Star Wars

[Todinho]

Spoiler: show

I dont think it's unresonable to want to know who is fighting who,just by comparing this movie to a New Hope and just by those standards you can see the problems:

Start of Star wars: This is the Empire and these are the rebels,they are the galatic empire and they have this super weapon that we gotta destroy,there were jedis that used these cool laser swords and were kinda mystic but they were all destroyed there's this darth vader guy he betrayed them and was Obi-wan aprentice.There was a feel other elements thrown in there but this is the gist and it`s perfectly understandable.
Now in this movie we have the First Order,ok I thought the empire had fallen at 6 so these are remnants of it? Are they just the Empire by another name?They must have at least the same strenght if they built this super weapon that`s way better then the Death Star right?Speaking of which you`d think the good guys would`ve paid more attention to that but sure maybe security got better,by the way who are the good guys?There`s the republic and a senate but they are also called the resistance at many points,are they different entities or the First Order just calls them the resistance to spite them? You dont have to give a monologue to explain things you just have to have a few lines to help the audience understand exactly what`s happening,like they did in a New Hope were they were able to explain this stuff and not drag things out,dont leave it a "mystery" to be "explained" in future movies or in books,those are for you to expand what you build here not to explain what's going on now c'mon,the things I wanted explained here are things vital to the plot of this film,I dont care that I dont know what the "knights of Ren" are because they dont factor here I dont need to know what they are other then that Kylo is a part of them and that they are probably bad guys and that's fine,but I do need to know who are the two main factions of the film.

I was literally just reading up on this. While, as I said, I appreciate not having things over-explained, there definitely seemed to be some scenes missing here, and it turns out that there were.

Apparently, the original script featured more screentime for Leia, who

Spoiler: show

dispatches an agent to warn the Republic about the First Order (and presumably the Starkiller), and this is the girl we see on the balcony who dies on the city planet when it explodes. It is established that Leia has a fractious relationship to the Republic, who covertly support but publicly denounce The Resistance, who we learn are Leia's paramilitary organisation, set up to challenge the threat of the First Order, an extreme off-shoot of the old Empire that is rising to power on the far reaches of the galaxy.

It's a shame that this was cut as it really helps clarify what is going on with all the various factions. My guess is that they cut it due to pacing/timing issues, but if they hadn't, and built up more of introduction to the Starkiller, that, for me, would fix a lot of the problems with the second act of the movie. I still think the film didn't need another Death Star superweapon but at least that way it wouldn't just appear out of nowhere.

I'm actually holding out hope some kind of director's cut with some of this vital plot information reinstated, as wrong as it seems for there to be a director's cut of a Star Wars movie.

OMG this would literally fix 90% of my problems with the movies plot how did this got cut!?

Also I get it that people really love the movie and it's characters especially Rey but Im finding it really disheartening that people are just calling any criticism to her misogyny,I dont wanna get on a whole debate about it because I dont even 100% agree with him but Max Landis(writer of chronicle and maker of the great youtube videos "Death of Superman" and "wrestling isnt wrestling") criticism of the characters of the movie being used to just call him bigoted are insane,people need to calm the hell down the guy doesnt have an anti-women agenda he just has an opinion on a character,would people be losing their mind if he Rey was a male character and had the same arc?No,I get it people want more diversity in movies and all but you cant just protect them from criticism c'mon,watch these videos and tell me this guy has some agenda against women.

Spoiler: show

[KissMammal]

OMG this would literally fix 90% of my problems with the movies plot how did this got cut!?

I'm guessing someone saw the scenes of people sitting around in meetings discussing things like 'The Senate' and 'The Republic' and 'Ambassadors' and ordered it cut because it was giving them Prequel flashbacks...

My immediate, honest thoughts on that other point was that while Finn seemed like a relatively well-rounded character who had flaws and foibles, Rey AND Poe Dameron both came off as a little one dimensional to me. They're both brave to a fault and great at everything. I don't expect Star Wars characters to be anything other than broad archetypes, but I'd like a little texture if possible. Hopefully they'll be embellished in the sequels.

In all honesty I've never interpreted 'Mary Sue' as a loaded or sexist term, and have heard it used to describe both male and female characters - for example I've always thought of Harry Potter as a bit of a Mary Sue. As a protagonist, he's a little dull imo. He's great at everything he does, is destined for greatness since birth and is unfailingly good-natured at all times, especially in the early books.

[Todinho]

OMG this would literally fix 90% of my problems with the movies plot how did this got cut!?

I'm guessing someone saw the scenes of people sitting around in meetings discussing things like 'The Senate' and 'The Republic' and 'Ambassadors' and ordered it cut because it was giving them Prequel flashbacks...

