The Last Jedi SPOILER THREAD

18911131416

Comments

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited December 2017 Posts: 23,883
    Strog wrote: »
    - In the theater I was thinking that some of the editing came across as clumsy. It appeared to have been trimmed done awkwardly in some portions (some of the scenes on the island with Luke and Rey, the ending post-rock removal). Not surprised to have learned afterward that what we got was trimmed down from 3+ hour cut (although to be fair this is the case with many blockbusters). But I do wonder at what cost the casino/codebreaker escapade was kept in. I'd much rather have had the Luke/Rey scenes on the island fleshed out.
    I agree @Strog. That casino sequence (and the entire Finn/Rose angle) just seemed like unrequired filler to me. As I've said earlier, pandering.
    Strog wrote: »
    - I enjoyed Johnson's playing with the tropes and the reversals he employed.
    - That said, I think his choices resulted in the reneging of some of the promises (or anticipations at least) Abrams made with TFA. Luke tossing the lightsaber over his shoulder oddly stands in for much of the film as a whole. The disposal of Snoke would be my prime example. I can forgive the cavalier answer to Rey's parentage. But TFA really seemed to make a promise with Snoke, and I thought it might have been one lightsaber toss too far (even if that scene was neatly structured and executed).
    I agree again. Not only was Luke's lightsaber toss a stand in for the film, but also Kylo's line to Rey. "Let the past die. Kill it. If you have to. That's the only way to become what you were meant to be"

    For me, the Snoke ending didn't quite work (although the entire sequence was great fun). He's strong with the force after all. Not an apprentice. Why didn't he sense it coming, after boasting about structuring the whole dynamic between Rey and Ren? Unless of course he planned it, and that is set up for a reveal in SW-9.
  • Does anyone else think it would have been a great sendoff for Leia if she had been in Vice Admiral Holdo's position (lightspeeding into the ship I mean)

    I mean Holdo sacrificed herself but no one gave a shit about her. The only reason I even noticed her at all over any of the other new characters is because I was like "oh hey, that's Laura Dern, we haven't seen her in a while!"
  • Posts: 1,314
    Yes leia sacrificing herself would've meant way more. What was the point of Laura Deena character anyway. You can't just drop in a new character and expect the audience to root for them.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Killing off Leia would have been disrespectful. They can do away with her in the next title crawl.
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,730
    Why would it be disrespectful? If they did it properly I think it would be fine and make more sense. Give her a proper send off not some bull shit words in a title crawl
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    It doesn t have to be bullshit, and it wouldn t be nice for her family who just lost her to watch her being killed off.
  • pachazopachazo Make Your Choice
    edited December 2017 Posts: 7,314
    I think the only problem I'd have with it is that they already teased her death earlier in the film. Why bring her back to life and have her go through a long recovery process only to kill her in the end? I'm sure RJ thought about all of this after she passed away and I think they made the right decision to not change anything.

    Edit - Although I do agree it was hard to really care about Holdo because we barely knew her.
  • edited December 2017 Posts: 684
    pachazo wrote: »
    @Strog, I'm torn about the decision to kill off Snoke. On the one hand, I love the boldness of it, but then again it's very disappointing that we never learned much about him. Just who exactly was he? Where was he during the time of the OT and what was his connection to the dark side?
    Precisely how I feel @pachazo. I'm sympathetic to the viewpoint of, "In the end, who he was doesn't matter," but only to an extent. It comes across rather more as, "We didn't bother to figure out who he was" (even if that's not the case). It was a wonderfully crafted moment. It certainly surprised. Most of all it was true to Kylo Ren's character, and a great pivotal moment in his development. But the moment seemed less true to the overall story, which alone might be enough of an offense to supersede all its merits. Johnson's choosing character over story, taken in the scope of his film, could work; taken in the scope of the new trilogy I'm less convinced. Johnson having apparently been given a 'blank slate' for this film, I'm wondering if perhaps some more initial mapping ought to have been done by Kasdan/Abrams -- or if it was developed then utilized.
    bondjames wrote: »
    I agree @Strog. That casino sequence (and the entire Finn/Rose angle) just seemed like unrequired filler to me. As I've said earlier, pandering.
    I have seen some (probably unlikely) suggestion that the casino sequence was intended as a setup for the new trilogy Johnson is creating.
    bondjames wrote: »
    I agree again. Not only was Luke's lightsaber toss a stand in for the film, but also Kylo's line to Rey. "Let the past die. Kill it. If you have to. That's the only way to become what you were meant to be"

    For me, the Snoke ending didn't quite work (although the entire sequence was great fun). He's strong with the force after all. Not an apprentice. Why didn't he sense it coming, after boasting about structuring the whole dynamic between Rey and Ren? Unless of course he planned it, and that is set up for a reveal in SW-9.
    Good catch on that line, @bondjames. Had missed that.

