|
Post by CrepedCrusader on Jan 18, 2024 21:55:51 GMT
Found this video through Reddit. It looks at Rey's character arc through the lens of Maureen Murdock's "heroine's journey" in much the same way as Luke's arc is often seen through the lens of Joseph Campbell's "hero's journey".
|
|
|
Post by Feologild Oakes on Jan 18, 2024 22:37:26 GMT
I disagree that she is a great character, i also don't think she is an awful character
I think Rey is a mediocre character.
I also hate the name Rey, they should have given her a better name, honestly the worst thing about her character is her name.
|
|
|
Post by Waxer-n-boil on Jan 19, 2024 1:36:36 GMT
Ultimately the question is can the audience relate and connect with the protagonist and understand the journey. In this case, Rey. And in this case, the heroine’s journey.
And I have to say, Rey’s (Star Wars) journey feels somewhat messy. The author of the video grabbed different scenes from the trilogy and lined them up with the bullet points of the heroine’s journey. But watching it in real time through the 3 movies, Rey’s version feels choppy. It’s not fluid.
And to be honest, most of time it looks like Rey is confused and always moves along this journey by de facto status. In other words, circumstances or other people are always pushing her into the forefront (often against her will or objective). And this moves her along this journey.
Also the journey shouldn’t require reinventing established characters to fit some purpose to move the journey forward for Rey, and check one of the journey’s boxes. That was obviously done with Luke Skywalker. As his entire characterization was changed into a jaded, bitter, impotent hermit to fit the inadequate, disillusioned father figure.
And throughout the trilogy, Rey’s connection to the Force is still farcical, even in the context of the heroine’s journey. It was often a trump card/McGuffin used to advance her along the journey when they didn’t seem to have any rational or practical way to do it.
So all of this doesn’t do a good job of portraying discernible character development when it comes to Rey.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Jan 22, 2024 13:12:25 GMT
I disagree that she is a great character, i also don't think she is an awful character I think Rey is a mediocre character. I also hate the name Rey, they should have given her a better name, honestly the worst thing about her character is her name. I heard that!
|
|
shinnickneth
Junior Member
@shinnickneth
Posts: 2,527
Likes: 1,798
|
Post by shinnickneth on Jan 31, 2024 2:45:38 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Jan 31, 2024 15:15:58 GMT
Ultimately the question is can the audience relate and connect with the protagonist and understand the journey. In this case, Rey. And in this case, the heroine’s journey. And I have to say, Rey’s (Star Wars) journey feels somewhat messy. The author of the video grabbed different scenes from the trilogy and lined them up with the bullet points of the heroine’s journey. But watching it in real time through the 3 movies, Rey’s version feels choppy. It’s not fluid. And to be honest, most of time it looks like Rey is confused and always moves along this journey by de facto status. In other words, circumstances or other people are always pushing her into the forefront (often against her will or objective). And this moves her along this journey. Also the journey shouldn’t require reinventing established characters to fit some purpose to move the journey forward for Rey, and check one of the journey’s boxes. That was obviously done with Luke Skywalker. As his entire characterization was changed into a jaded, bitter, impotent hermit to fit the inadequate, disillusioned father figure. And throughout the trilogy, Rey’s connection to the Force is still farcical, even in the context of the heroine’s journey. It was often a trump card/McGuffin used to advance her along the journey when they didn’t seem to have any rational or practical way to do it. So all of this doesn’t do a good job of portraying discernible character development when it comes to Rey. You just spent more time thinking about this than anyone involved in the making of this trilogy ever did. Nobody in this trilogy has any arc, at least not one that makes sense. It was trash created by people who have no appreciation for Star Wars, just looking to cash in.
|
|
|
Post by twothousandonemark on Feb 2, 2024 4:19:27 GMT
The shame is Rey & the actress were hornswoggled into that trilogy's trainwreck of a writing scheme.
I don't like the sequel trilogy, I've no opinion on Rey or the performance frankly. I know that's not very constructive of me, yet she was a pawn in JJ & co's absurd mystery box horseshit.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Feb 2, 2024 14:30:30 GMT
The shame is Rey & the actress were hornswoggled into that trilogy's trainwreck of a writing scheme. I don't like the sequel trilogy, I've no opinion on Rey or the performance frankly. I know that's not very constructive of me, yet she was a pawn in JJ & co's absurd mystery box horseshit. Every character introduced in that trilogy had loads of potential, they just never did anything interesting with them.
