Star Wars: The Force Awakens [ SPOILERS FROM POST 4472 ONWARD ]

tigger123 · 30-04-2016 10:22pm

expectationlost wrote: »

thats not a motivation, why is he bad?

I'm assuming its going to be revealed as we find out more of his back story over the next few films.

Sad Professor · 30-04-2016 10:24pm

Kylo's motivation, as he says himself, is to "finish what [Vader] started", or rather what he thinks Vader started. Presumedly imposing order on the galaxy, destroying the Jedi, etc, etc. In Episode 7 he seems mainly concerned with destroying the last vestiges of good in himself, which means killing his father and tracking down Luke Skywalker so he can kill him too.

Why did he turn bad? He was seduced by the dark side for reasons we have yet to learn.

johnny_ultimate · 30-04-2016 10:24pm

He, like his grandfather and uncle before him, finds himself torn between the dark side and light side of the force. Obviously, the former influence has proven most powerful. But he also finds himself actively conflicted and unstable in his positioning - hence the impulsive emotional outbursts (or, let's be honest, tantrums) and his ultimate decision to kill his father and more fully embrace the dark side.

For a series that has always dealt in broad stroke good vs evil paradigms, I think Kylo's motivations and characterisation is one of most intriguing and potentially fruitful realisations of that so far. It's still broad strokes, but certainly I already find him more interesting as a character than Darth Vader was initially (the 'Anakin Skywalker' side of the character only really emerging in Empire and Jedi). I still think there's plenty to learn about him - and indeed several other characters - and hopefully they have been created with a three film arc in mind.

Zubeneschamali · 30-04-2016 10:44pm

expectationlost wrote: »

thats not a motivation, why is he bad?

This is a Star Wars movie, you are overanalysing it.

Even if a reason is revealed later, it'll be some cliché from the Hollywood scriptwriters folder.

It is enough to know that he is Bad, and either he will change and become Good, or he will be destroyed.

Most probably both.

expectationlost · 01-05-2016 12:30am

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

This is a Star Wars movie, you are overanalysing it.

Even if a reason is revealed later, it'll be some cliché from the Hollywood scriptwriters folder.

It is enough to know that he is Bad, and either he will change and become Good, or he will be destroyed.

Most probably both.

asking what a film character's motivation is is over analysing?

expectationlost · 01-05-2016 12:32am

tigger123 wrote: »

I'm assuming its going to be revealed as we find out more of his back story over the next few films.

are we not allowed to see the motivation of somebody in the film thats shown?

Osmosis Jones · 01-05-2016 12:37am

expectationlost wrote: »

are we not allowed to see the motivation of somebody in the film thats shown?

He's the grandson of Vader, his temptations lie on both sides of the force. Snoke has played him much like the Emporer did to Vader. He's being used, he's just a kid sure, a powerful one at that.

expectationlost · 01-05-2016 12:38am

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

He, like his grandfather and uncle before him, finds himself torn between the dark side and light side of the force. Obviously, the former influence has proven most powerful. But he also finds himself actively conflicted and unstable in his positioning - hence the impulsive emotional outbursts (or, let's be honest, tantrums) and his ultimate decision to kill his father and more fully embrace the dark side.

For a series that has always dealt in broad stroke good vs evil paradigms, I think Kylo's motivations and characterisation is one of most intriguing and potentially fruitful realisations of that so far. It's still broad strokes, but certainly I already find him more interesting as a character than Darth Vader was initially (the 'Anakin Skywalker' side of the character only really emerging in Empire and Jedi). I still think there's plenty to learn about him - and indeed several other characters - and hopefully they have been created with a three film arc in mind.

I know lucas was riffing off white hat/black hat cowboys etc (and the heroes journey etc) but even those guys had a motivation didn't they? Kylo Ren doesn't seem to have one, its like JJ has decided to invert film and leave out his motivation, the dark side itself (or badness) isn't a motivation, its seems to be the absence of motivation.

01-05-2016 12:42am

expectationlost wrote: »

are we not allowed to see the motivation of somebody in the film thats shown?

