|
Post by Waxer-n-boil on Apr 12, 2018 20:35:14 GMT
So you're accepting that Passing the torch is impossible in SW as well. Good. That's not what I said, moron. I said you don't know the definition. It's already been done in the EU. If you say it hasn't, I'm calling you a liar.. because you are.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Apr 12, 2018 20:42:06 GMT
So you're accepting that Passing the torch is impossible in SW as well. Good. That's not what I said, moron. I said you don't know the definition. It's already been done in the EU. If you say it hasn't, I'm calling you a liar.. because you are. The Torch was never passed in the EU, in fact they went out of their way to mock the idea of the OT characters being retired by killing off the new characters instead. Like Anakin Solo.
|
|
|
Post by Waxer-n-boil on Apr 12, 2018 21:18:43 GMT
That's not what I said, moron. I said you don't know the definition. It's already been done in the EU. If you say it hasn't, I'm calling you a liar.. because you are. The Torch was never passed in the EU, in fact they went out of their way to mock the idea of the OT characters being retired by killing off the new characters instead. Like Anakin Solo.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Apr 12, 2018 21:32:38 GMT
The Torch was never passed in the EU, in fact they went out of their way to mock the idea of the OT characters being retired by killing off the new characters instead. Like Anakin Solo. Did they kill off Anakin Solo instead of any OT lead and have Anakin take over? Yes? Then they were mocking the idea of "Passing the Torch".
|
|
|
Post by Waxer-n-boil on Apr 12, 2018 21:37:10 GMT
Did they kill off Anakin Solo instead of any OT lead and have Anakin take over? Yes? Then they were mocking the idea of "Passing the Torch".
|
|
|
Post by audiosane on Apr 13, 2018 3:12:12 GMT
Doing it without them was never an option, Ford was only coming back if they killed him in the first movie, and no matter how many times they tried any scripts with Luke in them always had him take over the story to the point Rey and Finn had no reason to exist in the first place. And they HAVE been killing them off over the trilogy. Okay. Yes, there were some limitations, but my point is Disney had a number of options when it came to handling the OT cast. What did we get instead of having Luke "take over the story"? An overpowered Rey. You know why? Because that's what they wanted. Disney forced Luke onto that island, not because it made the most sense given his character, but because he would've gotten in the way of a character they wanted to prop up as the new badass female lead. Rey should not have fought Kylo Ren in TFA. That made no sense given the fact that she was never trained and had not even held a lightsaber before. Good storytelling should come before whatever agendas the filmmakers have. IMO, Luke would not have taken over TFA if he had a larger role in it, especially if he was introduced 30 minutes or so after we spent some time with Rey, Finn and Poe. Did Han or Leia take over TFA? No. Why? Because the new characters dominate the first 30 minutes and most of the screen time. Yeah, according to Harrison's contract, Han was a dead man walking. That doesn't mean it was a good idea to rehash him as smuggler instead of moving him forward with something new. Why doesn't Luke render Rey utterly useless in TLJ? Why is this only a problem in TFA? To me, the whole thing feels exaggerated. Why would Rey be useless if Luke had a larger role? She would still be a member of the next generation that would need to rise up and take her place? Why would she need to use a lightsaber in the first film? Like Luke before her, Rey could've waited until the sequel where it would make more sense. The problem wasn't the big Republic but rather how it was handled. Too much focus on boring, confusing, illogical politics. TFA was confusing by not really explaining anything. I wasn't sure what the galactic situation was exactly. Were the New Republic and First Order about the same in size and power? Did