ST Which do you think you would've preferred?

How Disney ended up with a ST that is by most people opinion the worst of the Trilogies,

It is mainly cause they were hell bent on fast tracking the ST instead of going with tradition and having 1 movie every 3 years and like the PT having 1 director through out with a cohesive story but if they had gone with George Lucas's ST that everyone wanted they could have had 3 directors and come out with a cohesive story told by the creator.

 

My view of how the characters are written in TFA obviously informs my perception of how the characters are utilised and developed in the subsequent films. That a darkside Rey is ‘possible’ is drawn entirely from the fact that there’s a vacuum in TFA regarding character motivation. That Rey is basically a blank slate, with a ‘mysterious’ heritage, with ‘mysterious’ powers that a non-Jedi has never been shown to have in the films, plus what proceeded TFA in the previous 6 films, makes Rey’s arc in the ST entirely open to interpretation. The same applies to Kylo Ren… whose just a thinly drawn Anakin IMO. And that I stated *may* have been set up by Johnson for a flip between Rey and Kylo, is just that I.e it’s speculative based on the lack of characterisation in the films.

If you’re stating that Kylo Ren is written as being so irredeemable in TFA that any form of salvation is implausible/impossible, I’d refer you to Darth Vader. That Kylo is depicted as the masked villain of TFA is, IMO, a reflection of the attempt to replicate the Vader persona of the OT… and not an attempt to depict a villain who wouldn’t be as conflicted as Vader etc.

Where is the ‘bias’ and ‘prejudice’ exactly? If one makes a direct sequel to the OT/PT, featuring the children of the OT3, then obviously audiences (particularly the fans) are going to assume the character would be a main character, probable protagonist, or at the very least, not inherently ‘evil’. That is kind of built into the DNA of SW. Weren’t you (like me) an advocate of Rey being Luke’s daughter… or at least from the Skywalker bloodline?

I say it to underline the point that he had no more prominence in TLJ than he had in TFA. I thought he had way too much focus in TFA, and should have been treated in the same way as Vader in ANH and/or Maul in TPM.

Rey is categorically the main protagonist of TLJ, it’s just that she’s a bland character, who is written poorly… and in contrast, Kylo Ren seems far more interesting. This is as true in TFA as it is in TLJ… however, what I would say is that whilst Kylo Ren gets some development in TLJ (largely concerning his relationship with Luke), Rey just levels up again and any development is confined to the plot point about her rather mundane lineage.

I’m not sure what you’re arguing… certainly in relation to my view of it? I think Rey is bland and the most thinly drawn lead in any Star Wars film… and I’d regard her in the same light regardless of whether she was the daughter of Luke, Han and Leia or a secret clone of Shmi… I would have much rather had Finn as the lead and Kylo Ren as a non related Sith/Knight of Ren/whatever. But the root of the issue here, IMO, is that TFA made the villain a Skywalker, and by virtue, Kylo is much more emotionally connected to the OT3 and the galactic situation/galactic events. And as soon as that family connection is revealed, Kylo becomes much more significant to proceedings, and unfortunately, the redemption becomes kind of obvious (especially in the light of no other Skywalker’s). Rey, on the otherhand, is kind of dull and uninteresting… especially as she’s never really given an obstacle that she can’t overcome with ease, or overcome with a new force power that she can just materialise…

 

Of course Kylo Ren is being ‘treated like Vader’. It’s like you’re assuming that ANH is the *only* frame of reference for the audience. The audience know (or at least those familiar with Star Wars) that Anakin Skywalker/Vader killed women, children, Obi-Wan etc. and was responsible for Padme’s death. And yet, even after those actions, *Vader* is ultimately redeemed through love. That is hard coded into Star Wars. The audience are attuned to that story (given it was the main narrative thrust of the previous films). That Johnson decided that Kylo’s route to salvation was a ‘romantic’ love, as opposed to a ‘sibling’ love etc., may not align to our preferences (and I’d agree that it stretches credulity within the confines of the story being told), but is a consequence of a redemption story being set up (either directly or indirectly) in TFA. Make Kylo Ren a straight out villain with no connection to the OT3, or Rey, and the redemption arc ceases to exist.