This is something which annoys me of late. These are not weekly TV shows, we shouldn't have to wait for another film for this. The story can be over all films but each film should be self contained and enjoyable in their own rights

Osmosis Jones · 01-05-2016 12:44am

[Deleted User] wrote: »

This is something which annoys me of late. These are not weekly TV shows, we shouldn't have to wait for another film for this. The story can be over all films but each film should be self contained and enjoyable in their own rights

You don't think TFA was enjoyable?

01-05-2016 12:47am

Osmosis Jones wrote: »

You don't think TFA was enjoyable?

It's a good spectacle but far too much a clone of the original.
JJ has form there with Star Trek Into Darkness ripping Wrath of Kahn, to be fair

But why would you pick that one word, given that it had nothing really to do with my point

Mickeroo · 01-05-2016 12:48am

[Deleted User] wrote: »

This is something which annoys me of late. These are not weekly TV shows, we shouldn't have to wait for another film for this. The story can be over all films but each film should be self contained and enjoyable in their own rights

It's the first part of a series, you don't put all your cards on the table in the first act. We know a lot more about Ren now than folks did about Darth Vader at the end of Star Wars. I thought the film was pretty self contained too, I'm a little baffled at folks saying the don't know his motivations tbh, we know a lot more about him than we do Rey at this point. He was the most fleshed out character in the entire film I thought.

expectationlost · 01-05-2016 12:50am

Mickeroo wrote: »

It's the first part of a series, you don't put all your cards on the table in the first act. We know a lot more about Ren now than folks did about Darth Vader at the end of Star Wars. I thought the film was pretty self contained too, I'm a little baffled at folks saying the don't know his motivations tbh, we know a lot more about him than we do Rey at this point. He was the most fleshed out character in the entire film I thought.

did Rey kill her father or some such? this is why one wonders about his motivation.

Osmosis Jones · 01-05-2016 12:51am

[Deleted User] wrote: »

It's a good spectacle but far too much a clone of the original.
JJ has form there with Star Trek Into Darkness ripping Wrath of Kahn, to be fair

But why would you pick that one word, given that it had nothing really to do with my point

Well then on your whole point, the movie was quite self-contained, characters had their arcs, we had a clear beginning, middle and end and the goal was achieved. It's a story within a bigger universe so of course we'll find out more in the next installment but that doesn't make this movie worse.

Mickeroo · 01-05-2016 12:52am

expectationlost wrote: »

did Rey kill her father or some such? this is why one wonders about his motivation.

What?

Osmosis Jones · 01-05-2016 12:53am

expectationlost wrote: »

did Rey kill her father or some such? this is why one wonders about his motivation.

What

Edit: what he said^^

expectationlost · 01-05-2016 1:05am

Mickeroo wrote: »

What?

It's the first part of a series, you don't put all your cards on the table in the first act. We know a lot more about Ren now than folks did about Darth Vader at the end of Star Wars. I thought the film was pretty self contained too, I'm a little baffled at folks saying the don't know his motivations tbh, we know a lot more about him than we do Rey at this point. He was the most fleshed out character in the entire film I thought.

I don't wonder so much about Rey's motivation are (although they are wait for her parents...escape people chasing her... wait for her parents) because she doesn't do something so extreme as to murder her parent.

expectationlost · 01-05-2016 1:06am

Osmosis Jones wrote: »

Well then on your whole point, the movie was quite self-contained, characters had their arcs, we had a clear beginning, middle and end and the goal was achieved. It's a story within a bigger universe so of course we'll find out more in the next installment but that doesn't make this movie worse.

but but a character kills his father and we don't know why.

Osmosis Jones · 01-05-2016 1:22am

expectationlost wrote: »

but but a character kills his father and we don't know why.

In his mind Han Solo isn't his father, he's no longer Ben he is Kylo Ren. Han is an obstacle that he has to overcome to fully commit to the dark side and he does so. It's not totally explained 100% but Kylo Ren killing Han Solo is definitely not out of the blue or uncharacteristic.

In Star Wars the only line we got about why Vader did what he did was that he was 'seduced by the dark side'

Mickeroo · 01-05-2016 1:26am

expectationlost wrote: »

but but a character kills his father and we don't know why.