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Feb 3, 2024 0:14:53 GMT
Ultimately the question is can the audience relate and connect with the protagonist and understand the journey. In this case, Rey. And in this case, the heroine’s journey. And I have to say, Rey’s (Star Wars) journey feels somewhat messy. The author of the video grabbed different scenes from the trilogy and lined them up with the bullet points of the heroine’s journey. But watching it in real time through the 3 movies, Rey’s version feels choppy. It’s not fluid. And to be honest, most of time it looks like Rey is confused and always moves along this journey by de facto status. In other words, circumstances or other people are always pushing her into the forefront (often against her will or objective). And this moves her along this journey. Also the journey shouldn’t require reinventing established characters to fit some purpose to move the journey forward for Rey, and check one of the journey’s boxes. That was obviously done with Luke Skywalker. As his entire characterization was changed into a jaded, bitter, impotent hermit to fit the inadequate, disillusioned father figure. And throughout the trilogy, Rey’s connection to the Force is still farcical, even in the context of the heroine’s journey. It was often a trump card/McGuffin used to advance her along the journey when they didn’t seem to have any rational or practical way to do it. So all of this doesn’t do a good job of portraying discernible character development when it comes to Rey. You just spent more time thinking about this than anyone involved in the making of this trilogy ever did. Nobody in this trilogy has any arc, at least not one that makes sense. It was trash created by people who have no appreciation for Star Wars, just looking to cash in. Most of the characters in TLJ are given arcs. Unfortunately, TRoS seems to spend its runtime apologizing for their character development and undoing everything.
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Feb 3, 2024 2:08:56 GMT
The Hero's Journey is a silly concept because there are famous heroic characters who have no journey. Tarzan, Sherlock Holmes, Conan, and Flash Gordon come to mind. The 1938 Robin Hood has no character arc--the only change is that he has a Norman girlfriend but it isn't something that changes his personality or goals. He has no mentor either.
Odysseus has no "father atonement." He visits his father after his return and after the adventure is over. He isn't atoning for anything, just saying hello to dad.
Plus, every story is a journey--it is impossible not to have a story where characters stand still--they have to move around--interact with others.There's a logical physics to it.
Plus the heroine's journey as they call it pertains to non-warrior characters. She doesn't have romance or children as part of the journey as other female characters usually do according to the theory.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Feb 3, 2024 14:14:18 GMT
You just spent more time thinking about this than anyone involved in the making of this trilogy ever did. Nobody in this trilogy has any arc, at least not one that makes sense. It was trash created by people who have no appreciation for Star Wars, just looking to cash in. Most of the characters in TLJ are given arcs. Unfortunately, TRoS seems to spend its runtime apologizing for their character development and undoing everything. "That stuff we set up in the first stale rehash film? None of it meant anything, sucker," is not a proper arc. Worse, TLJ decided to undo Luke's arc, and turn him into an asshole in order to prop up Rey. It also used a clumsy commentary on animal cruelty as a major subplot, and I'm only scratching the surface of nonsensical creative choices in that film. It was so terrible that they tried to course correct in the next movie, but the damage had been done. There was no sensible way to dig out of that shit pile. The sequel trilogy was a disaster from top to bottom. There are ways to integrate new characters into the narrative and hand them the baton from legacy characters, but nobody involved in this trilogy figured out how to do it.
