I think it is likely that we will find out that Rey was trained as a Jedi, but they were young memories that were repressed because of something traumatic (probably Ren killing the other students).  That makes the lightsaber scene make sense.

 

If that isn't the case, then I agree with you.  But we won't know till a few more reveals, like who her parents were and why she was left on the Jakka.

 

A lot of other things happen "because movie".  Characters meet up or do things because they need to for the plot to move along quickly, not because they would make sense in the actual movie world (Abrams' Star Trek was even worse in the regard).  But again, we could find out through reveals why Rey just happened to be growing up by the Millennium Falcon the whole time, Solo just happened to be relatively close by to find them when it took off, etc.

I don't think Kylo Ren was actually trying to kill Rey or Finn

I didn't read anything about this movie before seeing it, so I didn't really learn any of the new characters' names or anything about what was supposed to happen.  There was the neo-Hans Solo who magically reappears at the end to get kissy-faced with his droid, except we never cared about him (we care more about the droid, but not in a way that differed significantly from R2D2).  There is the totally uncompelling Laura Croft sort-of main character whose name is barely mentioned, and then Darth Vader 2.0 whose name I don't think was mentioned even one time yet everyone seems to know it.  He was a totally douchey character who we could not possibly care about.  A generic villain.  He's not scary, he's not funny, he's not clever, he possesses no new superpower.  He looks like he walked into the Star Wars set from some other movie being shot on the studio's lot.  He doesn't have a sidekick, a pet, a cool apartment, or some side job that ads some depth to his character.   

 

What was so irritating about the whole thing was it was all one giant set-up for more and more movies where the grand narrative finally clicks into place.  Except I'm not sure that we'll care about that narrative since it doesn't appear that it's going to head into any new territory.  Again, the meeting of Han Solo and Princess Leigha after a 30~ year separation was the core feature of this movie that distinguished it, and could have made it one of the great movies in American cinema.  What if the two had gone on a date and we really saw them possibly get back together and Han settle down?  Then we would have cared more when he died.  Instead we had more phasers firing, crap flying all over the place, and low rumble...SMASH. 

 

 

I didn't read anything about this movie before seeing it, so I didn't really learn any of the new characters' names or anything about what was supposed to happen.  There was the neo-Hans Solo who magically reappears at the end to get kissy-faced with his droid, except we never cared about him (we care more about the droid, but not in a way that differed significantly from R2D2).  There is the totally uncompelling Laura Croft sort-of main character whose name is barely mentioned, and then Darth Vader 2.0 whose name I don't think was mentioned even one time yet everyone seems to know it.  He was a totally douchey character who we could not possibly care about.  A generic villain.  He's not scary, he's not funny, he's not clever, he possesses no new superpower.  He looks like he walked into the Star Wars set from some other movie being shot on the studio's lot.  He doesn't have a sidekick, a pet, a cool apartment, or some side job that ads some depth to his character.   

 

What was so irritating about the whole thing was it was all one giant set-up for more and more movies where the grand narrative finally clicks into place.  Except I'm not sure that we'll care about that narrative since it doesn't appear that it's going to head into any new territory.  Again, the meeting of Han Solo and Princess Leigha after a 30~ year separation was the core feature of this movie that distinguished it, and could have made it one of the great movies in American cinema.  What if the two had gone on a date and we really saw them possibly get back together and Han settle down?  Then we would have cared more when he died.  Instead we had more phasers firing, crap flying all over the place, and low rumble...SMASH. 

 

 

 

Are you telling me you didn't cry at the end?

 

Zzs-OvfG8tE

I got to say, I was highly disappointed.  I am a big Star Wars fans as most of you all are, and this one just didn't do it for me. 

 

My main beef is this: The original trilogy, it slowly builds up the characters, the drama, you are vested.  Luke trains as a Jedi over two shows, etc.

 

In this one, it's like bam! Rey has the force and can do whatever she wants.  Fin can deftly defend himself against Ren using a light saber when he has never used one in his life.  It's like where did they learn all this, out of thin air or through a book!?

 

The original trilogy had to establish what the force was. Who Jedi were. What as going on in the world. In the current trilogy, you're expected to already understand that. It would be the most boring movie ever if you watch Rey advance in the same way that Luke did and they overexplained everything.

 

It's pretty well established that Rey is a really good fighter. It shows her handily fighting off two muggers in Jakku with a stick. She clearly has a good fighting technique and can hold her own against anyone. Why can she hold her own against Kylo Ren? It's pretty clearly established that she is much stronger with the force than Kylo Ren, she just doesn't know how to use it. Kylo Ren was struck by Chewbacca's bow, which was very clearly a powerful weapon by how much they bludgeoned us with it in the conversations between Han and Chewie. Kylo Ren also might not have been trying to kill Rey and might have been trying to convince her to join him (hence the line about needing a teacher). And we have no idea if, like X suggested, she was properly trained before being dropped off on Jakku with her memory wiped. There are still a lot of questions.

 

There will be plenty of growing for Rey just as Luke grew. And keep in mind, Luke was a farmer for his first 20 years. Rey was a scrapper with no family on a hostile planet with people who routinely tried to take advantage of her. She's in a much better spot to fight than Luke was in Episode IV.

 

And it's been established via Finn's first light saber fight with the storm trooper that he was trained in hand to hand combat when the storm trooper fights him with the electrified light saber gizmo. I don't think it's that crazy that he can defend himself for 30 seconds. He quickly gets Kylo Ren's light saber into his shoulder and then a big swipe through his spine. He didn't defend himself deftly. He managed to survive for a longer than you or I would, but he was no match for Kylo Ren. He was trained to kill and used the training as best he could (not too well).

 

Then, Ren is just this pitiful evil character.  He isn't intimidating at all in the slightest.  Then they have this super weird scene with Ren and Rey like staring each other down with the force which is honestly just kind of stupid.  Considering Ren is trained as a Jedi, he shouldn't have any issues with manipulating Rey.

