ST Rey Skywalker/Daisy Ridley Discussion Thread

Peaple have been twisted comments made by Hamill and plenty of others regarding plenty of other things about TLJ. I suspect this is no different.

Unless you can present me with actual evidence, or sufficent, logical reason for why Johnson would deny Trevarrow the sparing of Luke, then I am going to call the suggestion what I see it, and what I see is a conspiracy theory to further the insepid, tiresome narrative of "TLJ bad, Rain Johnson evil. Star Wars dead. Raraaar."

If TFA only ever had mystery boxes to offer, rather then proper setup, then TLJ could never not fit with it - the boxes were designed so that Johnson could put whatever he wanted in them, ergo there were no wrong decisions (only decisions that some peaple would'nt like, but that was always going to happen no matter what answer he gave).

And the films being diametrically opposed to one anouther does not preclude them from fitting well together (which at any rate is more a matter of personal taste and satisfaction then anything else).

How can you know if you would have bought the romance or not if the romance never happened and you never had a chance to receive and process it?

Ridley did'nt write the character - there was never any guarantee that Rey (or anyone else) would'nt end up with anyone*; DTOF was written and almost made, and even though she had no romance with either Poe nor Kylo she made eyes at the former and kissed the latter, so

*and there's no guarantee she won't in the future; her stories just begining, after all.

Considering that shipping is a matter of personal opinion and does'nt (and often does'nt) remotely need to apply to characters that actually get together or even exist in the same francise, I fail to see how Ridley expressing her opinion on the matter "kills" any of them. She no more killed the ships then Tom Brady could kill my cousin's fantasy football team by saying he would'nt play on the same team with Joe Cool (see guys, I do sorta know sports!)

And both Rey and Finn are still alive and still single, so I'd say there's hope for Boyaga's fantasies yet

 

Well, LFL didn't care for those fantasies when ST was at its peak, tough luck to care now that it's devalued and not because the fantasy didn't come true. But you have the right to cope.

 

I wouldn't be a bit surprised if in comic or book format he gets his wish.
With Finn now FS he'll need training. And of course....Rey will be his trainer.

 

Nobody cares about comic books. They are as good as never happened.

 

I think you have me confused with someone else. I don't particulerly care either way, I'm just pointing out that it's not impossible for it to yet happen.

And just becuase the ST is devalued to you does'nt mean it is to everyone. To plenty of us both it and it's surrounding era contiue to have value; a lot of us are eagerly anticipating more stories with these characters and the chance to see how they devolop further.

And so do many others. You know there's an entire generation of Star Wars fans who grew up with print media repersenting "the" Star Wars experience, right? I mean surely that alone must mean that that medium matters as matter as movies, since it was equally capable of defining the francise to some as they were to others.

 

well, plenty of you couldn't make TROS outgross TLJ could you? And that was a big deal breaker. if TROS made more than TLJ, lets say anywhere between 1.5M-1.7M and got a stellar critical reception, you would be hearing about plans and actors would be much more coy and mysterious in their answers about the future. Also, plenty of you couldn't change the optics that TROS is the worst SW movie ever. Just look at YT. So yeah, with plenty of you who needs detractors, naysayers, boycott?

 

If it was a good movie that reviewed well and had good word of mouth it would have been a bigger success at the box office. Sometimes audiences can just smell a stinker.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Sometimes audience just stops carrying regardless of quality. SW is a franchise where fans buy tickets for the opening day and weekend well in advance, ahead of reviews. yet tickets sales this time around where much lower than for TFA and TLJ even though previews pushed for what fans claimed they wanted to see (the trio is finally working together!) and squeezed every inch of nostalgia they could without being overly spoilery (emperor laughs! Leia lives! Lando is back!). Interest was down from the get-go and poor reviews didn't help its legs.

 

And that matters to me...why?

To you and some other peaple around here, sure (for some reason I can't quite fathom) but not to me.

We are hearing plans, just not for sequels to the sequels trilogy. Which is'nt in the least bit weird, becuase they completed that trilogy and it's time to try new things - I mean it took three decades before we started hearing things about sequals to the Original Trilogy?

Of course we could'nt, becuase that it is is a matter of opinion - and as far as my opinion is concerned TROS can't be the worst Star Wars movie as long as ATOC, the Clone Wars film, the Ewok Movies and the Holiday Special exist.

I am. I'm using it to listen to Bowling For Soup.

