I assume you are quoting books. And I will assert that if you have to write a book in order to put a Band-Aid on a plothole, the movie has still failed to make Rey not be a Mary Sue.
Look -- I like Rey. There's great potential there. She has, or rather, had, an intriguing backstory. However, the fact remains that she steps on some of the other character's toes with the abilities she has shown... but never earned. Not on-screen at least. All I'm saying is that she's not as well written as she could've been.
Honestly, I don't think that any of her non-Force abilities are even close to Mary-Sue-y-ness. She can fly and repair ships because she knows how they work from scavenging for parts her whole life. I thought that was well-established. She's good at fighting because she's been using a quarterstaff to defend herself her whole life, also well-established. She also is seen climbing around inside Starkiller Base, even going inside some wall of something, which is reminiscent of the first scene she was seen in, when she was climbing around inside a wrecked Star Destroyer.
The techniques for using a quarterstaff are completely different than what you would use for a sword (or lightsaber for that matter). And to be honest -- the one thing Rey has going for her in the department of whether or not she's a Mary Sue is, quite bluntly: her swordplay sucks. However, this is a double edged sword: because even though it's great character design to show that she's not handy with a sword, it also makes it hard to understand how she beat Kylo Ren in their first encounter. I'm not mad about this or anything -- but I do think that having Kylo beat Rey in that first fight would've lent him credibility as a strong villain, and it would've shown that Rey is capable of losing fights, which would've given a lot more tension to subsequent movies.
To be honest, I'm hoping that in Episode IX she goes back to her quarterstaff-wielding roots, and makes a double bladed lightsaber. 1. Double bladeds are cool. 2. It would let her wield the kind of weapon she's actually good at using 3. Not ONE good guy outside of Star Wars video games has used double bladed lightsabers, which is a shame since they're such a cool concept.
"Remove everything that has no relevance to the story. If you say in the first chapter that there is a rifle hanging on the wall, in the second or third chapter it absolutely must go off. If it's not going to be fired, it shouldn't be hanging there."
"If in the first act you have hung a pistol on the wall, then in the following one it should be fired. Otherwise don't put it there."
It states that if it’s there, it must be important to the story. If it isn’t important, then don’t have it. If we go by that, then almost everything in this movie wouldn’t be there. Almost everything in every movie ever wouldn’t be there.
I am looking at key story elements here. Obviously Chekov's gun is only useful for key elements of a story, not stuff that goes on in a background. I mean, if Chekov's gun were to be completely applies, one of the best things about Star Wars: the bizarre extras, just wouldn't be there.
However -- Chekov's gun is still a useful principle to have when you are examining key story elements.
When the script of one movie describes a certain hug as being motherly that is evidence that the director of that first movie was trying to hint at something.
Honestly -- Disney's mistake was not letting JJ write the WHOLE story down. Having one person write a section of a story and getting another one to write the middle of it is only going to cause problems. The reason TFA was so similar to A New Hope was because they were trying to create a setup -- and what better way to create a setup than to write a completely new story using a structure that has already been successful?
The problem is that TLJ removes some of the building blocks that TFA had set up, and tries to make the egregious claim that those story elements didn't matter, and then tosses them over the shoulder much in the same way Luke does to his lost lightsaber (which, how it was recovered is still completely unexplained). By trying to assert that Rey's parents are 'nobody' they turn the relationship Rey had with Han and Leia into something of a red herring.
It could’ve just been a way to describe the hug. If someone displayed a motherly attitude toward someone, does that mean that that someone is the person’s mother? No.
"A lot" as in hardly any. Most of the big critics loved it, it is just the "fans" who hate it!
Right. But the big critics don't matter. By definition it is the fans for whom the movie is made, and it is their opinion that needs to be respected.
Being a fan of a franchise doesn't mean blindly loving everything it puts out. Being a fan of a franchise means loving the franchise itself -- and wanting the best for it.
As it happens, fans know that TLJ is not the best movie for them.
I am looking at key story elements here. Obviously Chekov's gun is only useful for key elements of a story, not stuff that goes on in a background. I mean, if Chekov's gun were to be completely applies, one of the best things about Star Wars: the bizarre extras, just wouldn't be there.