    Yes, there's always the possibility that some of this looks even better post-SW9. Given Johnson's blank slate, though, I wonder if Abrams will have a more difficult time wrapping things up? TLJ felt very much unlike the 'second act' SW films we've come to know, in particular the ending. The characters are backed up against a wall...but that's vaguely it. Each of AOTC and ESB anticipated more clearing the beginning of the next, or even the events which might occur between that film and the next. TPM and TFA did as well. TLJ seems the most open-ended ending since the original.
  • We often deride films for too much exposition.

    TLJ is a prime example of not enough.

    The movie is daft in so many ways. Disney have dropped the ball.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    I wish they had killed Finn instead of Snoke.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited December 2017 Posts: 23,883
    Just returned from lining Disney's pockets for a 2nd time in a week. It's much better on 2nd viewing imho, now that the shock value of some of the changes has worn off. I actually am looking forward to seeing it again on blu ray and will purchase it on day one. I still prefer TFA but this is a grower for me.

    I'm still a bit confused by the Snoke situation. For a Master Dark Side Force player (who boasted only a few minutes earlier about manipulating emotions and what not), I can't quite comprehend how he missed the incoming betrayal. Perhaps there's more to it.

    Also, I'm not quite certain that Kylo is all bad. He has issues with Luke for obvious reasons, but perhaps Rey is right. Adam Driver is far and away the best thing in the film imho. This is how you show deference to the Dark Side (unlike that miscast whiner from the prequels).

    Also the PC and political brown-nosing is a bit transparent, but then again I realize this is Disney and they have to set a wholesome example. I just wish I couldn't see through it so readily. A bit more subtlety next time around wouldn't go unappreciated by this viewer.
  • Posts: 684
    Glad it was better second time around, @bondjames. I've suspected since walking out of the theater the same would be true for me. I'll hand over the dough at some point soon and try again. I'm thinking of marathoning the rest of the films prior to. Not sure if that will help or hinder the second TLJ viewing but it's been since my mid-teens I've done anything of the sort, and I've got a bit of the SW bug at the moment.
    bondjames wrote: »
    I'm still a bit confused by the Snoke situation. For a Master Dark Side Force player (who boasted only a few minutes earlier about manipulating emotions and what not), I can't quite comprehend how he missed the incoming betrayal. Perhaps there's more to it.
    The more criticism I read online, the more apparent the (seemingly) massive amount of faulty story logic becomes. Some of what's been noted I took in at the time (such as Snoke) but there's been some other head-scratching items pointed out that, in the moment, I didn't care about -- which is as it should be, imo. It's that Hitchcock thing of not giving the audience too much time to think, just going with it. I worry I've slightly biased myself for the next viewing, however, having taken in all the commentary.

  • RoadphillRoadphill United Kingdom
    Posts: 984
    Well I have to say, after watching the film last night, it was jaw droppingly bad.

    The main plot, by any films standards, waiting for fuel to run out when they where in touching distance anyway, was ludicrous.

    Add in all the 'Star Warsy' stuff that the film ruined and it goes even further into the abyss.

    Just watch Spaceballs instead if you want a Star Wars spoof.
  • I was watching the Graham Norton interview with the Star Wars cast, and John Boyega is really cool and funny! It's a shame he didn't have as much to do this time.
    After contemplating The Last Jedi, and likeing it a lot more, every scene with him (& Rose) is what I'd cut from the film :(

    Planet Vegas was like Prequel territory, as bad as the '50's diner' from AOTC only longer

    On another note, can someone help clarify something for me? I only have one viewing under my belt, and could easily have missed something. I loved the flashback that showed Luke with his green saber; we got what happened that night from his perspective & Kylo's. I gather that Luke felt the Dark Side in Kylo/Ben, and in a moment of weakness, gave serious thought to killing him in his sleep, but ultimately wasn't going to. That's pretty dark. From Kylo's point of view, he woke up just in time to see Luke looming over him.
    So my question is: THAT'S IT?? That's what this whole thing was about? Because unless they show some more in Episode IX what led up to that, Kylo seemed pretty innocent and Luke was the bad guy.