You dont know why

I thought it was spelled out quite clearly, it was pretty much the source for his character's conflict and inner turmoil over the course of the film. The act of killing his father was him overcoming his attraction to the light side in much the same way Luke overcame the dark side by not killing his father in Return of the Jedi. It was quite literally a juxtaposition of what happened with Luke and Vader.

RoadhouseBlues · 01-05-2016 3:31am

Well I'm fairly pissed folks........Bought the dvd in Centra today................no extras...........what the feck folks...........what the feck....

Kidchameleon · 01-05-2016 9:12am

Mickeroo wrote: »

You dont know why I thought it was spelled out quite clearly, it was pretty much the source for his character's conflict and inner turmoil over the course of the film. The act of killing his father was him overcoming his attraction to the light side in much the same way Luke overcame the dark side by not killing his father in Return of the Jedi. It was quite literally a juxtaposition of what happened with Luke and Vader.

Wow yet another similarity to the old films, thanks I didn't notice that one. JJ shouldn't be let near a camera ever again, he's a joke. So much potential for episode 7 and he took the easy road.

01-05-2016 9:42am

Osmosis Jones wrote: »

Well then on your whole point, the movie was quite self-contained, characters had their arcs, we had a clear beginning, middle and end and the goal was achieved. It's a story within a bigger universe so of course we'll find out more in the next installment but that doesn't make this movie worse.

Who is Rey, what were her flashbacks about?
Why is she so insanely in tune with the force, infinitely more so than luke was ever shown to be (and he fought Vader FFS)?

Who is Snoke, what is he about?

Why did R2 wait so long to activate, what's that about?

Who's Finn and why did Mas say he could use the light sabre? What's that about?
Why was Finn so adept at new weapons so fast, why was he able to even battle Ren?

All of the answers to these stupidly important plot points can be yours by simply watching another film for the low price of another ticket.

The original trilogy are a series but you don't have to watch Empire to get full value from Jedi.
Same with Jones trilogy.

Hell even Back to the Future.

Don't say that Awakens is anywhere a self contained story. It may say "let's blow up yet another death star" but that's the side plot this time. The main plot is rey (potentially Finn also) and none of that is answered even a bit.

johnny_ultimate · 01-05-2016 9:49am

Finn could use a lightsaber because it's a glowing stick of light you can wave around and hurt people with. He was very bad at it and got defeated twice, even when fighting an already badly injured opponent.

There is no plot hole there.

JustTheOne · 01-05-2016 9:54am

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Finn could use a lightsaber because it's a glowing stick of light you can wave around and hurt people with. He was very bad at it and got defeated twice.

There is no plot hole there.

Lol brilliant!

Zubeneschamali · 01-05-2016 10:37am

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

He was very bad at it and got defeated twice

When he fights another trooper with it, we see that the troopers are trained with some sort of melée zappy stick (which the other trooper beats him with) - so a light saber is not a completely new thing to him.

But he is a newbie trooper on his first mission, so he is not as good as the other guy.

Why doesn't the light saber cut through that weapon? maybe the trooper manages to catch the blade on the zappy bit every time?

johnny_ultimate · 01-05-2016 12:27pm

Deleted User wrote: »

The original trilogy are a series but you don't have to watch Empire to get full value from Jedi.
Same with Jones trilogy.
Hell even Back to the Future.

Actually, I would happily argue that to fully or even generally appreciate the various conflicts & characters in Return of the Jedi, you would definitely have had to have seen the previous films.

Indiana Jones and Back to the Future were 'accidental' trilogies (and really there's good cause to believe George Lucas was sort of making it up as he went along too), never intended to be three parts of a single story (and Back to the Future II, incidentally, is nonetheless a sequel that requires particularly solid knowledge of its predecessors to properly 'get'). The Force Awakens was conceived as the first chapter of a new trilogy, hence it makes perfect narrative (and of course commercial) sense to design the story that way. It's more comparable to, say, Lord of the Rings or the currently screening Arabian Nights trilogy, which were designed as trilogies in the first place, and will offer a substantially more rewarding experience for everybody who watches all three as intended. Whether it also stands up as a standalone tale is a matter of debate - I personally think they struck a nice balance, leaving me pleased but also wanting more - but I in no way blame them for keeping cards close to their chest when we all know Episode VIII and IX are imminent.