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Feb 3, 2024 15:51:04 GMT
Most of the characters in TLJ are given arcs. Unfortunately, TRoS seems to spend its runtime apologizing for their character development and undoing everything. "That stuff we set up in the first stale rehash film? None of it meant anything, sucker," is not a proper arc. Worse, TLJ decided to undo Luke's arc, and turn him into an asshole in order to prop up Rey. It also used a clumsy commentary on animal cruelty as a major subplot, and I'm only scratching the surface of nonsensical creative choices in that film. It was so terrible that they tried to course correct in the next movie, but the damage had been done. There was no sensible way to dig out of that shit pile. The sequel trilogy was a disaster from top to bottom. There are ways to integrate new characters into the narrative and hand them the baton from legacy characters, but nobody involved in this trilogy figured out how to do it. What in God's name does "a clumsy commentary on animal cruelty" have to do with the lack of character arcs? Nevermind the fact that, while I'm not a big fan of the Canto Bite stuff myself, it plays a blatantly obvious role in Finn's arc. While we're on the random subject, who even says commenting on animal cruelty is a bad thing? Is it because this is Star Wars and this franchise previously didn't have commentary...except when it did (re: Vietnam and the Bush administration)? Or are we supposed to be FOR animal cruelty? You don't seem like that type. Now that I think about, I don't think in all of that ranting you even addressed the subject of the characters in TLJ having or not having arcs. Except indirectly conceding Luke had one and you just didn't like it. On that note, people can and do regress. Saying "gee, I guess I should control my temper a little" a second after chopping your dad's hand off doesn't automatically mean you're forever cured of all violent tendencies. Other than people having lingering problems with the Rey character in TFA, this notion that Luke got castrated in her favor just never made sense to me. Like it or hate it, Luke's force projection is one of the most incredible feats of power in the whole franchise. And up until JJ decided to remake Return of the Jedi, everything Luke says is right. Both about Kylo, and the Jedi in general. Remember those prequels we're all supposed to like now? Lucas made it abundantly clear the Jedi were hypocritical, arrogant, dogmatic, power mad, and instrumental in their own downfall. In the Clone Wars series they even torture POWs. There's also the commonly ignored fact that Luke ultimately comes out of his nihilism. And not even because of Rey! But because of Yoda. Meanwhile, what does Rey accomplish in TLJ? Falls for a bad boy after seeing him shirtless, fails to redeem him, gets tricked and ass-kicked by Snoke, comes to terms with the fact that she has been lying to herself about having special parents, and moves a couple of rocks at the end. Whoop de do.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Feb 4, 2024 14:03:58 GMT
"That stuff we set up in the first stale rehash film? None of it meant anything, sucker," is not a proper arc. Worse, TLJ decided to undo Luke's arc, and turn him into an asshole in order to prop up Rey. It also used a clumsy commentary on animal cruelty as a major subplot, and I'm only scratching the surface of nonsensical creative choices in that film. It was so terrible that they tried to course correct in the next movie, but the damage had been done. There was no sensible way to dig out of that shit pile. The sequel trilogy was a disaster from top to bottom. There are ways to integrate new characters into the narrative and hand them the baton from legacy characters, but nobody involved in this trilogy figured out how to do it. What in God's name does "a clumsy commentary on animal cruelty" have to do with the lack of character arcs? Nevermind the fact that, while I'm not a big fan of the Canto Bite stuff myself, it plays a blatantly obvious role in Finn's arc. While we're on the random subject, who even says commenting on animal cruelty is a bad thing? Is it because this is Star Wars and this franchise previously didn't have commentary...except when it did (re: Vietnam and the Bush administration)? Or are we supposed to be FOR animal cruelty? You don't seem like that type. Now that I think about, I don't think in all of that ranting you even addressed the subject of the characters in TLJ having or not having arcs. Except indirectly conceding Luke had one and you just didn't like it. On that note, people can and do regress. Saying "gee, I guess I should control my temper a little" a second after chopping your dad's hand off doesn't automatically mean you're forever cured of all violent tendencies. Other than people having lingering problems with the Rey character in TFA, this notion that Luke got castrated in her favor just never made sense to me. Like it or hate it, Luke's force projection is one of the most incredible feats of power in the whole franchise. And up until JJ decided to remake Return of the Jedi, everything Luke says is right. Both about Kylo, and the Jedi in general. Remember those prequels we're all supposed to like now? Lucas made it abundantly clear the Jedi were hypocritical, arrogant, dogmatic, power mad, and instrumental in their own downfall. In the Clone Wars series they even torture POWs. There's also the commonly ignored fact that Luke ultimately comes out of his nihilism. And not even because of Rey! But because of Yoda. Meanwhile, what does Rey accomplish in TLJ? Falls for a bad boy after seeing him shirtless, fails to redeem him, gets tricked and ass-kicked by Snoke, comes to terms with the fact that she has been lying to herself about having special parents, and moves a couple of rocks at the end. Whoop de do. The movie ruined Luke's established arc from the previous films, that's what I was referring to. He spent years believing he could turn Darth Vader to the light again, and having accomplished that, his first instinct when detecting the dark side in his nephew is to assassinate him in his sleep. It's absurd. He was rebuilding the Jedi, but that one confrontation caused him to abandon all hope. Again, after turning Darth Vader. To me, the movie is filled with hollow characters that sound good in theory, but the creators never could decide what they wanted to do with them. SW always had commentary, but side quests during a slow speed chase in space (WTF?) to make a lazy commentary on animal cruelty was Johnson trying too hard to shoehorn activism into the plot. (And I never said that had to do with a character arc, I said it was one of many lame creative choices made in this movie. We can all agree animal cruelty is awful, but this entire sequence was clunky and unnecessary.) I get that some people liked these movies, and that's fine. But they didn't work for me (to say the least). Like TDKR, I immediately deleted them from my head canon.