    Did Luke consider, I don't know, talking to him? I mean, this is the guy who brought Vader back to the light. Just something that's been bugging me.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited December 2017 Posts: 23,883
    Strog wrote: »
    I'm thinking of marathoning the rest of the films prior to. Not sure if that will help or hinder the second TLJ viewing but it's been since my mid-teens I've done anything of the sort, and I've got a bit of the SW bug at the moment.
    It can't hurt @Strog, but I'm not sure if it will necessarily improve the 2nd viewing experience given that TLJ pretty much stomps on much of the past anyway. If I may suggest: just do it for the sake of it. I'm planning to do a marathon at some point soon too.
    Strog wrote: »
    The more criticism I read online, the more apparent the (seemingly) massive amount of faulty story logic becomes. Some of what's been noted I took in at the time (such as Snoke) but there's been some other head-scratching items pointed out that, in the moment, I didn't care about -- which is as it should be, imo. It's that Hitchcock thing of not giving the audience too much time to think, just going with it. I worry I've slightly biased myself for the next viewing, however, having taken in all the commentary.
    There is definitely a lot of faulty logic in the new one. Ultimately, I think it's best if one just absorbs this as a high production quality popcorn flick and not try to overthink it. I realize that it will be difficult to do for many of us who grew up with this story, but in retrospect this was perhaps inevitable, given the current franchise caretakers and their priorities (namely future spin offs and films).
    On another note, can someone help clarify something for me? I only have one viewing under my belt, and could easily have missed something. I loved the flashback that showed Luke with his green saber; we got what happened that night from his perspective & Kylo's. I gather that Luke felt the Dark Side in Kylo/Ben, and in a moment of weakness, gave serious thought to killing him in his sleep, but ultimately wasn't going to. That's pretty dark. From Kylo's point of view, he woke up just in time to see Luke looming over him.
    So my question is: THAT'S IT?? That's what this whole thing was about? Because unless they show some more in Episode IX what led up to that, Kylo seemed pretty innocent and Luke was the bad guy.
    That's it @Master_Dahark. Nothing more to it. Yes it struck me as a bit simplistic as well. Perhaps they didn't want to elaborate given the conceptual similarities to the prequels (Anakin's turn to the dark side).

    At the end of the day, I think the key message of this film is that the force is for everyone. It's certainly a desirable (but also somewhat 'in vogue' at this particular time) message of egalitarianism. Everything else is subservient to that message.
  • Forgive me

    25487488_10214967366476049_6292304331156591695_o.jpg?efg=eyJpIjoidCJ9&oh=7a24c092fa4f8d383b94ec011b970910&oe=5AC67D54
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    edited December 2017 Posts: 45,489
    Is this the original storyboard? Glad they changed it.
  • edited December 2017 Posts: 4,617
    Saw it this evening. Something to remember IMHO: The original 3 movies captured the imagination of kids like me. Thats exactly we we are now watching sequels and middle aged parents are taking their kids along. To experience the magic that they felt during those first three movies. So when I take my two boys along, I would love it if they enjoyed these new movies as much as I enjoyed the originals.

    With that in mind, my two boys just did not take to the movie "too intense, too long, too much going on". (their body language at around 2 hours sad it all) And I have to say, I agree with them. The originals had very simple stories and a lightness of touch (even the second one). This latest attempt seems to be far too adult and serious IMHO with too much beng squeezed in. Humour comes via flimsy one liners and are really badly timed in terms of their placement within the film.

    So while TFA was a lazy retread, by doing so, it did retain some of the lightness and some of the early magic. TLJ attempts to be far more imaginative which I respect but it does not pull it off.

    I know I'm in a minority but RO got the balance right with a very simple heist movie with a small team. Leading to a rollocking adventure with a classic three part structure and a well defined climax: all within a shorter running time.
  • edited December 2017 Posts: 2,107
    Watched it a second time around and like it much more. But I still feel the casino scenes could have been cut. Me and my friend, who's just a casual cinema goer both felt the casino scenes felt most like 'Disney' and were like from some other movie.

    My friend thought it was 'watchable' no major complaints. My only complaint second time around, was that the scenes with Finn and Rose could have been cut and it would have been a better movie entirely.

