesn't press the attack against Vader solely because of him threatening Leia, it's the straw that broke the camel's back when he's fighting Vader. This is crucial context that you're blatantly omitting and the fact that Luke lets him live after all that is what's remarkable. Not that he lashed out in the first place.

This situation's contrast with Luke sneaking up on his defenseless nephew in the middle of the night when he's sleeping and contemplating to murder him are completely and utterly incongruous.

 

But I`m not gonna be a hypocrite about it. I dislike how the concept was executed on principle. And I would think it was bad as in the specific way it was done, with the specific ratio of descontruction vs. "reconstruction", no matter the character it happened to. It bugs me more with Luke, yes. And I would get cathartic glee out of it if it happened to a character I hated. But all those still work on the same principle of thinking it is bad in general.

The hypocrisy I usually see has people saying something is great in principle - unless it happens to a character they like. Meaning, it was never about liking the concept in the first place, just solely who it happened to.

It is more ripe in TV show fandoms of course because of the sheer quantity of the material usually meaning each character gets hit with narrative X at least once. And it`s always "so-and-so is not a problem or bad writing, it is beautiful and natural" *cue so-and-so happening to those fans favourite character* "OMG, that`s a disgrace, it is super-bad and problematic, nothing about it is good." Oh, really. I admit experiencing this for the last 20 years on a continuous loop has given me a very cynical outlook on that kind of thing.

 

I kinda think it is - definantly more interesting then what we got at least, if you ask me.

No, I have thought it through, I just don't view the situation the same way you do.

The duel is what your focusing on and what you think is importent, but I don't think it's relevent and it does'nt play a role in shaping my perception of what happened - I think Luke reaction to the threat is what's relevent and what shows his characterization, not the circomstances leading up to that reaction.

Says you. Whose to say Luke would'nt have flipped out on Vader if he had started mocking him, done the mind-probe to dig up the information on Leia and then threatened her while they were still on Endor? IMO I don't see any reason to think he would'nt have.

I'm not ommiting anything - Luke lets Vader live, yes, just as he also relizes that killing Ben would be a stupid, horrible thing to do and thus does'nt do it.

Not to me.

But why is it wrong for someone to (hypothetically) get upset about it happening to Rey, but it's okay for you to feel that way about Luke?

The problem is that this is all seemingly based on the assumption that in order to like it happening to Luke vs not liking it happening to Rey you'd have to dislike Luke or like Rey - you know their are peaple who like both Luke (including his dipiction in TLJ) and Rey, and peaple who like Luke (agian, including as he was dipicted in TLJ) but dislike Rey, right?

Anyway, your talking hypothetical, and as far as I can recall your not even reffering to specific peaple but just general randos in the audience, so I don't really see how this is relevent to the overall convestation; would some peaple be hypocrites when/if Rey is dipicted in such a way? Sure, probobly, and that would be annoying to you and probobly to me as well, but hypocrites always exist and their hypocrisy should'nt really factor into intellegent debate.

 

IMO it would be totally hypocritical if the same person said "I love this arc, it is such a beautiful and interesting character take" when it happens to Luke. But then when it happened to Rey to say "that is how you ruin a character, nothing about this is good or interesting." Don`t pretend you liked the concept then.

I don`t pretend that. Even IF it happened to Rey, I wouldn`t pretend to like the concept then, I would still call it horrible in principle. Just in that case, I would like who it happened to.

Sure, there are people of all kinds of reactions. I mean, I`m sure there is the odd person in the world who likes the Star Wars holiday special best of all.

I just happen to think for example 99 % of "media" bloggers who waxed poetical on how this arc for Luke was the greatest thing ever would scream bloody murder if it remotely happened to Rey. And I even know why. Which is why I roll my eyes at their overly praising essays now. But I guess that is more my problem for even having read them in the first place. Should have known better.

 

What if it happened to Rey and you liked it?

And I don't mean like as an in "mahahaha. I hate Rey so this brings me joy!" I mean like it as in "wow, I really like how they did this. What an interesting choice that adds a new facet to the character and makes me see them in a new way and appreciate them more becuase of that."