the First Order rule over anyone? Etc. My solution from failed politics of the Prequels? Give us less politics, have it make more sense and make it more dramatic. Getting rid of the New Republic destroyed one of the gains from ROTJ and rehashed the whole "underdogs vs. Empire" conflict. How was Luke the least interesting character when he went from a being farm boy trying to join the Imperial Academy to a Jedi Knight who redeemed the main villain, a man who turned out to be his own father, from the dark side? Luke was an underdog with an arc. He had victories and failures in every film. Where can Rey go once she's already defeated the main villain in a one-on-one fight in the first film? What can she learn when TFA already gave her everything she ever needed to succeed? Luke didn't even really train her, and I have no reason to believe Rey won't be the next Jedi Master and founder of the new Jedi Order. Rey didn't really earn anything, and she doesn't really grow as a character. Luke began his journey from being a follower to being a leader when he figured out a way to convince Han to help him rescue Leia. How did Leia and Han overshadow Luke? Luke was responsible for Leia's rescue, he blew up the Death Star, he spent most of ESB by himself, he led the rescue that saved Han's life, he got two one-on-one fights with the baddest mothafuckah in the galaxy - and won. The Empire didn't need much fleshing out because they made it clear that they ran the galaxy. The First Order is different because, 1. we need to understand how exactly it relates to the New Republic and 2. it would've been helpful to understand how a military organization in decline post-ROTJ had the resources to build an even bigger Death Star 30 years later. IMHO, Snoke needed to be fleshed out because 1. Abrams went out of his way to stoke interest in him from TFA and 2. the 6-film saga established the Rule of Two and the idea that the Sith were wiped out by the end of ROTJ. So... where the hell did Snoke come from? Is he a Sith? If not, what is he? What was he doing during the PT and OT? Kylo Ren doesn't need to be all-powerful in order to be a competent villain. Competent villains don't lose one-on-one fights to someone who has zero training in the Force and has never even held a lightsaber before. This is Star Wars. There are rules. Disney chose to play things safe. Nobody forced this on them. Nobody forced them to almost completely abandon politics or rehash the OT or anything. Let's not pretend the fans held a gun to Disney's head and forced them to handle the ST the way they did. Most fans were perfectly fine continuing the story after ROTJ had handled it conclusively. What mattered was how it was all handled. The new characters didn't need to take over ASAP. They had an entire trilogy to do that. Just focus primarily on them, balance them out in terms of failure and success and give them character arcs. We already saw Han mentoring Rey and Finn, Luke mentoring Rey and Leia mentoring Poe, all while in supporting roles. That's how you pass the torch. It's not that hard, regardless how ROTJ ended. Like with all other franchises, new films bring new threats, and Star Wars had an entire galaxy of possibilities. Stop making excuses for Disney. They had more than enough opportunity to fully capitalize on a brand new trilogy in a brand new era. And what did they do with that golden opportunity? They played it absolutely safe, rehashed the OT while undoing the gains from ROTJ, and they gave us unbalanced co-leads in Rey and Finn. They didn't need to buy Star Wars back in the 80s to give us good sequels.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Apr 13, 2018 11:37:03 GMT
I'm not gonna debate all that because I agree with some of it...but I don't think Disney had that great an opportunity after all the damage the Prequels did. Playing it safe was their, well, safest option. They'll be more willing to do new stuff once the current Trilogy is over and they've established a new status quo with entirely new characters and the light goes down on the OT.