 

I think the whole deal with Kylo Ren is that he is supposed to be intimidating with the mask on, but whenever he takes it off he's revealed to be practically a child. And again, it is established that Rey is much stronger with the Force than Ren is. Obi Wan Kenobi can only convince extremely weak minded individuals (storm troopers in Episode IV) using the force. He can't use his mind powers even in the bar on Tatooine. You never see someone manipulate someone else who is force sensitive. For Ren to even try suggests he's naive and untrained, to me.

 

Honestly, I think the whole movie was "kiddified" for all the children to enjoy.  It had none of it's original charm and regurgitated everything from the original 3.  There was absolutely no development of characters and it jumped way too fast into turning Rey into a Jedi with no training.  It was just a silly movie.

 

The opening scene showed the slaughter of a village and a storm trooper disoriented after seeing a friend die in battle. Then we see Kylo Ren murder his father which Luke/Vader couldn't ever do. This was a much more adult movie than IV-VI were. And I disagree completely on the development of the characters. I never really cared about Luke in the original trilogy. He was just the vehicle for the movie to progress in my mind. I'm really excited to learn more about Rey and follow her journey. I think her part was written almost perfectly and the actress did a phenomenal job. They gave you just enough for you to care about what happens, but not enough to give away future twists.

 

I think most of your complaints will be further explored in future movies, and you're comparing VII to IV-VI as a whole, and that isn't entirely fair.

I've read a lot of interesting theories.  Mostly just speculation.  But some are based on what are either valid clues or blatant mistakes which the Star Wars people usually don't make.

 

First, there is the scrolling text at the beginning of the movie where it says that Leia is "desperately searching for her brother Luke....."  Now, if Luke was her one and only brother, the grammatically correct way to say that would be "her brother, Luke,...."  The way it was phrased would imply that she has more than one brother.  We know her mother only had two kids (Luke and Leia), but perhaps Vader somehow spawned more children in the time between III and IV?  Of course, my English teacher step-sister claims that is not a firm rule.

 

The other theory has more teeth.  Star Wars is very careful with accents.  If you have an American accent, you are from the outer rim.  If you have an English accent, you are from the center of the Republic.  Recall the differences between Luke and Leia's accents in IV.  Note that the actor who played Finn is British, but he used an American accent.  On the other hand, Rey has a very prim and proper English accent, suggesting she is not originally from the outer rim but instead comes from somewhere more at the heart of the Republic.

Never heard the accent theory before.  Sounds like a winner.

 

Overall I loved the movie.  The amount of plot cribbing from the original trilogy was part of its point, which is that stories on this scale are cyclical rather than linear.  Or that each generation has to deal with the same BS because we never learn.  Rey's power level was a little over the top, especially her piloting skills, which I assume will get explained, so I'm not too worried about it.  Luke's rise wasn't plausible either-- he shouldn't have been able to get an X-wing out of the hangar successfully, let alone fly like an ace.

 

As far as people's names not being mentioned onscreen, that's a Star Wars tradition.  No one ever says Boba Fett in Empire, and no one ever says Ewok in Jedi.  We learned their names from the toys.

Rey's power level was a little over the top, especially her piloting skills, which I assume will get explained,

 

Regarding this, she has spent the last 15 years or so dismantling old ships for parts. I'm sure she is very familiar with how they work since she has taken them apart most of her life. Also, I get the impression she did work on the Millennium Falcon repairing a bunch of pieces, however, she had never flown it before and wasn't sure it would run. I think this is a plot point that just needs to be inferred. They don't need to explain everything to us. I really hate it when movies do explain everything. It usually causes more problems than it solves in the plot.

 

Her excellent piloting is likely a result of her lineage to Luke and Anakin who were both excellent pilots. It runs in the family.

Like I said, not worried about it.  She probably has lots of midichlorians.  Exhibit A in favor of leaving out the details!

I thought they handled it well.

 

I didn't read anything about this movie before seeing it, so I didn't really learn any of the new characters' names or anything about what was supposed to happen.  There was the neo-Hans Solo who magically reappears at the end to get kissy-faced with his droid, except we never cared about him (we care more about the droid, but not in a way that differed significantly from R2D2).  There is the totally uncompelling Laura Croft sort-of main character whose name is barely mentioned, and then Darth Vader 2.0 whose name I don't think was mentioned even one time yet everyone seems to know it.  He was a totally douchey character who we could not possibly care about.  A generic villain.  He's not scary, he's not funny, he's not clever, he possesses no new superpower.  He looks like he walked into the Star Wars set from some other movie being shot on the studio's lot.  He doesn't have a sidekick, a pet, a cool apartment, or some side job that ads some depth to his character.   

 

What was so irritating about the whole thing was it was all one giant set-up for more and more movies where the grand narrative finally clicks into place.  Except I'm not sure that we'll care about that narrative since it doesn't appear that it's going to head into any new territory.  Again, the meeting of Han Solo and Princess Leigha after a 30~ year separation was the core feature of this movie that distinguished it, and could have made it one of the great movies in American cinema.  What if the two had gone on a date and we really saw them possibly get back together and Han settle down?  Then we would have cared more when he died.  Instead we had more phasers firing, crap flying all over the place, and low rumble...SMASH. 

 

 

 

Are you telling me you didn't cry at the end?

 

 

Me? No.  But I went to see this with my dad and he was a little struck by the whole thing, I suspect because my mom in 2015 looks somewhat like what Carrie Fischer looks like in this film (I think she even has a similar poof jacket).  If you are older you get a sense for the giant chunk of your life that has passed since you last saw these actors play these roles.  Also, for anyone 50+ watching this, they almost certainly can relate to having a child reject them, even if it didn't happen in the spectacular fashion depicted in the film.  You can imagine, even if you remained married, another life where you would have separated and you would have failed to maintain a healthy relationship with your children.  A lot of times the entire course of our lives comes down to single arguments, chance meetings, and other random incidents. 

 

That's should have been the centerpiece of this movie, not a side story.  This movie was a completely different experience for older people, since no doubt the events of the movie triggered those kinds of thoughts in many people as they watched it.  And that's where the power of all of the great literature and movies lie -- they present allegories which compel people to contemplate their own situation. 