If you mean go over to the stupid side of the site to watch biased videos repeating the same tired old story about how Disney is killing Star Wars, that's gonna be a hard no; if I want to watch something negative, nakedly baised and so stupid that will drain my brain cells like Palpatine drained Rey and Ben's life and I'd watch Fox News

Pictured; Disney caring about your boycott of the films that made them an ungodly buttton of money

 

Advanced ticket sales were in line with TLJ-


https://deadline.com/2019/12/star-w...e-ticket-sales-fandango-last-jedi-1202812274/

Poor reviews and the first B+ Cinemascore from audiences tanked any chance the movie had at meeting or exceeding TLJ’s box office.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

So what you are saying is that people returned tickets after they read reviews? Nah. Most likely, sales were on par with TLJ like Solo sales exceeded BP sales.

Also, lets not forget that audience and critics don't necessarily agree.

 

Agreed, John. Word of mouth means a lot with films and in my personal experience the word of mouth with TROS was "it's pretty darn fun, but it has issues and it does'nt stick the landing of the trilogy; once is good but it's not really worth a second trip to the theater."

And honestly area has a lot to do with it to. My area has one theater and it's...not the best. A lot of peaple were I live won't go more then once - or even just once - to see a film unless it's something really special, even if the film is (like TROS) not really *that* bad overall.

IMO it's even more likely peaple bought tickets, went once and did'nt go to see it a second time, and word of mouth did the rest. Even so, the film still did pretty well overall. That being said, it's also more then likely some peaple did return tickets, or just failed to find the time to use them, as both things happen all the time even with the best of the undeniably good movies.

 

As I said I am not going to sift through years of tweets, and try to find 2 - 3 year old articles from when we were debating this in the Sanctuary thread and more and more stuff kept coming out about CT and his issues with TLJ and how it affected his script etc. Believe what you want to believe the evidence is out there find it for yourself if your so interested in it instead of taking my word for it I have better things to do.

If you like how TLJ and TFA fit together I am glad I don't think they fit at all especially when it comes to the character of Rey who is turned into a walking plot device with no agency in TLJ. In any case there isn't much more to be gained from this conversation so as I said earlier I am out.

 

You said anticipation wasn’t there, that advanced ticket sales were down overall but advanced sales data proves that to not be the case, as I demonstrated thru the Deadline link.

This leads me to believe that if the movie reviewed well and had positive buzz it would have resulted in a better box office run.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I...um...I did'nt ask you to...

...so...

Oh, I accept your word that you believe that, I just don't share your opinion and I don't consider what you see as evidence to be evidence; I'm not denying the statements were made, I'm denying they mean what you think they mean.

You know, I like TROS just fine and I had fun with it in theater, but I won't deny it would have been a much better film if I had a "positive buzz" while watching it

 

Plus, Mark Hamill tried to get Johnson to change his mind both about Luke dying and about Luke’s characterization. He felt that what Johnson wanted Luke to do didn’t fit the character that he had played for four prior films. However, Johnson refused to change his mind. Why would he treat Trevorrow any differently than he treated Hamill? If he wasn’t willing to respect Mark hamill’s wishes and concerns, ( the guy who had helped bring Luke to life) why would he do what trevorrow wanted?

Johnson doesn’t seem like the compromising type.

 

Becuase at the end of the day Johnson was the writer with the vision and Hamill - irregardless of being the guy who brought the character to life - just an actor tasked with executing that vision. Hamill says he ultimatly came to understand and respect Johnson view and they worked together to make the best movie possible (an "all-time great" in his own words), so clearly their conversation was a lot less simple then just Hamill demanding Luke live and RJ refusing; they probobly sat down and had a nice long discussion about it, and I would'nt be suprised if the compromised by allowing Hamill to inject a bit into the character to make it fit more with his personal vision.

Hamill's an all-around nice dude, but were he a petty jerk he could have dug his heals into the ground and refused to perform unless Johnson allowed Luke to live, in which case Johnson would almost surely have to oblige him becuase he can't very well make the film without him. But Hamill would'nt do that.

Becuase Trevarrow is a fellow writer who is writing the sequal to the film Johnson is writing, and they were tasked with working together on the overall trilogy to make it mesh together - the relationship dynamic is totally different then that between RJ and Hamill*. We know Johnson was'nt above changing his film for Trevarrow (as he added Poe and Rey's scene on the Falcon at the latters request), so why assume he would'nt change this as well if that's what Colin had really wanted?

*if I ask my boss to put me on the cash register becuase I'm sick of cleaning, he's probobly going to refuse me outright, but if one of the other managers asks him he'll be much more likely to consider it.

 

This is why Disney doesn't want anything extra or behind the scenes released for their projects. The marketing narrative for Luke and Mark Hamill was it's a challenging character and a challenging role for Hamill to play. Mark didn't know about it at first but rose to the challenge, liked it, and is proud of the work.

YouTube and other places like to drop all but the first frame of your image.