|
|
|
Post by audiosane on Apr 13, 2018 18:23:57 GMT
I'm not gonna debate all that because I agree with some of it...but I don't think Disney had that great an opportunity after all the damage the Prequels did. Playing it safe was their, well, safest option. They'll be more willing to do new stuff once the current Trilogy is over and they've established a new status quo with entirely new characters and the light goes down on the OT. I understand taking reasonable safety measures. The Prequels were criticized for having too much boring politics, an awkward, creepy romance, bland characters, scenes and characters that were CGI-heavy/fake-looking, etc. A basic solution to all this would be to return to what made the OT work: light-hearted adventures with occasional dark dramatic moments, just enough politics to inform us on what's going on, a romantic subplot that works, engaging characters we care about and a greater emphasis on real locations, sets and practical effects. Disney did not have to rehash ANH. They chose to. I expected TFA to be a proper sequel, not ANH 2.0. Even when fans realized this, many of us were convinced that TLJ and IX would be more original and take more risks. TLJ... still rehashed way too much from ESB and ROTJ. Resistance leaving their secret base while under attack (Hoth), Rey having a Force vision, Rey moving rocks with the Force, Rey and Kylo Ren meet Snoke in the throne room, Kylo Ren disappointing Rey by not redeeming himself before betraying his master, AT-ATs battling flying speeders on white terrain, etc. And I have zero confidence that Abrams won't rehash a lot from Episodes I-VI. The ST is Disney's biggest platform to get fans excited about the future of Star Wars. Now is not the time to rehash better films, mishandle OT characters, including Ackbar and provide answers to the questions TFA setup that many fans find unsatisfying. As a Star Wars fan, I'm not excited about Solo, IX or Rian Johnson's new trilogy.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Apr 14, 2018 2:40:39 GMT
Disney did not have to rehash ANH. They chose to. They were probably scared that if they tried something different, they'd get the same reaction as the Prequels. They needed their own audience for their movies ASAP, rather than depend on OT fans alone. Problem is, it's pretty hard to to that with a "Happily Ever After" ending. Even the EU didn't do much because it was "Star Wars: And Pretty Much everything was fine after ROTJ." Time will tell.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Apr 14, 2018 19:02:17 GMT
Did they kill off Anakin Solo instead of any OT lead and have Anakin take over? Yes? Then they were mocking the idea of "Passing the Torch". Did they kill off Anakin Solo or not? If they did, it's them giving the "Pass the Torch" people the finger. And for all this Mary Sue talk about Rey, no one minded Mara Jade.
|
|
|
Post by Waxer-n-boil on Apr 15, 2018 18:53:14 GMT
Did they kill off Anakin Solo or not? If they did, it's them giving the "Pass the Torch" people the finger. What does Anakin Solo's death have to do with passing the torch? Not only was the torch passed to Anakin Solo, it was also passed to Jaina Solo and Ben Skywalker. Did you know that Mara was a trained and skilled agent of Emperor Palpatine? Did you know that Mara Jade was an experienced smuggler? Did you know that Mara Jade was trained in the Force?...It doesn't sound like it. And Rey is none of those things. So let's go ahead and kill 3 (of your narrative) birds with 1 stone. 1. Mara Jade was never regarded as a MarySue because there was no reason to. Her training, skills, and experience were clearly outlined in the Legends EU. 2. Your claim that the torch wasn't passed doesn't hold up. Anakin Solo had his own adventures. So did Ben Skywalker. So did Jaina Solo. In some cases they had entire novels devoted to them. 3. Another narrative of yours about OT fans demanding a "post-ROTJ happy ending" is also fraudulent. Anakin Solo ultimately died. Luke's wife Mara Jade was murdered by her own nephew. That nephew (Han and Leia's son) Jacen Solo turned to the Darkside, became a Sith Lord, and was eventually killed himself. There was much unhappiness in the "sequel" Legends EU. None of it was protested by OT fans. Of course your next argument is going to be that "the big 3" themselves weren't killed. But clearly they lead lives checkered with serious unhappiness. You argued that their post-ROTJ story in the Legends EU was "happy endings". Not true. The writing coming from Timothy Zahn and others was just so much better in characterization, mythos, lore, and arc.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Apr 15, 2018 19:04:05 GMT
Did they kill off Anakin Solo or not? If they did, it's them giving the "Pass the Torch" people the finger. What does Anakin Solo's death have to do with passing the torch? They killed him rather than kill off Han and Leia. So to say "You thought we're going to have those two step down and have Anakin step up? NOPE!"[/quote] There was no torch passing, Luke is still the Top Dog and they're just his subordinates. All of which happened off-page by the time she showed up. Give that to Rey and it'd be all the Mary Sue proof they needed. And if Rey had any of that when we first met her you can sure as Hell know she'd be decried as a Mary Sue. And rather than retire Han and Leia they deliberately chose to kill him and keep them around. To insult people who thought he'd be a new hero. Still with Luke as the REAL hero and them as his inferiors. Because Luke and co are around, the New Republic always ends up winning, the new Jedi Order always triumphs. If the New Republic and the New Jedi were ever destroyed and left destroyed, then you'd have a point. Do they die? Do they ever have their Republic destroyed and their Jedi killed off? No? Then there's your answer. Nah, it just doesn't kill off the OT nor did it have the guts to have the Galaxy fall to chaos and have new characters step up to save the Galaxy in Luke and co's place. And that's what OT fans just can't stand. Plus no one was out to hate the novels for existing.