Becuase the latter is how I feel about how Luke was dipicted in TLJ.

I really don't think it's fair to compare my view on Luke and Rey to fringers like the one dude who likes the Holiday Special.

Well it's a good think the opinions expressed by random peaple on their online blogs don't matter on lick then in the grand scheme of things, amiright?

 

Not gonna happen because as I said, I hate the concept of it. Therefore, I`m never gonna have a positive reaction to it on those terms. No matter the character. And if they did it with her but with way better execution than Luke`s - to me - I would resent her even more because it wouldn`t be the same thing anymore and she would get propped yet again. I`m talking the TLJ execution, not in details but in principle. And that has a 100 % probability rate to fail for me. It`s like asparagus, no matter how you cook it: ew.

Nope, my one option would be the "mahaha" one.

Of course I wouldn`t watch anything with her unless it was very specifically something I knew beforehand from reading up on it would bring me joy so. I`m never gonna go into Star Wars again "blind". I love being spoiled anyway and to be forewarned is to be forearmed.

I didn`t mean to. I know there are way more people in your group (or mine) than the prospective group of the Holiday Special lovers. Just meant to say everything has someone to be a fan of.

 

That's fair, but as I've said before their was a time were I would have been as certain as you about never liking the PT or enjoying Anakin's character and would have claimed any attempt to do so had a "100 percent porovibility," but look at me now. That's not on you though, and I'm not saying your going to change your mind, that's just my own experiences telling me that peaple should never say never.

That being said, I feel like I should point out that just becuase some hypothetical person had no issue with how TLJ dipicted Luke but does'nt like that some future work dipicts Rey in a similer manner does'nt mean their a hypocrite; perhaps this hypothical person just did'nt feel like the explanation for Rey was belivable as they did with Luke?

That's actually more or less the point I constantly try to remind a lot of peaple around here of (to no avail, seemingly).

 

It may not seem like it here but I`m actually pretty easy-going and flexible - when I know there is room for it. But when it comes to my personal squick areas, I know myself enough to know that those aren`t going to change. Heck, I even did watch TLJ twice and it was so much worse the second time around. My friend looked at me with such pity even, I was honestly kind of shocked. I have a pretty good poker face normally but I guess not then.

Guess my Star Wars dream of making at least an animated show out of the Legends books just won`t ever come true. Sigh.

 

And I will be there, bringing the receipts, for all the people who went on about how great it was that Star Wars was burned to the ground....

I mean, it already happened at the time - I saw someone who loved what happened to Luke and loved TLJ and screeched at everyone about how they were ists....and when there was talk of Buffy being rebooted, went crazy. Hell, we've already seen that with some Ben Solo fans going on about how horrible it was that he didn't get a happy ending without a shred of self awareness of them laughing at those of us who wanted a happy ending for Luke, Han and Leia.

It's my standard response: when it's your fandom it's okay, when it's my fandom, it's serious business.

 

You already see this to a certain extent with Ben Solo fans. Luke's death praised to high heaven and critics of the death lectured for being married to head canon. Ben's death then brings laments about dying to soon (shocking concept, but Luke was still young as well), complaints about Ben dying to prop up another character (say hello to Luke's entire story in TLJ), and big time virtual tears about how he had so much potential for an amazing story going forward (i.e. head canon galore squashed).

 

I really didn't think Luke dying alone, away from Leia and his friends was a happy ending.

 

You see this with every fandom that feels their favorite character was slighted. There's lament that Luke was in TLJ, Ben Solo in TROS, Rey in TLJ, and the less said about daily walls of text about muh leading man Finn muh Rian mancrush on Kylo the better. It's the same thing - fans view movie quality through their favorite character's lens and if their favorite character didn't get the best scenes or didn't get the best arc or didn't become the most popular, they are much less likely to like a movie regardless of its merit and how the character was treated will remain the focal point of criticism. It's normal. Everyone does it so flinging crap at each other for different character bias is redundant.