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Why doesn't the light saber cut through that weapon? maybe the trooper manages to catch the blade on the zappy bit every time?

As has been described in supplementary material, and summed up by the SW Wiki:

It featured collapsible conductor contact vanes capable of resisting the plasma blade of a lightsaber

The reason I believe this isn't explained in the film is because really it's expository nonsense, and it's substantially more cinematically effective and visceral to show a fight that clearly implies "this guy is holding a weapon that can counter a lightsaber".

Osmosis Jones · 01-05-2016 2:18pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Who is Rey, what were her flashbacks about?
Why is she so insanely in tune with the force, infinitely more so than luke was ever shown to be (and he fought Vader FFS)?

Rey is a scavenger on Jakku, her "flashbacks" were visions she had when she touched the lightsaber which "called out" to her. We don't yet know why she's force sensitive, much like we didn't know why Luke was in Star Wars either.

Who is Snoke, what is he about?

Snoke is the Supreme Leader of the dark side/First Order. there's a strong possibility he is Darth Plagueis, mentioned in Revenge of the Sith by the Emporer.[/QUOTE]

Why did R2 wait so long to activate, what's that about?

I assume R2 activated in response to Rey coming on board, he was waiting for Luke to come back so some sort of connection between her and Luke most likely

Who's Finn and why did Mas say he could use the light sabre? What's that about?

Finn was a Stormtrooper, kidnapped as a child and trained by the first Order. Maz told him he could use the lightsaber because he was holding it and he asked for a weapon.

Why was Finn so adept at new weapons so fast, why was he able to even battle Ren?

It's a sword, not that difficult to know to swing it. We're shown that Stormtroopers have some sort of hand to hand combat training too. He wasn't able to battle Ren. Ren had been shot and even still was essentially toying with Finn, as soon as Finn got a hit in Ren cut his spine apart.

Is that everything answered? These aren't so much plot points as they seem to be indicators that you weren't paying attention to the movie.

expectationlost · 01-05-2016 4:59pm

Mickeroo wrote: »

You dont know why I thought it was spelled out quite clearly, it was pretty much the source for his character's conflict and inner turmoil over the course of the film. The act of killing his father was him overcoming his attraction to the light side in much the same way Luke overcame the dark side by not killing his father in Return of the Jedi. It was quite literally a juxtaposition of what happened with Luke and Vader.

but hadn't Luke watched his father be involved in the planet genoicde etc, ie motivation. I'll have to the watch the other two now

expectationlost · 01-05-2016 5:03pm

Osmosis Jones wrote: »

In his mind Han Solo isn't his father, he's no longer Ben he is Kylo Ren. Han is an obstacle that he has to overcome to fully commit to the dark side and he does so. It's not totally explained 100% but Kylo Ren killing Han Solo is definitely not out of the blue or uncharacteristic.

In Star Wars the only line we got about why Vader did what he did was that he was 'seduced by the dark side'

I think he knows the guy is his father.

I watched a new hope last night to see the comparison, in that Darth Varder doesn't do anything so personal, just stands with the general guy as he blows up the planet, its a very impersonal act of war/genocide, if the general guy killed his father I'd wonder more about his motivation then him blowing up a planet full of billions? of people.

Osmosis Jones · 01-05-2016 5:14pm

expectationlost wrote: »

I think he knows the guy is his father.

I watched a new hope last night to see the comparison, in that Darth Varder doesn't do anything so personal just stands with the general guy as he blows up the planet, its a very impersonal act of war, if the general guy killed his father I wonder more about his motivation then him blowing up planet full of billions? of people.

Okay I'm lost, I honestly can't understand what you're saying.

Tony EH · 02-05-2016 1:15am

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Finn could use a lightsaber because it's a glowing stick of light you can wave around and hurt people with. He was very bad at it and got defeated twice, even when fighting an already badly injured opponent.

There is no plot hole there.

Bingo.

There seems to be an awful lot of guff about Finn being "force sensitive" on sites like The Force.net and other places, simply because he switched on a lightsaber.