However -- Chekov's gun is still a useful principle to have when you are examining key story elements.
When the script of one movie describes a certain hug as being motherly that is evidence that the director of that first movie was trying to hint at something.
Honestly -- Disney's mistake was not letting JJ write the WHOLE story down. Having one person write a section of a story and getting another one to write the middle of it is only going to cause problems. The reason TFA was so similar to A New Hope was because they were trying to create a setup -- and what better way to create a setup than to write a completely new story using a structure that has already been successful?
The problem is that TLJ removes some of the building blocks that TFA had set up, and tries to make the egregious claim that those story elements didn't matter, and then tosses them over the shoulder much in the same way Luke does to his lost lightsaber (which, how it was recovered is still completely unexplained). By trying to assert that Rey's parents are 'nobody' they turn the relationship Rey had with Han and Leia into something of a red herring.
It could’ve just been a way to describe the hug. If someone displayed a motherly attitude toward someone, does that mean that that someone is the person’s mother? No.
Welp, I don't want to fixate on the issue. If you can look past it, that's your business. All I'm saying is the issue is present, and that it's a valid reason for me to dislike what the movie did.
It could’ve just been a way to describe the hug. If someone displayed a motherly attitude toward someone, does that mean that that someone is the person’s mother? No.
Welp, I don't want to fixate on the issue. If you can look past it, that's your business. All I'm saying is the issue is present, and that it's a valid reason for me to dislike what the movie did.
Did I not just explain why it isn’t an issue? Fine. If you don’t like the movie, don’t let me stop you.
Alright, I don't want to start a huge debate, but I have pretty simple answers to most of these.
1. Yeah, I know, kinda disappointing, but rarely is it painfully obvious aside from the Starkiller.
2. Sad for sure, especially that he never reunites with Luke, but not a reason to hate the movies. His death was done well.
3. I'm kind of tired of people calling Kylo "angsty" and "emo," he's a complex character who has emotions. If you'd rather have just another Vader, that's fine, but personally, I like Kylo and his character development.
4. You honestly just described the way I felt while first watching that climax pretty well. The only thing is, it left me stunned, not angry or betrayed. I was very confused and kind of in denial as it cut back to Kylo marching into the base. I will never forget it and it was an awesome theatrical experience. His death didn't take long to come to terms with and I'm not too sad since he's pretty much guaranteed to return in IX as a ghost.
5. Snoke's betrayal should not have been put off to IX, and here's why. It wouldn't have been nearly as surprising then. Vader betraying Palpatine in VI was surprising, but if it had happened with Kylo and Snoke in IX, people would have just said it was copying the end of VI just like VII copied IV. But instead, they surprised everyone by doing it a movie early. That was a good twist. The sad part is now people are complaining that they killed off Snoke too early, many of the same people that would have complained about it copying VI if they had waited and done in IX. I really feel sorry for some of these people who just won't let themselves enjoy a movie.
6. Every single one of those decisions was made before Carrie's passing, and they couldn't go back and change it.
7. It is actually very important to the story even though they are nobodies because it defines a large part of Rey's character development.
8. He literally said in the same scene that he described this that it was "the briefest moment of pure instinct," and yet people still use it to try and prove his character was ruined by this film.
5. I'll grant you that, but it still would've been nice to get an actual backstory. All we know about his is that he made the First Order... because reboot. And they he's an ugly emperor... because reboot. We do not know why he created the First Order, how he did it, who he was before the First Order was created, etc.
6. I mean, I'm all for Leia not dying. It let's us imagine what she does next even if she can't be in the next movie.
7. I think you're missing the point: certain elements were present in the first movie that hinted at certain revelations to come. A different director came in and then flipped these expectations on its head by giving a pretty confusing if not all-too-vague answer to the question of who Rey's parents were, and why they abandoned her.
8. He'd become a jedi master by that point... you would think he'd of, you know, mastered his emotions.
I will say this, though, your arguments are refreshingly moderate and well-thought out
5. Actually, I don't think he did necessarily create the First Order as a political faction, because according to Wookieepedia, it was founded by Rae Sloane and Brendol Hux (father of Armitage), but clearly he took over at some point. I'm assuming that info came from a book or something. But honestly, I never saw Snoke's death as meaning we wouldn't find out more about him. I mean, isn't it still possible there'll be some exposition about him in IX? Just because he's dead doesn't mean we can't find out about him, I mean, I'm sure there are people who know about his past, like possibly even Kylo.