    But IRJ could not thik any other use for the chatacter of Finn.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,230
    What an absolute waste of a badass character in Captain Phasma.
  • Posts: 4,617
    Agree, there are many wasted roles and opportunities. Del Toro is a fine fine actor who can be very dark and threatening when required. They tried to squeeze in far too much.

    Much better to have a smaller cast and give them more time, giving other characters a break and we look forward to them coming back - wasted.

    The whole Fin/Rose story line made little sense and what did it add to the movie? Really strange.
  • Posts: 684
    Roadphill wrote: »
    The main plot, by any films standards, waiting for fuel to run out when they where in touching distance anyway, was ludicrous.
    In the theater I remember thinking, "This sounds like something Battlestar Galactica would do." A few days later I remembered that the first episode (of the revived series) was about enemy ships being able to track and relentlessly pursue the Galactica ship through its faster-than-light jumps. I'm not complaining/criticizing them for the stories being similar (god no), just noting that the core idea pulled me out of one world and into another. (It's still better than yet another Death Star plot.)
    On another note, can someone help clarify something for me? I only have one viewing under my belt, and could easily have missed something. I loved the flashback that showed Luke with his green saber; we got what happened that night from his perspective & Kylo's. I gather that Luke felt the Dark Side in Kylo/Ben, and in a moment of weakness, gave serious thought to killing him in his sleep, but ultimately wasn't going to. That's pretty dark. From Kylo's point of view, he woke up just in time to see Luke looming over him.
    So my question is: THAT'S IT?? That's what this whole thing was about? Because unless they show some more in Episode IX what led up to that, Kylo seemed pretty innocent and Luke was the bad guy.
    A related question: what do we think about the Knights of Ren? Lots of speculation after TFA about the scene Rey saw in the rain being from the night the temple was destroyed. Apparently not. Perhaps it'll be something for IX? I always thought the glimpse Rey got in TFA would be more interesting as a flashforward than a flashback, so I think it'd be neat to have that scene coming.
    bondjames wrote: »
    If I may suggest: just do it for the sake of it. I'm planning to do a marathon at some point soon too.
    Yes, true, good suggestion. At the moment I am very much looking forward to watching the old ones again. Its been years since I've seen certain ones, let alone marathoned them.
    patb wrote: »
    With that in mind, my two boys just did not take to the movie "too intense, too long, too much going on". (their body language at around 2 hours sad it all) And I have to say, I agree with them. The originals had very simple stories and a lightness of touch (even the second one). This latest attempt seems to be far too adult and serious IMHO with too much beng squeezed in. Humour comes via flimsy one liners and are really badly timed in terms of their placement within the film.
    A very good point, and one which I'd somehow not even considered till now. Imagining myself in a kid's place I can certainly see why your boys reacted that way. TLJ does seem skewed to an audience with the luxury of knowing the franchise well (i.e. subverting tropes etc.). TFA, as you note, managed to be both fresh for its new audience and evocative for its old.
    I know I'm in a minority but RO got the balance right with a very simple heist movie with a small team. Leading to a rollocking adventure with a classic three part structure and a well defined climax: all within a shorter running time.
    I do like RO (it's the best film Disney has made with the SW property I think) but it also felt to me like it might have gravitated toward an older audience. I'll have to take note when I rewatch (only seen it twice).
  • Posts: 4,617
    I was chatting to my boys again this morning,
    "Why did you like RO?"
    "Because the goodies were the goodies and the badies were the badies"

    I think they have overdone things with the uncertainty re the dark side and characters turning one way and then another. Kids need to know who to cheer for and who to boo. The originals were always described as fairy tales in space and I think thats fair. Its too self indulgent and clever to have characters on the tipping point and its a confusing experience for the younger audience.

    What the last 3 have done is to really illustate how clever the 3 originals were in striking the perfect balance. It also shows that the improvement in special effects is pretty meaningless if you dont have a good story and strike the right tone.

    One last point (for now), RO had an analogue feel to it as it had to butt right up against the original. But this had the additional effect of evoking the feel of the originals even though most of the characters were new and it was a self contained story.

  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    patb wrote: »
    I was chatting to my boys again this morning,
    "Why did you like RO?"
    "Because the goodies were the goodies and the badies were the badies"

    I think they have overdone things with the uncertainty re the dark side and characters turning one way and then another. Kids need to know who to cheer for and who to boo. The originals were always described as fairy tales in space and I think thats fair. Its too self indulgent and clever to have characters on the tipping point and its a confusing experience for the younger audience.