Pretty much everything in TFA doesn’t make sense or has little internal logic to it IMO… everything from Rey pulling force powers out of her backside at will, to Luke running away, to the First Order being the Empire v1.2, to Snoke, to the Resistance, to Han and Leia’s ‘reset’ etc. etc. so I see no further requirement for willing suspension of disbelief in Rey and Kylo’s relationship? Do I think it’s a misjudged creative choice? Yes. Do I think it would be better without that relationship? Sure. But in terms of ‘feasibility’ and internal logic, it has as much as the notion that Luke would ‘blame himself’ and would ‘walk away’ from his friends, family and the New Republic he’d helped rebuild, and sit by and watch the galaxy burn (as established in TFA). So it comes down to which piece of incredibly bad writing one is more diametrically opposed to.

I think you’re making fairly large assumptions on what I or any other Star Wars ‘fan’ wanted, in order to deflect away from the criticisms of TFA and Abrams in particular. That is your prerogative, but I believe your dislike of TLJ (and dislike for it is warranted) is clouding your view on the bigger issues within the ST… primarily in its development… and many of us recognised that the ST was ******* (or at least hamstrung) as soon as we saw what Abrams had done with TFA.

I think you’re inadvertently highlighting your own bias with your passive aggressive comments. It seems (or that’s how you are coming across), that you think fans that like TLJ/Reylo (or any other element you disagree with) are part of the problem… whereas my criticisms are squarely focused on the films and those responsible for putting them on screen.

And as to your point, compelling fictional characters are usually made interesting by the emotional relationships they have with each other… be it Hamlet, Michael Corleone or Darth Vader… that’s how *drama* is usually crafted and developed… and the inter and intra relationships were a significant factor of SW Episodes I-VI. That DLF chose to develop the ST around the extended family of the OT3, as opposed to Rey Smith and Ben Dover, is entirely their choice and not mine, nor necessarily the choice of those that were just expecting a Skywalker to be front and centre of a film that was marketed as a direct sequel to the OT, and that pushed nostalgia and all the existing iconography of the OT.

 

Moreso it's stupid, has no real development, build up, or real basis rational thinking.

TLJ did NOT have to develop a redemption story through Rey. That, as a concept, wasn't really remotely set up in TFA. TLJ did that. That's not on TFA. The existence of the idea of Kylo turning from the dark side in TFA doesn't make it responsible for TLJ actions.

That's not in TFA. That's in TLJ. The stupidity of other things doesn't make it so these things are comparable or less dumb. Rey is the main character. Some may suggest doing what they do makes her tool to service Kylo's character, while what OT did was have Vader be a tool for Luke's character.

The anti TFA sentiment isn't really relevant to what some may suggest are TLJ's real issues, that can be seen as different from TFA's, for the most part.

 

Then whom? Han Solo was dead, Luke had ran off and Leia was a passenger in her own story. I'm not an advocate of Rey redeeming Kylo, but I'm struggling to think which dynamic in TFA (other than Han) could be developed to facilitate that arc.

Each film has to own their own issues and shortfalls, but absolutely the proceeding films are culpable for what's set up/established. This applies equally for Kylo, as a character, as it does for Luke. For example, it's TFA that has Luke run away into self isolation and leave his friends to die. TLJ has to try and rationalise what TFA first establishes. I mean, I personally don't like what Johnson did with these characters, but I'm not blind as to poor scenarios, situations and characterisation TFA throws over the fence.

As per above. Of course they are relevant. These things are conjoined. It's why the ST is an utter mess. Disconnected films, with thinly drawn characters and concepts, with each subsequent filmmaker trying to make sense of what they've been left.