It's quite odd. Can only Jedi and Sith use lightsabers?

Honestly, I hope Finn isn't a Jedi in the making. It would be better if he stayed as he is. Maybe they should "serious" him up a bit though. He's a bit too much of a buffoon in 'The Force Awakens'. In any case, there's far too much Jedi tripe in Star Wars. I know to some that may sound odd, but I preferred it when the Jedi were just Ben, Luke, Yoda, Palpatine and Vader. The "force sensitives" in the original Star Wars films were the odd guys. Alchemists, almost, in a weird religion nobody could remember any more.

Frankly, the Jedi are now one of the most boring parts of Star Wars.

Thanks prequels. :mad:

Osmosis Jones · 02-05-2016 1:19am

Tony EH wrote: »

Bingo.

It's quite odd. Can only Jedi and Sith use lightsabers?

I do see people say this from time to time, but sure Han used Luke's lightsaber on Hoth to cut open the tauntaun

Tony EH · 02-05-2016 1:21am

Yep. Switched it on and stroke the guts out of the poor animal. :pac:

Go Han!

02-05-2016 9:56am

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Actually, I would happily argue that to fully or even generally appreciate the various conflicts & characters in Return of the Jedi, you would definitely have had to have seen the previous films.

Perfectly correct but to enjoy the first film you don't HAVE to see Empire. Empire in turn leaves the series open to continue but doesn't depend on Jedi.

02-05-2016 10:09am

Osmosis Jones wrote: »

Rey is a scavenger on Jakku, her "flashbacks" were visions she had when she touched the lightsaber which "called out" to her. We don't yet know why she's force sensitive, much like we didn't know why Luke was in Star Wars either

Snoke is the Supreme Leader of the dark side/First Order. there's a strong possibility he is Darth Plagueis, mentioned in Revenge of the Sith by the Emporer.

I assume R2 activated in response to Rey coming on board, he was waiting for Luke to come back so some sort of connection between her and Luke most likely

Finn was a Stormtrooper, kidnapped as a child and trained by the first Order. Maz told him he could use the lightsaber because he was holding it and he asked for a weapon.

It's a sword, not that difficult to know to swing it. We're shown that Stormtroopers have some sort of hand to hand combat training too. He wasn't able to battle Ren. Ren had been shot and even still was essentially toying with Finn, as soon as Finn got a hit in Ren cut his spine apart.

Is that everything answered? These aren't so much plot points as they seem to be indicators that you weren't paying attention to the movie.

Luke's father was said to be Jedi.
So you need to wait to next Film for anything about Rey? Thanks for confirming.

Possibility of Darth Plagueis? So not a clue really then? Who's he by the way, to film viewers?
All told in later films? Thanks for clearing that up.

You assume he woke up due to likely connection? So not a clue? Thanks for confirming.

Lightsabre has been touted as a Jedi only weapon, she could have given him a blaster. Or a blaster and the sabre (saying get this to Rey) but no. She specifically said that he could use it. No explanation yet? Cool thanks for confirming.

He had to exert himself to hit Finn, something shown time and again that trained Force Users don't need to do against regulars and he actually missed, only grazing. No real answer so? Cheers

Have you any actual answers or just trying fill in the cracks? Given the condescending tone of that last paragraph you would imagine that it's personal or something.

Osmosis Jones · 02-05-2016 2:42pm

Talk about condescending?

Your critique is ridiculous, do you really want every single moment to be explained through dialogue? Because that's exactly what the prequels did, every moment in the prequels was explained through boring exposition, it didn't help the movies.

Tigger · 03-05-2016 12:13am

Deleted User wrote: »

Who is Rey, what were her flashbacks about?
Why is she so insanely in tune with the force, infinitely more so than luke was ever shown to be (and he fought Vader FFS)?

Who is Snoke, what is he about?

Why did R2 wait so long to activate, what's that about?

Who's Finn and why did Mas say he could use the light sabre? What's that about?
Why was Finn so adept at new weapons so fast, why was he able to even battle Ren?

All of the answers to these stupidly important plot points can be yours by simply watching another film for the low price of another ticket.