|
|
|
Post by taylorfirst1 on Feb 6, 2024 15:38:47 GMT
The Hero's Journey is a silly concept because there are famous heroic characters who have no journey. Tarzan, Sherlock Holmes, Conan, and Flash Gordon come to mind. The 1938 Robin Hood has no character arc--the only change is that he has a Norman girlfriend but it isn't something that changes his personality or goals. He has no mentor either. Odysseus has no "father atonement." He visits his father after his return and after the adventure is over. He isn't atoning for anything, just saying hello to dad. Plus, every story is a journey--it is impossible not to have a story where characters stand still--they have to move around--interact with others.There's a logical physics to it. Plus the heroine's journey as they call it pertains to non-warrior characters. She doesn't have romance or children as part of the journey as other female characters usually do according to the theory. Thank you. I also get tired of people whining about "Hero's journey" and "character arcs" when we are talking about pulp comic book and sci-fi franchises. Especially, when they imply that the hero has to be a completely different person by the end of the movie .
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Feb 8, 2024 21:02:17 GMT
What in God's name does "a clumsy commentary on animal cruelty" have to do with the lack of character arcs? Nevermind the fact that, while I'm not a big fan of the Canto Bite stuff myself, it plays a blatantly obvious role in Finn's arc. While we're on the random subject, who even says commenting on animal cruelty is a bad thing? Is it because this is Star Wars and this franchise previously didn't have commentary...except when it did (re: Vietnam and the Bush administration)? Or are we supposed to be FOR animal cruelty? You don't seem like that type. Now that I think about, I don't think in all of that ranting you even addressed the subject of the characters in TLJ having or not having arcs. Except indirectly conceding Luke had one and you just didn't like it. On that note, people can and do regress. Saying "gee, I guess I should control my temper a little" a second after chopping your dad's hand off doesn't automatically mean you're forever cured of all violent tendencies. Other than people having lingering problems with the Rey character in TFA, this notion that Luke got castrated in her favor just never made sense to me. Like it or hate it, Luke's force projection is one of the most incredible feats of power in the whole franchise. And up until JJ decided to remake Return of the Jedi, everything Luke says is right. Both about Kylo, and the Jedi in general. Remember those prequels we're all supposed to like now? Lucas made it abundantly clear the Jedi were hypocritical, arrogant, dogmatic, power mad, and instrumental in their own downfall. In the Clone Wars series they even torture POWs. There's also the commonly ignored fact that Luke ultimately comes out of his nihilism. And not even because of Rey! But because of Yoda. Meanwhile, what does Rey accomplish in TLJ? Falls for a bad boy after seeing him shirtless, fails to redeem him, gets tricked and ass-kicked by Snoke, comes to terms with the fact that she has been lying to herself about having special parents, and moves a couple of rocks at the end. Whoop de do. The movie ruined Luke's established arc from the previous films, that's what I was referring to. He spent years believing he could turn Darth Vader to the light again, and having accomplished that, his first instinct when detecting the dark side in his nephew is to assassinate him in his sleep. It's absurd. He was rebuilding the Jedi, but that one confrontation caused him to abandon all hope. Again, after turning Darth Vader. I didn't really get that Luke spent *years* thinking he could turn Vader. For one thing, only one year passes between Luke learning Vader is his father and the events of RotJ. Luke then doesn't bring up sensing good in Vader until they meet again on Endor toward the end of the movie, and even then the scene ends with Luke saying "Then my father is truly dead". He wavers back and forth then on. One moment, he refuses to fight Vader. The next, he is hacking away at his father with every intent to cause bodily harm. Rather, he spent years wanting to *kill* Vader as revenge for the deaths of his father and Ben. This inner darkness in Luke then resurfaces again when Luke, by mere words, is driven into an insane fit of rage culminating in chopping Vader's hand off - that's kind of a big deal that many "Luke is a boyscout" people gloss over. He quite nearly turns to the dark side in that moment himself, only regaining his cool when he sees the wires in Vader's stump reminding him of his own hand and the path he is going down. I empathize that it can be frustrating when a character regresses, but to me, it was not unfounded. Luke is a conflicted character, much like his father, and realistically, saying "I'm a Jedi like my father before me" seconds after turning into a psycho and trying to murder said father would not be the end of his conflict. Likewise - and this is mainly personal - Luke being in a state of nihilism about the Jedi (especially following the prequels) was a more interesting direction for the character to go down then if he had just been another Ben Kenobi, which wouldn't have really made sense given the plot of TFA anyway. *(And I never said that had to do with a character arc, I said it was one of many lame creative choices made in this movie. We can all agree animal cruelty is awful, but this entire sequence was clunky and unnecessary.)" - but here's the deal, when you criticized TLJ for the lack of character arcs, and I responded that it did have character arcs, I was hoping to somewhat stay on that topic. It wasn't necessary an invitation to hear you rant about every random problem you had with the movie, of which TLJ certainly has its share. It's not a perfect movie by any means. But it does have its qualities. Unfortunately, it's damn near impossible to talk with haters about them. Even when I counter that the "animal cruelty side quest" had a point in Finn's arc, you double downed on the word "unnecessary".