 

Another dumb detail of this movie were the obvious Nazi references.  The Nazi rally was cliché and begged the question as to what the motivation of the First Watch Order was.  It could have been cool if there was old-fashioned Fox News propaganda going on (ala 1984) rather than an army of clones or chemical indoctrination or whatever was going on.  The control of ordinary people through propaganda is way, way more interesting than cheating with a superdrug, a gas, or simply breeding an army of obedient clones.   

 

 

 

 

A lot of other things happen "because movie".  Characters meet up or do things because they need to for the plot to move along quickly, not because they would make sense in the actual movie world (Abrams' Star Trek was even worse in the regard).  But again, we could find out through reveals why Rey just happened to be growing up by the Millennium Falcon the whole time, Solo just happened to be relatively close by to find them when it took off, etc.

 

I think Star Wars gets away with this better than other films because of the force.  Everything that occurs in these films that would otherwise be implausible or wild coincidence can always be chalked up to the will of the force.  Why does the planet that Leia sends the droids to at the beginning of IV happen to be the same planet that her long lost brother has been marooned on for 20 years?  Because it needs to be, and because seemingly random and unrelated events are actually manipulated or dictated by the force.

 

The amount of plot cribbing from the original trilogy was part of its point, which is that stories on this scale are cyclical rather than linear.  Or that each generation has to deal with the same BS because we never learn. 

 

Great point.

 

I think this is a plot point that just needs to be inferred. They don't need to explain everything to us. I really hate it when movies do explain everything. It usually causes more problems than it solves in the plot.

 

Totally agree.  Just like when Lucas ham-handedly tried to explain the science behind the force in episode I.  Everyone had already bought into the force without any explanation other than that it's a religion/magic that actually works.  There was no need to try to answer questions no one was asking, and it came off as really lame.

 

He was a totally douchey character who we could not possibly care about.  A generic villain.  He's not scary, he's not funny, he's not clever, he possesses no new superpower.  He looks like he walked into the Star Wars set from some other movie being shot on the studio's lot.  He doesn't have a sidekick, a pet, a cool apartment, or some side job that ads some depth to his character.   

 

You're right, the lack of a cool apartment is definitely Kylo Ren's flaw.  LOL.  In all seriousness, I think that him being insecure and weak in this movie is setting him up to be more dangerous in the next two movies.  Darth Vader was cold, calculating, and confident.  He was a scary villain, but was predictable enough, so the audience was never really nervous about anything.  Kylo Ren seems like he's willing to take chances and self destruct if necessary to live up to a standard that he will likely never attain.  That kind of irrational, emotional, insecure, desperate villain is something that Star Wars hasn't really shown us yet.  It could take the series on some wild turns in the next two films.

Like I said, not worried about it.  She probably has lots of midichlorians.  Exhibit A in favor of leaving out the details!

 

You wrote that while I was writing my response.  Couldn't agree more.

Kylo Ren's weaknesses and insecurity make him a less impressive villain, but a better and more complex character overall.  The same thing happened with Vader from the moment you learned he was Luke's father.  He started becoming less impenetrable and monolithically evil, and became more human. The difference is that here they have done this over the course of 1 movie, not 3.  There has been talk of this being another "villain gets redeemed" story a la Vader in the original trilogy.  It would be more interesting if we saw the opposite, how a human being with insecurities and emotions becomes an emotionless killer.  This is exactly what I wanted to see in the prequels.  Not "he did it to save Padme"!

I think they're going to explore a different path for Kylo Ren. A part of me hopes he never gets redeemed, but instead get betrayed by Snoke. Because then you find out he was simply being used as Han predicted. It would make you feel bad for him, but he wouldn't be redeemed.

 

Obi-Wan: "So what I told you was true, from a certain point of view."

Luke: "A certain point of view?"

Obi-Wan: "Luke, you're going to find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view."

^ Haha. When the terror attack destroys something called a "Death Star" I think you get a free pass!

Not by any definition a terrorist attack. Also, rebel insurgents. They must be doing battle with dutiful loyalists, or devoted patriots

 

The Skywalkers would kinda fit nicely into rebel dynasties that you encounter in protracted social conflict zones.

Interesting take, I thought. 

 

http://www.everyjoe.com/2015/12/29/entertainment/star-wars-newest-villains-social-justice-warriors/#1

 

A few years ago when the Mouse bought the franchise, Leia was officially made a Disney Princess at the persistent insistence of SW fandom.

 

The latest joke is that Kylo Ren should be next.

Not sure wtf he is talking about with the "slavers" remark, but other than that, even though I enjoyed the new movie, I see where he's coming from. But, if he didn't want to sell it, he shouldn't have sold it.

 

George Lucas didn’t like ‘retro’ feel of new ‘Star Wars,’ says he sold franchise to ‘white slavers’

BY PETER SBLENDORIO / NEW YORK DAILY NEWS / Wednesday, December 30, 2015, 9:15 PM

 

It wasn't the movie he was looking for.

 

"Star Wars" creator George Lucas admits he was disappointed by how similar the franchise's latest installment, "The Force Awakens," is to his original trilogy — and even contended he sold his beloved sci-fi series to "white slavers."

 

"They wanted to do a retro movie," Lucas said in an interview with Charlie Rose. "I don't like that."

 

"Every movie, I work very hard to make them different," he continued. "I make them completely different, with different planets and different spaceships, to make it new."

 

He also called the first six movies his "kids," saying he "sold them to white slavers that take these things and…," before halting the remark and laughing it off, presumably thinking better of it.

 

More: http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/movies/george-lucas-didn-retro-feel-new-star-wars-article-1.2481449

^ I don't think he's going to garner any sympathy whatsoever.

While now it's confirmed, ultimately he created the world where Grand Admiral Thrawn is fanfic and Jar Jar Binks is canonical.    So yeah...

Interesting take, I thought. 