The original trilogy are a series but you don't have to watch Empire to get full value from Jedi.
Same with Jones trilogy.

Hell even Back to the Future.

Don't say that Awakens is anywhere a self contained story. It may say "let's blow up yet another death star" but that's the side plot this time. The main plot is rey (potentially Finn also) and none of that is answered even a bit.

Bttf2 only makes sense after watching Bttf

03-05-2016 3:00pm

Tigger wrote: »

Bttf2 only makes sense after watching Bttf

Jesus, you're the second.

You don't need to watch BTTF3 to understand BTTF2.
2 sets up 3 but is a self contained story.

You don't need to watch Return of the Jedi to get full appreciation of Empire.

You WILL need to watch the next SW to gst full meaning of a sh1t load of things in Force Awakens

03-05-2016 3:03pm

Osmosis Jones wrote: »

Talk about condescending?

Your critique is ridiculous, do you really want every single moment to be explained through dialogue? Because that's exactly what the prequels did, every moment in the prequels was explained through boring exposition, it didn't help the movies.

So you are now saying that you are totally guessing? Thanks for clarifying.

Sad Professor · 03-05-2016 3:15pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Jesus, you're the second.

You don't need to watch BTTF3 to understand BTTF2.
2 sets up 3 but is a self contained story.

You don't need to watch Return of the Jedi to get full appreciation of Empire.

You WILL need to watch the next SW to gst full meaning of a sh1t load of things in Force Awakens

This is not a commonly held view of Empire or BTTF2. Empire was strongly criticised at the time for not having an ending and leaving threads like Han's faith hanging. Criticisms which even Abrams and Josh Whedon have echoed in recent years when talking about the importance of a film having a standalone story.

TFA is pretty standalone in my view. Way more so than Empire or BTTF2, which left major plot points unresolved. Questions like "who are Rey's parents" and "what's up with Luke" are fairly minor loose ends in comparison to Han being frozen in carbonate or the Doc ending up in the old west.

I think fans have read too much into things, many of which won't be resolved in the next two films because they aren't important.

Mickeroo · 03-05-2016 3:23pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Jesus, you're the second.

You don't need to watch BTTF3 to understand BTTF2.
2 sets up 3 but is a self contained story.

You don't need to watch Return of the Jedi to get full appreciation of Empire.

You WILL need to watch the next SW to gst full meaning of a sh1t load of things in Force Awakens

The story of TFA itself was self contained, there are threads to be dealt with in later installments but nothing that should effect the enjoyment of TFA as a stand alone film imo. You haven't raised anything to convince me otherwise. You don't need to watch Return of the Jedi to fully appreciate Empire Strikes Back no, but you do need to watch it to see how the story ends. I think Han Solo being frozen in carbonite and finding out Darth Vader is Luke's father and Leia is his sister leave a lot more pressing questions than why Finn is able to operate an electronic sword or who Rey's parents are (which I still don't really get the obsession with, I don't think we necessarily ever need to find that out at this point personally).

And no the ending of BTF2 makes no sense without BTF3, it literally ends on a cliff hanger and has a trailer for the next film in the credits. It was quite frustrating when I saw it in the cinema because I wanted to see the next part straight away, didn't really take away from my enjoyment of the second film though and the actual plot of BTF2 itself had been concluded as it was indeed a self contained story, in much the same way TFA's plot had come to an end what with it also being a self contained story in a wider narrative too. I know you'll say it isn't but that doesn't make it so.

03-05-2016 3:26pm

Sad Professor wrote: »

This is not a commonly held view of Empire or BTTF2. Empire was strongly criticised at the time for not having an ending and leaving threads like Han's faith hanging. Criticisms which even Abrams and Josh Whedon have echoed in recent years when talking about the importance of a film having a standalone story.

TFA is pretty standalone in my view. Way more so than Empire or BTTF2, which left major plot points unresolved. Questions like "who are Rey's parents" and "what's up with Luke" are fairly minor loose ends in comparison to Han being frozen in carbonate or the Doc ending up in the old west.

I think fans have read too much into things, many of which won't be resolved in the next two films because they aren't important.