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Feb 9, 2024 0:04:01 GMT
The movie ruined Luke's established arc from the previous films, that's what I was referring to. He spent years believing he could turn Darth Vader to the light again, and having accomplished that, his first instinct when detecting the dark side in his nephew is to assassinate him in his sleep. It's absurd. He was rebuilding the Jedi, but that one confrontation caused him to abandon all hope. Again, after turning Darth Vader. I didn't really get that Luke spent *years* thinking he could turn Vader. For one thing, only one year passes between Luke learning Vader is his father and the events of RotJ. Luke then doesn't bring up sensing good in Vader until they meet again on Endor toward the end of the movie, and even then the scene ends with Luke saying "Then my father is truly dead". He wavers back and forth then on. One moment, he refuses to fight Vader. The next, he is hacking away at his father with every intent to cause bodily harm. Rather, he spent years wanting to *kill* Vader as revenge for the deaths of his father and Ben. This inner darkness in Luke then resurfaces again when Luke, by mere words, is driven into an insane fit of rage culminating in chopping Vader's hand off - that's kind of a big deal that many "Luke is a boyscout" people gloss over. He quite nearly turns to the dark side in that moment himself, only regaining his cool when he sees the wires in Vader's stump reminding him of his own hand and the path he is going down. I empathize that it can be frustrating when a character regresses, but to me, it was not unfounded. Luke is a conflicted character, much like his father, and realistically, saying "I'm a Jedi like my father before me" seconds after turning into a psycho and trying to murder said father would not be the end of his conflict. Likewise - and this is mainly personal - Luke being in a state of nihilism about the Jedi (especially following the prequels) was a more interesting direction for the character to go down then if he had just been another Ben Kenobi, which wouldn't have really made sense given the plot of TFA anyway. *(And I never said that had to do with a character arc, I said it was one of many lame creative choices made in this movie. We can all agree animal cruelty is awful, but this entire sequence was clunky and unnecessary.)" - but here's the deal, when you criticized TLJ for the lack of character arcs, and I responded that it did have character arcs, I was hoping to somewhat stay on that topic. It wasn't necessary an invitation to hear you rant about every random problem you had with the movie, of which TLJ certainly has its share. It's not a perfect movie by any means. But it does have its qualities. Unfortunately, it's damn near impossible to talk with haters about them. Even when I counter that the "animal cruelty side quest" had a point in Finn's arc, you double downed on the word "unnecessary". Still, he spent over a year contemplating his relationship with Vader, and his mentor told him he had to face him to complete his training. He doesn't take this as a challenge to defeat Vader or get revenge, his first instinct is to turn himself in and try to turn his father back to the light. And yes, he went primal during that fight, I think anyone would under those circumstances. I don't necessarily think losing his shit in a fight for his life against possibly the two most evil men in the galaxy, in a throne room dripping with dark side energy (when he still hasn't technically finished his training) is comparable to what happens with Ben Solo. Luke was an aged Jedi Master who had fought wars and indeed turned his father back to the light before his death. He'd devoted years to rebuilding the Jedi order; if anything, his faith in the light would be unshakeable after turning Anakin. But no, he impulsively decides it might be a good idea to kill his nephew, just to be safe. It's ridiculous, I don't buy it. And I agree, a conflicted Luke could've worked, if they had put a little effort into what brought him there. It needed more buildup. To just condense it into one random inexplicable act was shoddy writing, a means to an end. I still don't see how that side quest gave Finn an arc. Did he reconcile his past? Did he achieve some kind of character growth that I can't recall at the moment? It's entirely possible I missed something there, I only saw it when it was released and haven't had the desire to revisit it. It's worth noting that John Boyega himself has expressed disappointment in the lack of character building they did with Finn. Hell, Mark Hamill wouldn't shut up about how much he hated what they did with Luke in TLJ. In the end, I sadly have to agree with the guys who were actually in the movies. Ultimately, I think Rian Johnson was handed a rehashed shit sandwich and tried his best to turn it into something both interesting and unexpected. But he tried to cram too much into one film, he cut some corners, and the story just got away from him. The real crime of the trilogy as a whole is that it didn't do any of the characters justice, and that can't be blamed on TLJ alone.