 

http://www.everyjoe.com/2015/12/29/entertainment/star-wars-newest-villains-social-justice-warriors/#1

 

A few years ago when the Mouse bought the franchise, Leia was officially made a Disney Princess at the persistent insistence of SW fandom.

 

The latest joke is that Kylo Ren should be next.

 

What an incredibly dumb, dumb, dumb article. There exactly is one presidential candidate flirting with fascism this year, and there nothing "progressive", "Millenial", or "social justice warrior" about him.

 

I think the author probably subliminally compared Kilo Ren to Adam Driver's character in "When We Were Young." (I did too when I saw Star Wars last night.)

I got to say, I was highly disappointed.  I am a big Star Wars fans as most of you all are, and this one just didn't do it for me. 

 

My main beef is this: The original trilogy, it slowly builds up the characters, the drama, you are vested.  Luke trains as a Jedi over two shows, etc.

 

In this one, it's like bam! Rey has the force and can do whatever she wants.  Fin can deftly defend himself against Ren using a light saber when he has never used one in his life.  It's like where did they learn all this, out of thin air or through a book!?

 

I also thought this was a little strange. However, I think it could maybe be explained by the "awakening" of the Force that happened in this movie. Apparently the Force is something that can become weaker or more powerful at different times. In the prequels, the Force is clearly at a peak, considering the large number of Jedi and the considerable power of Yoda and Palpatine. After the Jedi are basically wiped out, the Force apparently became weaker as a whole. Then, in this movie, there has been inexplicable "awakening" of the Force. So maybe Rey doesn't need to train like Luke since the Force has been awakened and is now more powerful. I hope this awakening is described in more detail in the next movie, since I'm still not quite sure what it means.

 

I do have an issue with Finn using the lightsaber so well, especially against Kylo. I guess it could be argued that Kylo actually isn't very good at lightsaber combat, but he still should have been able to easily defeat Finn.

Kylo had been hurt earlier and was clearly fighting through a pretty gruesome injury considering all the blood.

I thought this movie was a bit of a mess.  Far and away the strongest aspect of this movie was the nostalgia-within-nostalgia -- we as viewers experienced nostalgia as the old characters themselves experience nostalgia.  I don't think there is anything at all like it in cinema history and I doubt it can happen again (except perhaps Spaceballs 2: The Farce Awakens).  It certainly wasn't planned back in 1983 that these actors would take a 30-year hiatus, which made this event very real.  Seeing these actors advance in age is something that can't be effectively CGI'd in, and it will be something quite remarkable for people to watch 50-100 years in the future.  That and the rather conspicuous advance of movie making techniques. 

 

Also disappointing was a limp use of audio.  The original movies of course had the quite brilliantly arranged (there's a lot going on with the chords and orchestration) main theme vs. Imperial March, a corollary for the movie's central concept.  With this thing they didn't even try to do anything creative with the audio.  It was low-drone SMASH low-drone SMASH just like every action movie out there.  Darth Vader's breathing is one of the iconic sounds in the history of cinema.  They couldn't come up with anything like that since they were so busy making the 422nd CGI explosion of the minute.  And telling the audio guy to throw in another low-drone SMASH.  The reggae playing the bar sounded like it was borrowed from a Chipotle.  Had none of the zing of the original oboe/clarinet thing from the original Star Wars movie and the band looked like they were phoning it in. 

 

I couldn't figure out what was going on during the second half of the movie or why I was supposed to care about Darth Vader 2.0 or Laura Croft.  Finn looked like he might work as a group leader at some Christian summer camp.  I could see him organizing dixie cups and cookies on a folding table. Then they finally get to Luke Skywalker, and his 30 seconds of acting kind of sucked.  I kind of wanted him to do the Icky Shuffle or maybe tell me the whole thing was a Geico commercial. 

 

As for visuals, I thought the opening silhouette of the star destroyer drifting across a moon was so wonderfully ominous and such a strong establishing shot.  But I wish it had been slower and that we had seen many other scenes drawn out with much, much simpler and slow-moving visuals.  I want to just watch somebody walk across the desert for about 3-5 minutes with that fantastic hulk of the wrecked star destroyer in the back.  Yes, I really like the pacing of 2001: A Space Odyssey. 

 

 

Agree with about everything, I found the movie to be a hokie mess.

I was going to resist commenting but the force is strong with this movie. Overall I loved it. The paced was in hyperdrive and engaging throughout. It was too familiar to the previous films. Rey and Finn are great and characters I want to know about more. There was no way not to pay homage to the earlier movies and there were lots a little touches to appreciate. Hopefully, future films with develop their own identity.

 

Stormtroopers having personalities was pretty funny. And this will go down in Star Wars lore... Still don't know what protection their uniform provide.

 

I finally saw it this weekend at the new Portage Crossing XD theater.  Count me among the underwhelmed, but then again, I'm also among the outliers who don't consider ESB the high point of the franchise.  I rank them IV, V, VI, VII, III, II, I.

 

Don't get me wrong, this was a very enjoyable film and it definitely has re-raised the bar to above anything accomplished by the prequel trilogy in terms of screenwriting and acting.  And it did have a few shots that could become iconic, particularly the crashed star destroyer.  But there was just too many implausible continuity stretches that were clearly "because plot, deal with it."  The entire setting was not very satisfying this time around, and yes, I understood the Nazi 30-years-later analogies (but if that were actually the intended parallel, then what was Versailles?).

 

Not only am I unsold on Kylo Ren as Darth Emo, but I wasn't particularly sold on General Hux as Captain Bloviate.  Honestly, General Grievous from the prequels was more intimidating, even without a weaponized planet at his disposal.

 

I wasn't even all that sold on the dialogue in many places.  If they were going for nostalgia, they really didn't take me there.  It was written at times more like an episode of Firefly would have been than what the original Star Wars would have been.

 

And there certainly wasn't any moment in the soundtrack that stuck with me the way the first time you hear the full Imperial March.  Obviously, the reprisals of the main theme connect the two films, but I was hoping they'd try a little something more to add on top of them.