The Doc ending up in the old west only happens outside the film's story altogether.
I'm not talking about having things carry over more the idea of leaving important story points out, as a hook for the next installment. Let's be fair, Rey's past is going to be a huge factor to come. But the story, in the current film, is intentionally lacking relevant material to the story unfolding on screen, not a "what happens next" type
Clifhangers are nothing new.
It's the treating a once a year event as a TV style serial.

Edit:I don't care who her folks are but her abilities are insane and when mixed with memory flashes show that they are holding back.

03-05-2016 3:30pm

Mickeroo wrote: »

The story of TFA itself was self contained, there are threads to be dealt with in later installments but nothing that should effect the enjoyment of TFA as a stand alone film imo. You haven't raised anything to convince me otherwise. You don't need to watch Return of the Jedi to fully appreciate Empire Strikes Back no, but you do need to watch it to see how the story ends. I think Han Solo being frozen in carbonite and finding out Darth Vader is Luke's father and Leia is his sister leave a lot more pressing questions than why Finn is able to operate an electronic sword or who Rey's parents are (which I still don't really get the obsession with, I don't think we necessarily ever need to find that out at this point personally).

And no the ending of BTF2 makes no sense without BTF3, it literally ends on a cliff hanger and has a trailer for the next film in the credits. It was quite frustrating when I saw it in the cinema because I wanted to see the next part straight away, didn't really take away from my enjoyment of the second film though and the actual plot of BTF2 itself had been concluded as it was indeed a self contained story, in much the same way TFA's plot had come to an end what with it also being a self contained story in a wider narrative too. I know you'll say it isn't but that doesn't make it so.

We're viewing different story threads as the main plot so. To me; DeathStar Part Trois was just a distraction.

Again I'm not alking about endings more the story being told on screen and that being incomplete.

Sad Professor · 03-05-2016 3:41pm

Deleted User wrote: »

It's the treating a once a year event as a TV style serial.

There is an element of this alright, probably stemming from Abrams's tv background and the influence of the MCU. But I think you are overstating how much it detracts from the story being told in the film.

Edit:I don't care who her folks are but her abilities are insane and when mixed with memory flashes show that they are holding back.

This has been discussed to death in the thread already. As I argued before, with quotes from Abrams to support it, I think her abilities are the result of an ordinary person reaching deep down and drawing on the power of the Force in a time of need. Ironically Abrams thought he was getting back to the original idea of the Force pre-midichlorians with this, but it hasn't gone down well with fans. I suspect Johnson may have a different take on it.

Kidchameleon · 03-05-2016 4:37pm

Midichlorians were in some the orignal drafts of Star Wars.

Tony EH · 03-05-2016 4:44pm

Says who?

Not saying you're wrong. It's just that there are so many claims about early Star Wars drafts, which are apparently more numerous than the stars in the sky.

Osmosis Jones · 03-05-2016 4:54pm

According to the internet early drafts had Luke as a robot and Han as some sort of frog man. After seeing the prequels I wouldn't be surprised.

Tony EH · 03-05-2016 5:04pm

Oh sure, Han was supposed to be this 7 foot green alien thing. But there's actual written source for that.

I've just never heard of the midi's being mentioned in early drafts for the original 'Star Wars'.

I read somewhere, ages ago, that Lucas said this to some comics people after Star Wars came out. But, I don't think there was anything written in a script.

Besides, Old George had/has an awful habit of shoehorning what he thinks in the present day to what he did 40 years ago and it doesn't always tally.

Kidchameleon · 04-05-2016 8:13am

The word Minichlorian does not appear in the rough drafts but Lucas had the idea that the force has some kind of biological aspect from early on. He goes into detail about the whole thing in the DVD commentary of the phantom menace. It was used as a way to retcon Leia into being Lukes sister.

Yoda said this in an early draft of Return of the Jedi: "The Force runs strong in the Skywalker line. If you will not destroy your father, there is only one other left who can…your sister."

http://starwarz.com/starkiller/revenge-of-the-jedi-revised-rough-draft/

Star Wars: The Force Awakens [** SPOILERS FROM POST 4472 ONWARD **]

Comments

Star Wars: The Force Awakens [ SPOILERS FROM POST 4472 ONWARD ]