|
|
|
Post by Waxer-n-boil on Apr 15, 2018 20:00:10 GMT
What does Anakin Solo's death have to do with passing the torch? They killed him rather than kill off Han and Leia. So to say "You thought we're going to have those two step down and have Anakin step up? NOPE!" What would be the point in killing them off? Leia and Luke progressively get more inactive as the timeline advanced. The next generation was at the forefront of duels, action, and drama. Killing off Luke and Leia for cheap shock value is from the Jar Jar Abrams school of storytelling. It's what you do when you know you can't write strong characters or compelling storylines. (No surprise that you like that idea). Of course there is when new characters are receiving their own novels and stories. This is what I meant by you not knowing the definition of the term. Most of it did happen on-page, or was established with supposition. So... no, you can't compare her to Rey. (Or Rey can't compare to Mara). Your own example of comparison, Mara Jade, proves that's a lie. His parents were relatively inactive at that point in time. He stays around - you say it's happily ever after. He dies - you say it proves that the big 3 are at the forefront of the action. Now who's creating no-win situations? Did you read any of this EU? Doesn't sound like it. They didn't win every time (despite your claims). And their victories often came at expensive prices. The New Jedi Order being successful? Why wouldn't they be? The old one was successful for a thousand years at one point. And even before that they were successful. What sense would it make to continue the theme of the Jedi if they were always unsuccessful? You go right ahead and cling to that shock value storytelling of Abrams. It makes a lot of money for the short run - it's also what keeps getting him chased out of fanbases. One of these days he is going to run out of places to go. I guess when that day comes you can always fall back on the Power Rangers and the Disney channel. That's the Jar Jar Abrams answer. Not good storytelling. Just cheap shock value until you run out of characters, storylines, and settings. Especially when you don't replace them or the new ones are as weak as old dishwater. It eventually kills franchises. See above statement. No one was out to hate the sequel trilogy for existing, least of all OT fans. Who do you think was at those sponsored new trilogy conventions before the release of TFA? Who do you think was at the trailer premieres? It wasn't Disney fans. It was OT fans primarily... Still lying about this subject. Oh really? How are book sales doing for Disney SW? How about toy sales? Guess who the best-selling novels of the Disney EU are being written by?... Yeah, one of the more prolific writers of the Legends EU, Timothy Zahn.
|
|
|
Post by audiosane on Apr 15, 2018 21:30:49 GMT
They were probably scared that if they tried something different, they'd get the same reaction as the Prequels. They needed their own audience for their movies ASAP, rather than depend on OT fans alone. As controversial as the Prequels were, they still made a lot of money. The Prequels didn't have problems because they were too different. They had problems because they were too different - and bad. Too much of it was boring, awkward and fake. If Disney respected the OT's legacy, they would've made an effort to introduce new things to their new trilogy. Even if TFA played it safe, it still should've had a more original story and new planet and ship types. Instead, almost everything in TFA can be traced back to the OT, especially ANH. Disney was going to get new fans anyway, so I don't buy that excuse. Look at the Prequels. Lucas got new fans for that trilogy despite the mixed reaction. Just make something new and good. Is that really asking too much? No, it's not hard. The Star Wars galaxy doesn't turn perfect just because ROTJ had a happy ending. Forming a new galactic government and Jedi Academy isn't easy. There's still lots of evil, corrupt people in the galaxy. Force sensitive people still exist, not all of them good. Sooner or later, new threats are going to arise, as they did in the past. Just use your imagination and write a good story. TLJ already underperformed by about 200 million. Unless Disney gets their act together, they'll continue to lose money unnecessarily.
|
|
|
Post by Primemovermithrax Pejorative on Apr 15, 2018 21:38:44 GMT
Disney sees Star Wars as a vehicle for disseminating social-engineering propaganda. People who want to see a new movie have only the choices in theaters, the choices increasingly decided by Disney management alone.