 

Some of the particularly scientifically jarring moments:

 

(1) Somehow people looked up into the sky from one star system and watched the destruction of another.  Huh?  I get that the weapon's beam traveled at hyper-speed, but that doesn't mean that the light from the destruction of the Hosnian system would have reached the Elenium system in effectively real time.

 

(2) The weapon somehow drains the sun of its system ... to extinction?  They're talking about finishing off the weapon before it gets completely dark, and showing the sun vanishing.  OK, but then how did they power the weapon for the first shot against Hosnia?  Or was this entire weapon specifically built for two shots exactly?  No matter how powerful, that would be a lot less terrifying than a weapon that could actually chase you down and fire repeatedly (see, e.g, the Death Star), but they specifically tried to shoehorn in an image to make this weaponized planet be even more intimidating than the Death Star (the holographic size comparison).  The nova bombs from the Andromeda TV series were more believable (in a sci-fi sense, of course) and more threatening.

 

(3) The amount of "vanishings" is just a little much, more than can be explained by 30 years of setting time passing.  It's not just Luke vanishing, which seems like kind of a Jedi thing to do and something of a parellel to how Yoda vanished into exile after his failure against Palpatine on Coruscant.  But so much more than that vanished, too.  I can buy Luke's lightsaber vanishing into an old chest in a faraway alien-Cambodian temple, since it did in fact vanish down a shaft (with Luke's hand!) in Cloud City and there is no record of its fate after that.  But the Millennium Falcon?  Really?  Not to mention a huge amount of what should be very recent history, of the "standard reading that every single child in the galaxy learns in elementary school," seems to have mysteriously been forgotten in an incredibly short amount of time.  I'd believe competing versions of what happened at Endor, but what we see is sort of the equivalent of everyone completely forgetting about WWI by the time WWII comes around rather than simply learning the wrong lessons from it.

 

 

On another note, the various foreshadowings of Rey's past ... I don't like any of them.  Did she lose her memories of Luke's Jedi school (through accident or intervention)?  Not a fan of either one of them.  River Tam can get away with being an instinctive badass with a damaged brain; Rey isn't about to pull that off.  Is she secretly a Skywalker or a Solo (or both)?  Too much in VII will be inconsistent with that to make that a very well-orchestrated reveal, unless they can really pull off a screenwriting miracle.  Is she secretly a Kenobi?  I've seen that theory posited as another way to explain the lightsaber vision she received (Kenobi guarded that saber between when Anakin held it and when Luke did, and trained Luke before Yoda took over).  I'm less opposed to that as to some others, but that's still going to involve some major retroactive insertions into the canon.

 

I could go on.  I probably will later.  But I'll stop and catch my breath for the moment.

I think if one suspends the Neil DeGrasse Tyson analyses of Star Wars and approaches it from a purely cinematic standpoint, it can certainly be counted as at the very least a "good" movie.

 

I disagree on points made about the soundtrack though.  Consider listening to the soundtrack isolated from the movie.  The track "Resistance March" off of the album is particularly impressive (especially great low brass orchestration).

 

Yes, there are inconsistencies.  But nonetheless, it works as a film.  Besides, the bar was set so low after the prequel trilogy, it was easy to get everyone excited.

I can buy Luke's lightsaber vanishing into an old chest in a faraway alien-Cambodian temple, since it did in fact vanish down a shaft (with Luke's hand!) in Cloud City and there is no record of its fate after that

 

Now that you mention it, it would have been pretty cool if that chest contained the bones of Luke's hand in addition to that lightsaber.  Kind of like the relics of saints that are stashed in ancient churches across Europe and the Mid East.

I can buy Luke's lightsaber vanishing into an old chest in a faraway alien-Cambodian temple, since it did in fact vanish down a shaft (with Luke's hand!) in Cloud City and there is no record of its fate after that

 

Now that you mention it, it would have been pretty cool if that chest contained the bones of Luke's hand in addition to that lightsaber.  Kind of like the relics of saints that are stashed in ancient churches across Europe and the Mid East.

 

True.  Some of the saints must have been like holy Cthulhus, too, because they seem to have had about 20 arms ...

(2) The weapon somehow drains the sun of its system ... to extinction?  They're talking about finishing off the weapon before it gets completely dark, and showing the sun vanishing.  OK, but then how did they power the weapon for the first shot against Hosnia?  Or was this entire weapon specifically built for two shots exactly?  No matter how powerful, that would be a lot less terrifying than a weapon that could actually chase you down and fire repeatedly (see, e.g, the Death Star), but they specifically tried to shoehorn in an image to make this weaponized planet be even more intimidating than the Death Star (the holographic size comparison).  The nova bombs from the Andromeda TV series were more believable (in a sci-fi sense, of course) and more threatening.

 

My interpretation is that they only needed two successful strikes to eliminate opposition to the First Order. I imagine the base would have been abandoned after a second strike. It was probably a lot quicker to assemble than an entire death star. They terraformed a portion of a planet and installed technology to fire a couple shots.

 

(3) The amount of "vanishings" is just a little much, more than can be explained by 30 years of setting time passing.  It's not just Luke vanishing, which seems like kind of a Jedi thing to do and something of a parellel to how Yoda vanished into exile after his failure against Palpatine on Coruscant.  But so much more than that vanished, too.  I can buy Luke's lightsaber vanishing into an old chest in a faraway alien-Cambodian temple, since it did in fact vanish down a shaft (with Luke's hand!) in Cloud City and there is no record of its fate after that.  But the Millennium Falcon?  Really?  Not to mention a huge amount of what should be very recent history, of the "standard reading that every single child in the galaxy learns in elementary school," seems to have mysteriously been forgotten in an incredibly short amount of time.  I'd believe competing versions of what happened at Endor, but what we see is sort of the equivalent of everyone completely forgetting about WWI by the time WWII comes around rather than simply learning the wrong lessons from it.

 

Keep in mind that Finn was raised as a storm trooper, so he didn't get the standard education that others in the galaxy would receive.