I don't think anyone believes 'TLJ's problems all spring from TFA'... and I've not really seen or heard anyone trying to position that TBH. But that's different from having the ability to see the structural problems stemming from the way TFA established its characters, situations and inter/intra relationship dynamics, and how those issues bleed into TFA and haemorrhage into TROS. It's why each subsequent film is perceived as being weaker/inferior to the previous, as those structural issues become more apparent and cannot be resolved.

 

Leia didn't have to be a passenger in her own story. TFA didn't do much of anything with her, but TLJ also furthered that and cemented the character there. But, also, Kylo could have changed, if that were to be done, by example or...

He could've not become an active hero in the whole trilogy, but be faced with the harsh reality of his actions, be caught and held at the end and Rey just tells him that it's his choice what he does with his life and he's left to contemplate his direction in life. That can be done whether Rey is a Skywalker or not.

I suggest that the stronger issues with TLJ, for the most part, to me, aren't from TFA. Luke isn't the issue being discussed from my end, here, at the moment (even if I agreed with TLJ being because of TFA, and I don't). I didn't say TFA didn't have it's own issues. TLJ chose it's own. Rey is the main character though in TLJ movie, not Luke, and she can't even get the same level of time, respect or commitment afforded to Luke, in that very movie.

No matter what, TFA didn't develop a romance between Rey and Kylo in the movie itself.

They're different movies written and directed, by apparently different people. Each subsequent filmmaker doing whatever they may want to do doesn't make it so they're not individually responsible for their choices.

 

Could of... would of... should of... We can all cite examples of what should have been done better. That Leia is a passenger throughout the ST isn't an issue created by Rian Johnson, although it would be true to say he doesn't fix it. However, the point remains that TFA didn't effectively establish the concepts, situations characters and inter-personal relationships. And as a consequence, the subsequent films struggle to fill the vacuum.

I'd imagine that pretty much every other Star Wars fan would disagree with you re. which character is 'disrespected' the most in TLJ (that being Luke Skywalker IMO).

It does and it doesn't. The Last Jedi has a host of issues that fall squarely on the shoulders of Johnson... be it the pedestrian space chase, the function of Rose, the whole Canto Bight sequence (the Finn and Rose subplot), the film not moving the story on in a meaningful way etc. etc. However, many of the bad creative choices in TLJ are as a direct result of what TFA set up (or what TFA failed to set up). That Rey is largely a central protagonist with no real motivation in TFA is (IMO) why Johnson chooses to give her more function by moving her into the 'redeemer' role. That Kylo is largely a central antagonist with no real motivation in TFA, but who is a 'Skywalker', feels conflicted, and murders Han Solo is (IMO) why Johnson focuses attention on the reason Ben Solo turned, and the necessity for Rey to bring him back to the light. That Luke Skywalker runs away and allows the galaxy to burn (as depicted in TFA) is why Johnson feels compelled (I assume) to paint him as some abject failure who has given up on the galaxy... after all, who other than an abject failure would give up on their friends and family just because the Jedi temple is sacked in act of betrayal?

It should be again noted that I'm not excusing Johnson for TLJ... I'm merely pointing out that he didn't fix the issues introduced in TFA (many of them beyond fixing and some salvageable) and he created a whole bunch of new issues to boot. And all these issues from TFA and TLJ cumulate in the cinematic mess that is TROS. Classic cause and effect...

 

It is an issue created by TLJ for that movie. The movie made that choice to do that for that movie. The movie holds itself back, not TFA. TFA holds itself back in similar and/or different ways, on it's own.

It struggles as a result of the choices and intentions of the individual developers per movie, for TLJ it's it's own problem, not TFA. But the concept of Rey seeking to redeem Kylo was never developed in TFA either. That's another thing TLJ developed.