So I just saw a video talking about that and apparently

Spoiler: show

The First Order firing that super weapon on the republic planets will ignite a new galatic war,because like you said while the resistance fights the First Order the Republic doesnt officially supports them,wow that sounds like something of great importance and gravity that had almost no impact in the actual movie the characters just react like it's tuesday when 4 planets get blown up,I mean how do you cut explaining something like that in the movie!? It really bothers me how easily all of it could have been fixed

[DomsBeard]

I was watching all 3 Lord Of The Rings on and off the other day on Sky and I own the extended additions. It's ridiculous some scenes that Peter Jackson cut, one of my favourite ever scenes is in ROTK wasn't even in the cinema release. I think TFA will get the same treatment. Or a cartoon

[Combine Hunter]

I'd love to see an definitive cut of the Lord of the Rings. One that keeps the extended scenes that add something meaningful, but leaves out the ones that aren't really necessary and kill the pacing a little. Basically, I want Saruman in Return of the King, but you can leave the extended city of the dead sequence on the cutting room floor. (I think, dramatically, it works better if you just leave Aragorn going "What say you!?" and you don't find out the dead king's answer until the heroes really NEED Aragorn's help later on.)

[Flabyo]

In all honesty I've never interpreted 'Mary Sue' as a loaded or sexist term.

The thing is, that doesn't matter. The way it gets thrown around now it clearly is a loaded and sexist term. Whatever it might've originally meant, most people using it now are using it to mean 'female character I don't like'. Use the term, and you're tainting your argument, no matter how eloquently put.

Originally the term came from criticism of fan fiction, where a Mary Sue meant 'author insert'. Nothing more than that. Everything else it has come to mean over the years has reduced it to the point where it's a nothing term. Your argument should be able to stand without using it.

[Todinho]

In all honesty I've never interpreted 'Mary Sue' as a loaded or sexist term.

The thing is, that doesn't matter. The way it gets thrown around now it clearly is a loaded and sexist term. Whatever it might've originally meant, most people using it now are using it to mean 'female character I don't like'. Use the term, and you're tainting your argument, no matter how eloquently put.

Originally the term came from criticism of fan fiction, where a Mary Sue meant 'author insert'. Nothing more than that. Everything else it has come to mean over the years has reduced it to the point where it's a nothing term. Your argument should be able to stand without using it.

Maybe Im just not very in touch with reality but I use the term mary sue to talk about a bunch of different characters that I dont like because they are overpowered and without flaws,like say Superman and the protagonist of Princess Mononoke(I hate that guy),hell Yatzhee criticised Geralt from the Witcher for being a mary sue(I strongly disagree).I think that's a validy criticism and if you're not gonna use the term "mary sue" what are you gonna use? "Overpowered character with no Flaws"?

[dezm0nd]

I saw the film last night and thought it was good. I had a checklist of things I'd like to see and all of them were met.

Spoiler: show

1) Funny, weird creatures/robots to make me laugh.
2) A band in a bar playing funky music
3) A classic character to die
4) A bad ass lightsabre fight

It looks absolutely amazing. To the point where I welled up because it was overwhelming my senses. I much prefer the aesthetic to star wars than what actually happens in it, which probably comes from my love of the games more than the films.

[Bakers_12]

Saw this last night and really enjoyed it, even my wife really liked it and she has only just seen the originals for the first time properly in the last few weeks and only liked the first two!

Spoiler: show

I like how the film mirrors the original trilogy, with our Hero dealing with a new generation of dark side user where in the originals it was the previous generation Kylo Ren I thought was a interesting villain unlike previous ones I thought him to be very creepy and the fits of anger a good contrast to the more controlled Darths we have seen before. Supreme Leader Snoke on the other hand was a bit meh, but I'm convinced he is a "mask" for someone else!

I was not a fan a Rey seemingly being able to use the force at will despite having no training!
I left the film wanting to know more about the First Order as its a bit of a mystery as how they came to be as the history between films is only hinted at, It's made me interested in getting some of the new books (dangerous)

Can't wait for the next one!!!

[DomsBeard]

Had a weird thought after a third viewing

Spoiler: show

Snoke couldn't be Palpetine could he? We didn't see him die

[Bakers_12]

Had a weird thought after a third viewing

Spoiler: show

Snoke couldn't be Palpetine could he? We didn't see him die

Spoiler: show

Good shout Palpetines Revenge to turn the next lot of Skywalkers! My wife is convinced it Vader somehow!

[KissMammal]

The thing is, that doesn't matter. The way it gets thrown around now it clearly is a loaded and sexist term. Whatever it might've originally meant, most people using it now are using it to mean 'female character I don't like'. Use the term, and you're tainting your argument, no matter how eloquently put.

Without wanting to get into all that, it does strike me as weird that a lot of people seem to respond to any kind of criticism of Rey as somehow reactionary or sexist. To be clear, I think it's absolutely wonderful that the longstanding lack of diversity in Star Wars has finally been addressed, and I'm delighted that the star of the new movie is female, I just think that Rey can be interpreted as a bit of a one-dimensional character and the criticisms of her are valid. She

Spoiler: show

picks up a lightsaber and is suddenly a jedi. She sits in the cockpit of the Falcon and is suddenly an ace pilot.

Like so much else in the film, it feels rushed and a bit phoney.