 

Also, keep in mind that Rey grew up mostly on a desert planet on the outer edge of the galaxy. She had no proper education and only heard about rumors. I'm sure information didn't come to Jakku quickly. Nothing likely changed in the 30 years since the Battle of Endor for the scrappers on Jakku except that a large part of the Empire's fleet crashed on the planet.

 

And I imagine Han lost his ship in a bet with someone and then spent years trying to track it down when he wanted to buy it back. I don't think an explanation is required.

Didn't they have some dialogue about how Han had a tracker on the Falcon which is why he showed up when Rey & Finn took off? Seems to me he had it 'stashed' there. Perhaps another part of the reveal in the next movie about Rey's backstory

Didn't they have some dialogue about how Han had a tracker on the Falcon which is why he showed up when Rey & Finn took off? Seems to me he had it 'stashed' there. Perhaps another part of the reveal in the next movie about Rey's backstory

 

He mentioned that they should have searched the section of the galaxy of Jakku again or better. Something to that affect. Perhaps they had a rather short range tracker that couldn't reach different systems, but had a good shot of picking up the ship if it was in their same system.

Didn't they have some dialogue about how Han had a tracker on the Falcon which is why he showed up when Rey & Finn took off? Seems to me he had it 'stashed' there. Perhaps another part of the reveal in the next movie about Rey's backstory

 

He mentioned that they should have searched the section of the galaxy of Jakku again or better. Something to that affect. Perhaps they had a rather short range tracker that couldn't reach different systems, but had a good shot of picking up the ship if it was in their same system.

 

He also mentioned that it had been stolen by the guy that Rey had been scavenging for, but I can't recall that character's name.  Presumably, the tracker was activated when the ship was powered up.  I agree that having the Millenium Falcon on that planet seemed unnecessary, but it does tie in with Star Wars themes of:

 

A) That ship has a history of changing hands under unorthodox circumstances, and

B) Another example of "the will of the force", which is essentially just what we think of as destiny.  There's something special about that ship in particular that causes it be in the right place at the right time.  The reason it was coincidentally on Jakku when Rey needed it is the same reason it was coincidentally on Tatooine right when Luke needed it.  In a Star Wars movie, seemingly random events look coincidental to the observer but are largely governed by fate.

See, I have no problem with interesting and unlikely coincidences.  So they just happen to end up on the planet where Luke's lightsaber has been stored by an agent of the Light Side/Resistance?  Cool by me.  My suspension of disbelief is more strained when it's things that are simply inconsistent with the setting, or with natural laws of physics other than those that have been shown to be overruled by future technology.  So the unaided eye still cannot see a star system light-years away in real time ... you can communicate with it and travel to it, but it doesn't just show up in the sky like that.  And the notion of the Millennium Falcon simply vanishing is sort of like the concept of an American aircraft carrier or other famous ship simply vanishing without a trace 30 years after its most famous moment.

See, I have no problem with interesting and unlikely coincidences.  So they just happen to end up on the planet where Luke's lightsaber has been stored by an agent of the Light Side/Resistance?  Cool by me.  My suspension of disbelief is more strained when it's things that are simply inconsistent with the setting, or with natural laws of physics other than those that have been shown to be overruled by future technology.  So the unaided eye still cannot see a star system light-years away in real time ... you can communicate with it and travel to it, but it doesn't just show up in the sky like that.  And the notion of the Millennium Falcon simply vanishing is sort of like the concept of an American aircraft carrier or other famous ship simply vanishing without a trace 30 years after its most famous moment.

 

If you want to get too scientific about it, travelling at light speed would result in a journey between solar systems taking years. Instead, they take minutes/hours (they always cut away). Earth is 4 light years away from the nearest solar system. So if you want to science your way out of liking the movie, start with one of the most basic elements of the Star Wars universe.

 

Also, they can communicate between solar systems in real time, but if you were to try to communicate between just Earth and Mars, it would take between 3-21 minutes for your message to reach there. There's a lot of science that doesn't check out. It's best to just leave it alone and assume they have overcome some hurdles in technology.

 

Also, I disagree with your comparison of an aircraft carrier getting lost after 30 years. The Millennium Falcon was piloted by a notoriously reckless man who dealt with shady characters. It wasn't just stolen from the Resistance's base or something. I would expect nothing less out of Han Solo. It's a part of his character.

^And it's more like a small nondescript cargo ship than an aircraft carrier.

See, I have no problem with interesting and unlikely coincidences.  So they just happen to end up on the planet where Luke's lightsaber has been stored by an agent of the Light Side/Resistance?  Cool by me.  My suspension of disbelief is more strained when it's things that are simply inconsistent with the setting, or with natural laws of physics other than those that have been shown to be overruled by future technology.  So the unaided eye still cannot see a star system light-years away in real time ... you can communicate with it and travel to it, but it doesn't just show up in the sky like that.  And the notion of the Millennium Falcon simply vanishing is sort of like the concept of an American aircraft carrier or other famous ship simply vanishing without a trace 30 years after its most famous moment.

 

I heard it once said that an audience will believe in a character getting into trouble by chance but won't believe them getting out of trouble by chance.  There was just too much that wasn't adequately explained in this movie, and the fanboys just let it slide because there is some great "force" behind these movies, one that keeps sucking their money in its direction like the death star's tractor beam. 

 

The problem with Star Wars is that at some point in the late 90s in anticipation of the prequels a huge media machine rolled out a hype campaign that made Star Wars a bigger deal than it was when the original movies came out.  Nobody in the late 80s or the entirety of the 90s was really that into Star Wars.  I remember maybe two people talking about it, and one of my friends fashioning an R2D2 costume out of a garbage can in 1995.  But the machine somehow orchestrated a campaign that made younger people who couldn't remember when the original movies were in the theater or played with the toys as kids think that Star Wars was theirs.  It's sort of like if the machine had somehow figured out how to convince young people who attended Woodstock '94 and Woodstock '99 that the original Woodstock was "theirs". 