I think they'd be not accurate on that. I think the poor writing of Luke is a different issue than his character prominence, something I'd suggest isn't given to Rey, as a character. Those that take issue with a perceived disrespect for Luke, I think are misrepresenting what I think the real issue is, in that the writing is stupid. I think some may perceive purposeful animosity, while I perceive not strong writing. I think TLJ made distinct choices to care more about Luke than Rey, and I think that's on TLJ. Luke isn't the main character in these movies. Rey is. And I think the movie chooses to dismiss her as a character. Something I never felt TFA did, as whole, even at it's poorest.

That is only an issue because TLJ chooses it to be one, not because it was forced to be by TFA. Rey is still her own character in TFA, even if she's underdeveloped. TLJ chooses not to develop her, from even really what she does have, and backtracks on some of it. That's on TLJ, not TFA. TLJ is the movie that chose to put her in that role for Kylo that she was never developed to be in in TFA, and chose the romance angle to do so, and favor Kylo at her expense, character wise, which TFA didn't do. Even some of what I think TLJ is presenting as an idea for Rey, could work, if the movie wasn't sliding Rey to the side in exchange for Luke and Kylo.

I think the underdeveloped concept, though, isn't an excuse for the writing of Rey, because Kylo is underdeveloped, but I think the movie chooses to have more focus on him, while Rey is in a moreso supporting role in his story. And I think this is down to individual choices, not something TFA is responsible for. This isn't a discussion about the lack of worldbuilding or the weak conflict, or even some perceived not well developed characters and such that TFA may have had, but character/story structure and forward momentum, all of which I think TLJ doesn't build off of TFA on, and I think that's on TLJ. Like I think TFA's, what I think of, lack of building on the OT and PT is on TFA, not on the PT for just being seen as so boring because of politics and too much CGI and Yoda fighting and all that, and people just wanna see things that "feel" like Star Wars again, so it's okay that it repeats ANH, and it's all the PT fault because of that.

Nowhere is it ever developed that Luke allowed the galaxy to burn. He's never developed to know anything about the first order or the destruction of planets or anything like that. The opening crawl of TFA suggests that the first order arose in his absence. TLJ is the movie that developed that. Luke being a jerk, is different from him sucking entirely. TLJ chose the latter, while TFA didn't. I think whatever RJ may feel compelled to do, like this, is on him.

I'm saying I think TLJ is a poorly constructed movie based on his new choices, not because of TFA, and that TFA is it's own movie with it's own individual issues.

 

The only 'myopic bias' on display is that which positions TLJ and Rian Johnson as being the singular failing of the ST, whilst ignoring the turd in the room (IMO) which is Abrams and his films.

As already mentioned, Kylo Ren is demonstrably the central antagonist of the films... I'm not sure what you're trying to argue?

What isn't a 'detailed or favourable view of TFA'? I'm not sure of the relevance of your 'facts'?

I'm not missing ANYTHING. I can assure you that any 'bias' is only related to how I view poorly constructed/written films. TFA being a prime example. We all know that Abrams was being hugely derivative... and that extends to the characters as well as the situations. Kylo Ren is positioned as the Anakin Skywalker/Darth Vader of the ST... and obviously Anakin/Darth Vader is much more than a 'villain'. Abrams/Kasdan were simply trying to recreate this in their own image and it went badly wrong.

You seem to be forgetting that TFA is in fact Episode VII... it doesn't exist in a vacuum, both in terms of Star Wars and fairy tales/fiction generally. What you seem to be doing is pretending that TFA is the only frame of reference for how we perceive Star Wars characters. It isn't, and I'd posit that even Abrams understands that... and that when he creates (or co-creates) a character... who is related to Anakin/Luke/Leia, and who has turned to the dark side, and who is conflicted, and who wears a black mask, Abrams actually knows what he's setting in motion i.e. a character who will follow the same path as Anakin/Darth Vader, and will ultimately find salvation in self-sacrifice. It's telegraphed. Some of us saw the cynical recycling of tropes for what it was, some of us bought into the idea that it was all 'new' because we wanted to believe in it...