If they cared about profits they would be concerned how the public reacts.
Black Panther is allegedly a super popular movie and yet no one is talking about it.
Are comic book fans buying all the tickets? But even on industry-comic book FB pages, hardly any BP discussion. The same with SW.
Just watch the brand get more and more watered down until it has as much excitement in the public imagination as a Frosted Flakes commercial.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Apr 15, 2018 23:12:31 GMT
What would be the point in killing them off? To make it perfectly, utterly clear that the new characters are the new leads and there's no going back. So get with the program or go away. That's the message. Let's use the Flash as an example, did they just have Barry Allen retire and not use him much when they made Wally West the Flash? No, they killed off Barry and Wally wasn't derided for this. It's what you do when you know you're dealing with a fanatical fanbase. And are clearly still overshadowed by Luke no matter what. Not good enough. If they had Rey show up in TFA with them saying she was trained off-screen, it'd get derided. He stays and they get killed off or die of natural causes. There. If the New Republic still around and strong by the end of the EU? Is the New Jedi Order still around and strong with no chance of it failing? Then they won in the end. Look at the MCU, which is going to start killing off people and replacing them in Infinity War. You don't see anyone saying that's bad. No, it's closing one chapter and moving onto another. That was under the assumption the OT cast would be the stars of the ST.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Apr 15, 2018 23:13:16 GMT
Black Panther is allegedly a super popular movie and yet no one is talking about it. Total lie.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Apr 15, 2018 23:16:20 GMT
If Disney respected the OT's legacy, they would've made an effort to introduce new things to their new trilogy. Even if TFA played it safe, it still should've had a more original story and new planet and ship types. Instead, almost everything in TFA can be traced back to the OT, especially ANH. Like I said, they were scared and wanted an easy way to re-establish Star Wars. The next trilogy is when they'll do new stuff because they'll have established a new fanbase by then. Right at the start...yes. It sadly is. That's the kind of story you tell 5 or 10 years after ROTJ, not 30. The creation of the New Republic and the New Jedi. All major threats would've emerged and been eliminated in THAT time. 30 years later, not so much. That's why the First Order is derided, because a new enemy shouldn't be appearing 30 years later. Unfortunately, Disney was dealt a bad hand in their movies being made 30 years later.
|
|
|
Post by Primemovermithrax Pejorative on Apr 15, 2018 23:42:58 GMT
I know, they lie. It's sad.
|
|
|
Post by audiosane on Apr 15, 2018 23:43:20 GMT
Like I said, they were scared and wanted an easy way to re-establish Star Wars. The next trilogy is when they'll do new stuff because they'll have established a new fanbase by then. Playing it ridiculously safe with TFA was bad enough. You're the only person I've ever heard claim that Disney's plan was to play it safe the entire trilogy. Most of us were expecting a lot more originality in TLJ. Making excuses for Disney is not doing Star Wars any favors. They could've done better than what they gave us. Instead, they lazily banked hard on nostalgia. How can TFA stand the test of time if it can't even stand on its own two feet? ANH doesn't begin with the Old Republic being transformed into the Empire under Darth Sidious. It begins 20 years later, in the midst of a conflict between the Empire and the Rebels. My point is we don't need to see everything. Lots of things happened between ROTS and ANH, similar to what could've happened between ROTJ and TFA. TFA's opening crawl, and a few lines of dialogue, could've been used to fill us in the major points. Again, stop making excuses for Disney. Lucas made ANH work without having to direct the Prequels first.
|
|