 

I read once about how The Wizard of Oz wasn't that big of a deal when it was released, but it grew in cultural importance since NBC or whoever started broadcasting it yearly in the 1960s.  The same thing happened with the Christmas Story movie.  Star Wars was a big deal when the movies and toys were released but it faded from the pop culture, with only occasional "special event" reruns on broadcast TV.  Then the new movies came out and they were horrible.  Yet despite their horribleness, the Star Wars franchise only grew as the hype machine behind it enchanted a new generation. 

^ I heard that the Wizard of Oz (novel) was some kind of allegory for the Gold Standard or William Jennings Bryan or some 1800's political thing no one remembers anymore.

See, I have no problem with interesting and unlikely coincidences.  So they just happen to end up on the planet where Luke's lightsaber has been stored by an agent of the Light Side/Resistance?  Cool by me.  My suspension of disbelief is more strained when it's things that are simply inconsistent with the setting, or with natural laws of physics other than those that have been shown to be overruled by future technology.  So the unaided eye still cannot see a star system light-years away in real time ... you can communicate with it and travel to it, but it doesn't just show up in the sky like that.  And the notion of the Millennium Falcon simply vanishing is sort of like the concept of an American aircraft carrier or other famous ship simply vanishing without a trace 30 years after its most famous moment.

 

If you want to get too scientific about it, travelling at light speed would result in a journey between solar systems taking years. Instead, they take minutes/hours (they always cut away). Earth is 4 light years away from the nearest solar system. So if you want to science your way out of liking the movie, start with one of the most basic elements of the Star Wars universe.

 

Also, they can communicate between solar systems in real time, but if you were to try to communicate between just Earth and Mars, it would take between 3-21 minutes for your message to reach there. There's a lot of science that doesn't check out. It's best to just leave it alone and assume they have overcome some hurdles in technology.

 

It's a given of the setting that human technology can make things go faster than light, though: spaceships, communications, death rays.  But that doesn't mean that without that technology, that somehow light should go faster than light.

See, I have no problem with interesting and unlikely coincidences.  So they just happen to end up on the planet where Luke's lightsaber has been stored by an agent of the Light Side/Resistance?  Cool by me. 

 

I don't know if I'd classify that as a coincidence.  They specifically went to this planet to see a person involved with the Resistance and the Light Side of the Force, as you note.  Wouldn't she be as likely a caretaker for such an object as anyone in the galaxy?

 

My suspension of disbelief is more strained when it's things that are simply inconsistent with the setting, or with natural laws of physics other than those that have been shown to be overruled by future technology.  So the unaided eye still cannot see a star system light-years away in real time ... you can communicate with it and travel to it, but it doesn't just show up in the sky like that. 

 

That one bugged me, too.  I see why they did it from a cinematic perspective- to show the intimidation that came along with the destruction, but wish they had found a less goofy, more clever way to show it.

Nobody in the late 80s or the entirety of the 90s was really that into Star Wars.  I remember maybe two people talking about it, and one of my friends fashioning an R2D2 costume out of a garbage can in 1995.  But the machine somehow orchestrated a campaign that made younger people who couldn't remember when the original movies were in the theater or played with the toys as kids think that Star Wars was theirs.  It's sort of like if the machine had somehow figured out how to convince young people who attended Woodstock '94 and Woodstock '99 that the original Woodstock was "theirs". 

 

You and I have very different memories of the 80s and 90s then, because the original trilogy was always popular with the people I grew up with.  Also, the early 90s were the golden age of Star Wars video games, with classics like X-Wing, Tie Fighter, and Dark Forces taking you deep into the events between each film.  I never got into the novels, but those did well and started popping up around 1990 as well.

Don't bother with Jake. He's insanely jaded about literally everything and is skews his understanding of reality and the past.

 

I was born in January 1989. I first watched star wars when I was a young kid (maybe 6 or so) and like Jimmy_James stated there were tons of Star Wars games out at that time. It wasn't just preparation for the prequels to eventually come out. Everyone I knew had seen the original trilogy and even people like me who didn't grow up in a household where one of the parents loved the movies still had seen them.

 

The idea that it was just some "media machine" overhyping it to make people think it was "theirs" (which is also inaccurate. I've never heard someone who isn't in their 50s state Star Wars as something from their generation) is BS. Which is typical coming from the source.

Saw it last night. Same complaints as last time. The Last Jedi, just like The Force Awakens, is an incredibly good execution of a bland rehash. The characters, the acting, the effects, all top notch. Kylo Ren's fall to the dark side was superbly done, much better than Anakin's was done in the prequels. The plot is good on a micro level but when we zoom out to the plot at a macro level of the saga as a whole, we are right back to a rebellion fighting an empire, rendering the entire events of the Original Trilogy to be pointless failures.

 

They could have set their story in a whole new galactic situation, dealing with the infancy of a New Republic and new Jedi, and all the various evils that would come up and need to be dealt with to ensure it lasts. They could have had Luke, Leia, Han, Chewie, Kylo Ren, Rey, and Finn, all the same as they are but fighting in a new situation. Instead, in TFA, the New Republic is seen by Rebootin' JJ Abrams as a writing problem to be dealt with, so it is destroyed in a three minute sequence, in order to get the heroes back to being a desperate rebellion ASAP. Even before that happens, the military group associated with the Republic is called the "Resistance" and are scrappy underdogs, even though they are supported by the galactic government. Doesn't make sense. The writers are just trying to unoriginally, desperately follow the rebels/empire dynamic.

 

Our heroes Luke, Leia, and Han die (or will die) sad and lonely deaths, having failed at their lives' goals.

 

I can't wait until episodes Ten, Eleven, and Twelve, when the New New Republic, after a three year reign, is overthrown by a New New Empire with a New New Darth Vader. Jedi Master Rey, who had all of her apprentices killed by one who turned to the dark side, can go into hiding as the latest Last of the Jedi, until one lone voice in the galaxy, a New New Hope, calls out to her to be trained as a Jedi. Then, don't even get me started on the anticipation I have for Thirteen, Fourteen, and Fifteen when we see the New New New Rebellion face off against the New New New New First Second Order with the New New Emperor.