It's my firm belief that Rey's origin was not nearly as ambiguous in the original script - and that she was identified as

Spoiler: show

both the daughter of Leia and Han and a former student of Luke, whose trauma at the hands of Kylo and his Knights is the driving factor for her reluctance to 'accept the call' and claim Luke's saber.

To my mind, this clarification immediately makes her arc make a lot more sense than it does in the finished film and singlehandedly dispels any claim that she is 'overpowered' or has it too easy, but for whatever reason (presumably to add mystery and keep their options open for sequels) this was deliberately kept ambiguous by Abrams in his rewrite. But the film as presented has to stand on its own, and as it is it's arguably a bit muddled and unsatisfying, and that obfuscation and vagueness around her character is in my opinion why people are singling her out as a problematic character rather than anything sinister. They turned her from 'someone' into 'no one' but didn't rewrite the script to reflect this so it feels like there's something missing.

I've seen people say that the 'overpowered' comment could be applied to Luke Skywalker, but imo it doesn't really hold up - Luke is a whiny kid at the start of the original movie, gets his arse well and truly kicked up and down for the first two films and has to be rescued or protected by Obi Wan, Han etc etc time and time again. Rey achieves almost everything Luke does over the course of three movies and several years in what seems like an afternoon. It feels like her 'hero's journey' is missing it's second act.

[KissMammal]

this clarification immediately makes her arc make a lot more sense

The more I think about this, the more it bothers me. To clarify, it explains, among other things:

Spoiler: show

Why she was hidden on Jakku in the first place - to protect her from the First Order, as Luke was hidden on Tatooine to protect him from the Empire

Why the Millenium Falcon is there with her on Jakku (rather than 'it was just sitting there', which is one of the most ludicrously convenient plot beats in a film in recent memory)

Why Han Solo is in such close proximity (he is remotely watching over her as Obi Wan did for Luke)

Why she appears to have prior Jedi training

Why Kylo Ren seems so bothered by her, and why he is so keen to pursue/capture her - they're supposed to be siblings, perhaps even twins

Her bond with Han and why she is so upset about his death - he is her father, not just someone she has known for an afternoon

Why Luke's lightsaber calls to her - she is a Skywalker by blood

Why Luke recognises her and the significance of her arrival

Why she was picked to go and find Luke

It actually gives the scenes between her and

Spoiler: show

Luke, Leia, Han and Kylo Ren

so much more weight and richness that it's utterly baffling to me that it was ever changed.

I can only assume it was done because the

Spoiler: show

'scrappy scavenger as Han's daughter'

was one of the very first rumours/leaks to come out about the film, so they changed her character because of the leak, or that they thought it was one plot point too close to the original film, or perhaps too close to ground covered in the Extended Universe novels, or as I say above, it's to add a vague sense of mystery and to hedge their bets for future films. Of course, they might be saving the revelation for Episode VII or IX, but it would be very strange if that's the case when it would have made so much more sense, and been so much more relevant, in this film.

In any case it's a real shame as far as I'm concerned, because in my opinion the change they made kind of breaks the film a bit, and if they hadn't rather bluntly rewritten this plot point (and also kept in Leia's aforementioned subplot) this would have fixed a lot of the film's story and script problems for me.

Back to my wider point about Rey, the very fact that there are so many 'theories' doing the rounds about her - "She's Luke's daughter!", "She's Obi Wan's Granddaughter!", "She's (I kid you not) Anakin Skywalker reincarnated!" - suggests to me that a lot of other people found her to be underdeveloped and are scrabbling to fill the void where a satisfying origin story should be.

[Flabyo]

What's wrong with a little mystery? Why do we have to have everyones origin story right away? Why not have it revealed in subsequent movies?

[ratsoalbion]

What's wrong with a little mystery? Why do we have to have everyones origin story right away? Why not have it revealed in subsequent movies?

Exactly. And my hunch is that Abrams, Disney and co will have things at least as planned out as Lucas ever did, who was - apart from a very rough outline - basically making things up as he went along.

[Beck]

Totally agree, I don't get the complaints about the plot and characters having little meat. There are 2 direct sequels to come as well as at least 3 more films coming in the Rogue triology.

[macstat]

Hold your horses. Rogue trlogy ? As in trilogy about rogue squadron ?

[Beck]

Sorry I've actually got that wrong (quick google later), at the moment only one film called Rogue One is confirmed which will release in 2016 but a triology is rumoured.

Taken from IMDB -
A band of resistance fighters unite for a daring mission to steal the Death Star plans. Felicity Jones, who stars in "Rogue One," will play a rebel soldier. The film will take place between Episode III and Episode IV, but closer to "A New Hope."

[macstat]

Awww I was hoping for Star Wars Top Gun with Wedge Antilles .

I also did a quick google and found out "‘Star Wars: Rogue One’ Is A Heist Movie About The Death Star". Also from what i understand this is more of a spinoff, they call Star Wars anthology series. Wookiepedia claims that those are supposed to be stand-alone movies. So far three total movies were mentioned, Rogue one, Young Han Solo movie (may 2018) and one more yet unrevealed SW movie. http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Star_War ... ogy_Series

[Beck]

Ah ha, that's why I had a triology in my head.