Again I'm not sure what point you're making... other than trying to reenforce your belief that Kylo Ren wasn't written as a character to be redeemed. I certainly believe he was, which is clearly evident by his redemption in TROS... which is (whisper softly) also a JJ Abrams film.

Again... could have, would have, should have.... The fact of the matter is that TFA *could* have been an infinitely better conceived and constructed film, instead of the derivative, cynical and unimaginative cash grab it was. And if TFA had been better, maybe Johnson would have had less excuse on TLJ, and maybe Abrams would have had less excuse on TROS. Who knows??? We can wish.

Possibly. However, they are both really poor films, IMO, for reasons both connected and not.

I don't necessarily disagree with that... apart from the 'easily corrected' comment. If it would have been so easily 'corrected', I'm sure TROS wouldn't have been as excruciatingly bad as it was.

 

Both of the movies can be individual failures in their own ways, for their own reasons. What those failures mean for their individual movies is another thing.

 

I would say TLJ retroactively peeled off the nostalgia paint off of TFA and seriously exposed a lot of problems that too many people gave passes to.

I still regret the fact I didn't rip TFA into shred for lousy storytelling because I naively put too much good will to Kathleen Kennedy reigning back the directors under one defined narrative. It became evident that Abrams just flat out used the nostalgia narrative to dictate both TFA and TROS, and apparently couldn't bother to actually look beyond the OT era, as evident by the Death Star Destroyers having a photoshopped cannon strapped underneath the OT Star Destroyers (as opposed to say, using the Eclipse design from Dark Empire). And when you're focus on nostalgia points of an old film trilogy that newer fans wouldn't care as much as the old fans, you tend to lose your new characters and their stories.

Rian Johnson went with the deconstruction narrative of the whole Star Wars Saga, which ended up also overshadowing the new characters and their stories (with the possible exception of Rey inexplicitly developing a romance with Kylo Ren, which unintentionally undermines Johnson's attempt to move Star Wars beyond the Skywalkers since it shows the moment you remove Rey from the Skywalker Family, her character becomes even more dependent on the Skywalkers to function... as a satellite love interest to the villain).

Ultimately, both films were more focused on the grander meta-narrative then they are of actually focusing on characters. Lucas, to his credit, knew he had to cut back the politics of ROTS (namely Padme forming the foundations of Rebel Alliance) to put full focus on Anakin's downfall into Darth Vader despite the fact ROTS politics is the most interesting and engaging of the bunch. And because of that, obviously Lucas' ST wins out for many simply on the grounds it would likely treat the characters better and handle the narrative better.

 

I’d agree that Johnson seems to ‘discard’, or probably more accurately, relegates Finn to a less interesting subplot in TLJ… *However*, I suspect that’s largely due to the view that Abrams wasted the opportunity to give the character needed depth, complexity and a compelling arc in TFA. The high concept of Finn being a renegade Stormtrooper, who joins the rebels, is a great one… and John Boyega is a fine actor with a lot of on-screen charisma… but beyond that, Finn is kind of ‘relegated’ to the comic relief of TFA. Where Rey gets to be heroic, Finn is the love sick fool, who is regularly slapped down, needs to be rescued and is not taken seriously. The defected Stormtrooper concept isn’t used nearly as competently as it should, and within TFA itself, doesn’t generate one iota of drama, apart from maybe the one scene where he leaves Rey at the cantina. Instead, the concept (the renegade Stormtrooper), is just used as plot device to get Poe off the Star Destroyer and the rebels inside SKB.

With respect, that’s a largely verbose criticism of *me* and Rian Johnson, which doesn’t really pertain to anything in particular. You seem to be approaching this discussion as if I’m defending TLJ… and this is where your bias is evident… because I am not defending Johnson or TLJ. I’m critiquing your interpretation… because your (seemingly) inbuilt bias towards Johnson/TLJ, doesn’t allow you to acknowledge, even as a possibility, that many of the ST’s issues are structural, and were seeded in the construction and development of TFA. Poor films usually beget poor sequels… and that’s exactly what we get with the Sequel Trilogy.