 

last movie in the 9 movie saga should have been critics proof and got the finale bump which is clearly what they tried to achieve with announcing that it was the end of Skywalkers. Perhaps it backfired. I certainly didn't see it when I found out that all Skywalkers were dead.

 

Agreed. All Hamill did was have a conversation had by a hundred other actors with a hundred other directors in a hundred other movies and shows, and when he unwisely voiced that which normally reminded private aloud certain elements of the fandom latched onto that and blew it out of proporition, twisting to into "evidence" that Johnson did something "wrong" and that Hamill hated everything.

“I regret voicing my doubts & insecurities in public. Creative differences are a common element of any project but usually remain private.”
- Mark Hamill.

I guarantee you he had plenty of creative differences with Lucas. Does that mean he hates him and the OT? Of course not. It just means he's a person with his own opinions and idea independent of other peaple. This is all far, far less them peaple made it out to be.

 

I wonder what Hamill privately thinks of JJ exterminating the Skywalkers so a Palpatine can take their name?
Whatever he's right to be proud of TLJ - he was absolutely incredible in it.

 

Who knows? He might love it, he might hate it or he might not care, and short of going on twitter or writing him a letter to ask him directly there's no way to know for sure. It's worth noting, though, that not nearly everyone shares such a narrow, cynical "Skywalkers v Palpatine. The latter usurped the legacy of the former" veiw of TROS's ending and IMO I'd imagine that Hamill would be more likely to take pride in Rey's sucesses due to his apparent fondness for Ridley.

Amen

 

I think this, to me, can maybe come off as an implication of it being asked, in a way, to someone:

No one, in this situation, said Johnson is evil. On the contrary, if this is the case, I sympathize with the desire to maintain control the storytelling of something I would put out.

It wasn't developed in the last 2 movies. Whether I enjoyed it or such, I think is another issue.

I think that's an assumption in how they handled the situation.

Johnson is no more important. I think to suggest he views Trevarrow as more of an equal than Hamill, to me, doesn't paint Johnson as someone whose non petty.

In the concept of filmmaking, if they feel it clashes with their creative vision for their story, I don't see why they would have to change it. And I don't think, to me, it's necessarily something I would feel comfortable heavily demanding in control over a story someone elses is putting out.

I think the Rey scene doesn't effect the story of that movie, like I think the Luke thing would.

 

Well it was'nt.

I did'nt say anyone did, I said that the idea that Johnson would refuse Trevarrow under the circomstances for what amounts to no reason smacks to me of that kind of narrative

Becuase it would have been developed in the third.

Of course it is, just as is the assertation that Johnson would have refused Trevarrow. To me, however, it's an assumption that's based off logic and seems fairly safe to make. I could be wrong, but my instincts and opinions lead me to belive more firmly in my assumption then yours.

It's not so much a matter of importence and equals as it is differing dynamics in the two respective relationships; Hamill is an actor tasked with executing Johnson's vision and bringing it to light, while Trevarrow is a fellow writer with his own vision scribing a sequal to Johnson's own film and the two have been tasked with coordinating in order to ensure their visions compliment, build off each other and fit together. Differing factors are at play, and differing factors lead to different outcomes.

In the concept of filmmaking, if they feel it clashes with their creative vision for their story, I don't see why they would have to change it. And I don't think, to me, it's necessarily something I would feel comfortable heavily demanding in control over a story someone elses is putting out.

Luke dies at the end of the film - almost in the last scene - and him not dying would'nt effect TLJ's plot (it would only affect the setup for the next film, which Trevarrow is writing); the difference between Luke dying and Luke living is tiny altering of dilogue in one scene and a minor change to anouther (very brief) scene. It would literally take Johnson like five or ten minates to alter the script.

 

I think there is a reason, in regards to the character's conclusion and death.

It wasn't in the others, and I think, with that, to me, it's not been developed well, is tacked on and isn't an organic part of the story.

I think it's not illogical like that, as apart of a creative perception of the character.

And that writer is no more important than the actor. In the midst of the character, Hamill has more experience in the situation than Johnson and Trevarrow. What's not petty about saying a director views the actor who has more experience playing the character on screen's opinion less valuable than that of a writer that's writing a movie?

Them coordinating doesn't have to equal anything in how it's done.

I think that's a conclusion to a creative choice in the character arc of Luke and the story of the movie. I think that's more prominent than a minute long scene after, I thin, to me, the conclusion of the stories have taken place. By comparison, the end of TFA, I think the change in having Luke not be lifting rocks or whatever means nothing to any of the character or story arcs in the movie and I think, to me, is entirely about the next movie. I think Lukes death is a conclusion to Luke's story and character in the movie, in that movie. I sympathize with keeping that conclusion in tact, irregardless of what's asked.