    What the last 3 have done is to really illustate how clever the 3 originals were in striking the perfect balance. It also shows that the improvement in special effects is pretty meaningless if you dont have a good story and strike the right tone.

    One last point (for now), RO had an analogue feel to it as it had to butt right up against the original. But this had the additional effect of evoking the feel of the originals even though most of the characters were new and it was a self contained story.

    I actually think it’s a little more smart to build some ambiguity into the good/evil dynamics. It progresses the saga, rather than offering a carbon copy, ala TFA. It’s flawed, but it’s the only movie they’ve made in this era that feels like a ‘proper’ new film, that didn’t heavily trade on nostalgia. It felt like an authentic vision to me.
  • Posts: 4,617
    The battle between good and evil within the human spirit is a decent focus for a movie and the force/darkside is a metaphor for the moral battle within all of us but I'm not sure this works for the kids. It's very much a debate/battle for adults IMHO. Vader redeeming himself was a classic twist/scene but its going to get tiresome if these guys are constantly on the cusp of good or evil: Even within one scene, we see Kylo go one way and then the other "make you mind up and get on with it"

    In the original, Luke was the classic "knight in shining armour" rescuing the Princess and it worked so very well. Obviously, they put twists in but the basic principles of the story were simple to relate to and understand. They are in danger of disappearing up their own backsides and alienating the younger views. It is meant to be fun.

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    This is more of an empowerment tale for females imho. There was a teeage girl sitting next to me and my mate when I saw it for the 2nd time. She was highly taken with certain things (as evidenced by her leaning forward and murmurings at critical moments) in comparison to me.
  • edited December 2017 Posts: 4,617
    My boys were also murmuring "how long til the end?"

    Re empowerment and Rey, what does she do in this movie? Fails to persude Luke to come and help, battles with her own inner demons (battle not over), fails to turn Kylo, co=pilots the Falcon at the end to distract the fighters but Chewy had that under control and then lifts some rocks to make an exit from the cave (a blast from the Falcon could have done that).

    We did female empowerment with RO
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited December 2017 Posts: 23,883
    patb wrote: »
    My boys were also murmuring "how long til the end?"
    Haha. I have to check with my young nephews (not sure if they've seen it yet). The younger one (seven) loved TFA but wasn't so impressed with RO. He mentioned to me that they should have done the continuation before moving forward with a new story (he doesn't know anything about the old films).

    ---

    EDIT. RE: Female empowerment: It's not so much in the success vs. failure but rather in the positive spirit. Not giving up. Being incorruptible. Thinking rather than shooting first (caution vs. bravado). Self sacrifice (although I'm not sure if 'suicide bombing' is something we want to encourage). It's about motherly feminine energy, as it were. Perhaps 'empowerment' was the wrong word. More like female perspective.
  • RC7RC7
    edited December 2017 Posts: 10,512
    patb wrote: »
    The battle between good and evil within the human spirit is a decent focus for a movie and the force/darkside is a metaphor for the moral battle within all of us but I'm not sure this works for the kids. It's very much a debate/battle for adults IMHO. Vader redeeming himself was a classic twist/scene but its going to get tiresome if these guys are constantly on the cusp of good or evil: Even within one scene, we see Kylo go one way and then the other "make you mind up and get on with it"

    In the original, Luke was the classic "knight in shining armour" rescuing the Princess and it worked so very well. Obviously, they put twists in but the basic principles of the story were simple to relate to and understand. They are in danger of disappearing up their own backsides and alienating the younger views. It is meant to be fun.

    This is why I’m happy for them to steer clear of the originals. They can’t be bettered. Like Bond, I’m happy for them to expand and redefine the parameters. It’s never going to be to everyone’s taste.

    For the record, I’d have preferred Rey to join Kylo and then destroy the First Order from within. Can see why it didn’t happen, though.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    Star Wars: The Last Jedi Review. A minor improvement on the previous practical remake instalment. Great special effects and entertaining throughout, yet the Director never captures the magic of and iconography of the original trilogy. Luke Skywalker makes a welcome return, but the real failure of the piece is in the villains. Where Darth Vader was sinister and imposing, Kylo Ren has the presence of a naughty child. Worth a watch 6.7/10.
Sign In or Register to comment.