As already mentioned… you seem to be forgetting the fact that a fictional ‘narrative’ is an artificial construction, which is designed to engage the audience. ‘Expectation’ is the desired objective of those creative the narrative, otherwise it would be impossible to predict and consciously create drama, tension, comedy etc. etc. In short, making the villain a Skywalker is a conscious creative choice, designed to elicit response in the audience… ‘expectation’ being one of the elements to elicit.. and in terms of TLJ, Johnson (for right or wrong) attempts to subverts some of those expectations.

Rey doesn’t have to redeem Kylo Ren, I’m not sure I’ve ever argued that? Point being, if the underlying narrative is one of redemption, then at some point the writer/director has to make the decision as to how that redemption is realised. Han Solo was dead. Luke is absent, Leia’s a passenger… which leaves Rey, Finn or Poe… and given that Rey is the central protagonist, it’s usual that the central protagonist is given that function.

If you’re stating that TFA creates an issue and TLJ makes it a bigger issue, I agree…

Using your analogy… Abrams gave us flour and water, some believed it would result in a cake, but some knew only too well that flour and water makes paste (a tortilla at best).

TROS suffers from the same thing TLJ does I.e. trying to find a compelling story/compelling character where none previously existed. It’s what happens, typically, when you throw different creatives into the mix, with no real plan and no discernible consistent vision across piece. Abrams delivered a film that was built purely on nostalgia, Johnson destroyed any remaining good will by trying (and failing) to find something more compelling, and Abrams came back to cash a cheque.

Both the micro and macro story of TFA was hugely derivative of the OT, which is why many people disconnected from it immediately (myself included)… especially as it shat on many elements of the OT/PT. The result being that any investment in the story was diminished by the lack of compelling story and narrative (both at micro and macro level)… In terms of my preferences, what is it exactly you think I prefer or don’t prefer? I think you’re confusing my opinion that Rey was a thinly drawn, vapid and boring character in TFA, with a preference to see her enter a toxic romance in TLJ. Not at all. I just believe the toxic romance was a consequence of the thinly drawn characters and situations in TFA i.e. Johnson was trying to create drama (badly IMO) where none existed before.

I’m less interested in conspiracy theories behind the scenes (be they true or not), than I am in the actual technical/creative merits of a film. And what we can say as empirical fact is that Abrams made both TFA and TROS, TFA being the film that set up Ben’s redemption (IMO anyway), and TROS being the film that not only formalised the ‘romance’, but had Ben redeemed. But yeah… Abrams family were absolutely held at gunpoint until he agreed to make a film diametrically opposed to what he wanted to depict in TFA.

 

Who said Johnson was an 'innocent bystander'???

There is nothing passive aggressive about stating that TLJ inherited many of the issues that TFA created.

Johnson couldn't have made Rey a 'nobody' if Abrams had correctly established who Rey was in TFA. That Johnson made a choice that we don't agree with is a creative choice on him, that Abrams creates a mystery box re. Rey's heritage, that the next film must resolve in some way is on Abrams.

Of course he had a choice, but the damage had already been done.

 

I'm kind of just focusing on one idea of yours here, but I definitely agree. For all of TLJ's role in contributing to a "problematic" relationship between Rey and Kylo, as a viewer I left TLJ thinking that the possible Kylo redemption arc and/or relationship with Rey (be it romantic or just Force connected super friends) was emphatically over and the whole point was to set up Kylo as the primary antagonist to be defeated in IX. TROS formalizing both really took me by surprise. Of course, I wasn't expecting "somehow Palpatine returned" either coming from TLJ, but perhaps I should've with Abrams in charge.