 

I know history repeats itself, and that's a theme in Star Wars, but it does not mean the exact same thing should happen every thirty years. Bottom line is, these movies took no risks and relied on a perfect execution of a reboot. The audiences love it so you can't blame them.  But for those like me who appreciate the entire epic narrative arc, well, I think I prefer the prequels, which had a very flawed execution, but at least tried to add something new to the saga as a whole.

I finally saw it and I generally agree.

 

The decision to have a Sith apprentice turn on his master successfully (in the sense of surviving the attempt) was a scene that the SW universe was a bit overdue for.  Palpatine and Vader basically killed each other; Maul tried to become a rival to Palpatine but failed miserably; Ventress failed to eliminate Dooku.  And Snoke was an uninspiring Big Bad, so killing him didn't rid the series of a character with much potential.

 

Also, as a villain, General Hux was more believable in this installment than his kind of Waffen SS cutout from TFA.

 

That said, I fully agree with Mark Hamill's public criticism of Rian Johnson's writing and directing of Luke (and, one also assumes, of Yoda).  The were big, concept-level issues and there were small, tactical-level inconsistencies.  For example, on the little-things side, there was no logical reason for him to let Leia and the others have to guess the reason phantom-Luke was going out to meet the invading First Order ground forces.  And on the big things side, Luke as the disillusioned anti-mentor really just left me shaking my head "no" on so many levels.

 

No scenes in this movie seemed as likely to become as iconic in the franchise's history as Darth Vader's boarding of the rebel flagship in Rogue One, or even the deaths of Jyn Erso and Cassian Andor.  No new characters stuck with me the way K2SO did, either.  Vice Admiral Holdo's sacrifice of the last Resistance cruiser may come close, and she was an interesting character.  But for example, Rey's "moving rocks" scene at the end was dramatic for its special effects but I was almost immediately thinking about the Mary Sue nature of the act (Luke had to train with Yoda for a long time to be capable of a fraction of that much).  In fact, the "subtle" scene that a lot of people were commenting on--the stable boy casually using the Force in the last scene--undercuts everything we've known of the setting even more, unless they retcon/explain this in the ninth movie as the Force growing in power overall somehow.  Even young Anakin, while obviously very Force-sensitive at an early age, wasn't capable of casual telekinesis as a child.

 

All in all, not really a fan.  Enjoyable, yes.  But if it weren't for the richness of the setting that Rian Johnson got the privilege to play in, this wouldn't be much more engaging than Jupiter Ascending.

I liked it a lot.  Loved the overall messaging and so glad the story is no longer about lineages.  Regarding Luke, plenty of great performances have come from actors who hated what the director was asking for, like George C. Scott in Dr. Strangelove.  Hamill has since walked back some of his criticism, since making Luke a perfect father figure would have been dull and trite.  And I like how they've made Kylo a unique villain.  Snoke was generic but Kylo has layers.

I'm glad the story is no longer about lineages as well, though I'm not sure what "overall messaging" you're referring to.  I had a pet theory that Rey would turn out to be a Palpatine, actually, based on her affinity for the Dark Side and the fact that she had a central-planets (British) accent despite her apparent seclusion on the Outer Rim, but I'm happy to be wrong on that.

 

The overall message that power does not belong to bloodlines, I can agree is a good one.  I'm less happy that they basically got rid of everything involving the training that both the Jedi and the Sith found to be necessary and instead made it something that could be spontaneously discovered and even put to practical use by an untrained child.  That kind of trivializes the thousands of generations (remember Obi-Wan's "over a thousand generations" line to Luke in ANH?) of the entire population of the galaxy (probably trillions of people) who somehow never figured this out.

 

That said, I agree with mu2010 in faulting JJ Abrams more than Rian Johnson for simply knocking out the second Republic so quickly.  Remember that the old Republic hadn't actually fallen that long ago and the Galactic Empire didn't actually last that long--and that took an extraordinary amount of work by one of the most powerful and subtle Sith lords ever.  I actually liked the message of the progression from ANH to ROTJ: that the rebel fleet actually grew, at least after the losses at Scarif in RO, the more the Empire tried to suppress the rebellion.  Now the First Order comes along at what would have been the height of the Rebellion's success at restoring the Republic and just blows the whole thing up?  And yet despite that, other systems, those Republic systems, are just waiting for a signal from a mostly-dead band in the middle of galactic nowhere to rise up?

Messaging like "Don't attack what you hate, support what you love."  Also the notion seemingly shared by Luke and Kylo that this whole Jedi/Sith dichotomy is too reductive.  And maybe all that training was a bit overblown, a bit self-serving all along.  Oh look how important we are, the masters.  But young Luke was able to precisely direct a missile after almost no training, and that was in the first movie.

 

I don't understand the political backdrop of the new series either.  Supposedly the New Republic wasn't allowed to have a military because of what the last one did.  That's why the Resistance was unofficial.  OK then what is the First Order, who do they represent, how did they relate to the government they blew up?  Was anybody unclear on their purpose?  Not much nuance, no good cover story.  How did they construct a planet sized death star in secret?  Was the New Republic just a lame shadow government while the bad guys kept chuggung along on Coruscant as if ROTJ changed nothing?  At least the prequels gave us a plausible explanation for how the empire came to be.

 

 

 

 

I can't wait until episodes Ten, Eleven, and Twelve, when the New New Republic, after a three year reign, is overthrown by a New New Empire with a New New Darth Vader. Jedi Master Rey, who had all of her apprentices killed by one who turned to the dark side, can go into hiding as the latest Last of the Jedi, until one lone voice in the galaxy, a New New Hope, calls out to her to be trained as a Jedi. Then, don't even get me started on the anticipation I have for Thirteen, Fourteen, and Fifteen when we see the New New New Rebellion face off against the New New New New First Second Order with the New New Emperor.

 

 

 

I saw the last one and complained about it on this thread and I can't even remember the movie now, it was so forgettable.