|
|
|
Post by Waxer-n-boil on Feb 22, 2024 5:02:45 GMT
The Hero's Journey is a silly concept because there are famous heroic characters who have no journey.Tarzan, Sherlock Holmes, Conan, and Flash Gordon come to mind. The 1938 Robin Hood has no character arc--the only change is that he has a Norman girlfriend but it isn't something that changes his personality or goals. He has no mentor either. Odysseus has no "father atonement." He visits his father after his return and after the adventure is over. He isn't atoning for anything, just saying hello to dad. Plus, every story is a journey--it is impossible not to have a story where characters stand still--they have to move around--interact with others.There's a logical physics to it. Plus the heroine's journey as they call it pertains to non-warrior characters. She doesn't have romance or children as part of the journey as other female characters usually do according to the theory. That really depends on the universe that the storyteller creates and the central characters in it. In Marvel and DC there’s not much of other than inner conflict and some journey to master it; i.e. Batman, The Hulk, Iron Man. But in Star Wars there’s plenty of it. The original protagonist Luke. Anakin of the prequels had this journey that went in reverse to where he developed into the primary villain. Even when we don’t see character development/journey, it’s implied… ObiWan: “I’m getting too old for this sort of thing, Luke.” He’s basically telling Luke he is transitioning from the hero to the mentor. The Jedi: They are all on a journey in the light side of the Force. From padawan to knight to master. Even the Sith have “journey” goals. So saying “the hero’s journey is a silly concept” is not a blanket statement that you can apply to every story universe or central character.
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Feb 22, 2024 6:27:00 GMT
So saying “the hero’s journey is a silly concept” is not a blanket statement that you can apply to every story universe or central character. Star Wars is a coming of age story. The Hero's Journey is specifically the idea that every story of a heroic character has certain elements that are listed as necessary but that implies a template. Flash Gordon doesn't follow the Hero's Journey. Sherlock Holmes doesn't--so it's not a template. Because they don't have origin stories--it was decided the adventure is more interesting if it happens later--not a coming of age story. If the character is a teenager then yes-you can expect they would learn things, but it's not written in stone as the Hero's Journey suggests.
|
|
|
Post by twothousandonemark on Feb 24, 2024 15:25:27 GMT
Apples & oranges - I was listening to pod Stick the Landing about tv finales... & they did Freaks & Geeks, & all its majestic glory of a history.
NBC kept hammering they wanted the kids to have more wins. Apatow & co. said F that, & like when Bill & the geeks make a great baseball play, celebrate, it's only the 2nd out & all goes awry. I never thought of that before - the show's magic was reality based where, not every character needs a winning curtain call, & probably none of them truly.
Heroes can be mundane, esp. if in Star Wars they keep being found on a f'n desert planet. Are we doing a solar system far far away, or a galaxy?? Tatooine can't be forever.
|
|
ralfy
New Member
@ralfy
Posts: 38
Likes: 8
|
Post by ralfy on Feb 25, 2024 5:57:52 GMT
I thought the first movie was a rehash of earlier ones, with the orphan on the desert planet and another Death Star.
Also, this one is a Mary Sue, so there's no tension and "growing up" story arc.
|
|