7. I agree that VII sort of dangled the whole Rey's parents thing in front of everyone, but I think that's more a problem with VII than VIII, especially since from what I heard, J.J. had the same idea for Rey's parents as Rian as far as them being nobodies. You could say J.J. just made it a bit too mysterious, like, "Oooooh, who are her parents?" But I still think that made the reveal of them being nobody a bit more potent. When you look at TLJ, it asks who Rey's parents are and hints at a reveal even more heavily than TFA did, especially with the cave scene, but obviously Rian wrote that scene as well as the reveal scene, so I don't think it's a problem with the films, they had a twist and a different one too. Instead of an "I am your father" moment, they had a "Your father is nobody," which is far more original and fresh for Star Wars.
8. He never really did get that far, to be honest. He was way too old to be trained as a "proper" Jedi, about twice as old as little Ani was, which is part of the reason why he noticed the flaws of the Order. He hadn't been brainwashed or anything, he had started training in his 20s. And at the end of VI when he becomes a Jedi, he hasn't exactly mastered his emotions. He's literally just beaten down his father in anger (which, by the way, was a bit more than just "the briefest moment" we learn about in TLJ) before refusing to kill him. But the fact that he makes that refusal rather than fully giving in to the Dark Side is what makes him as close to a "true" Jedi as he could have been.
Why, thank you very much, I can say the same of you.
I agree with everything you've been saying, but I don't think you really understand Chekhov's Gun. I mean, sure, a few things like Luke's green milk, don't add to the story but make the movie a bit more enjoyable. Little things like that are fine. I think what he means is that you shouldn't make a big reveal unless it's important somehow. However, Rey's parents being nobody is not a violation of that since it deeply affects the way she looks at herself and progresses her development as a character. On the other hand, it is precisely because of that principle that Snoke's backstory wasn't explored. It wouldn't affect the plot or characters in any serious way if Snoke told Rey that he was actually Darth Plagueis or something. Emarcee
Let’s go to the actual Gun.
"Remove everything that has no relevance to the story. If you say in the first chapter that there is a rifle hanging on the wall, in the second or third chapter it absolutely must go off. If it's not going to be fired, it shouldn't be hanging there."
"If in the first act you have hung a pistol on the wall, then in the following one it should be fired. Otherwise don't put it there."
It states that if it’s there, it must be important to the story. If it isn’t important, then don’t have it. If we go by that, then almost everything in this movie wouldn’t be there. Almost everything in every movie ever wouldn’t be there.
I get what you're saying and totally agree. It's ridiculous to assume that every little detail must pay off somehow. So while I don't think that it's entirely fair to use this principle on things like rifles on the wall, for big story beats and plot twists, it should be applied.
Never does everyone in the world agree that a movie is good or bad, but the majority of film critics who were actually looking at the quality of TLJ from a cinematic point of view gave it high praise.
To be fair, those particular critics were likely detached or removed from the actual context of the larger Star Wars franchise.
I can absolutely agree that the movie itself is of high quality... but it's a tough pill to swallow when you remember the original trilogy, and now have to watch how useless your favorite characters have become. The movie itself seems to be aware of this since it literally says, "Let go of the past, kill it if you have to." Implying that us as the audience should simply let go of our memories and force ourselves to enjoy the new content that is being put out... see, I, and many people like me, either can't or won't do that. And I'm proud of that : P
I love how that quote, "Let the past die," keeps being used as an argument against the film, as if it was actually said about the film series. It's just Kylo talking to Rey about starting over and bringing a new order to the galaxy, similar to the offers Vader made to both Padmé and Luke.
"Remove everything that has no relevance to the story. If you say in the first chapter that there is a rifle hanging on the wall, in the second or third chapter it absolutely must go off. If it's not going to be fired, it shouldn't be hanging there."
"If in the first act you have hung a pistol on the wall, then in the following one it should be fired. Otherwise don't put it there."
It states that if it’s there, it must be important to the story. If it isn’t important, then don’t have it. If we go by that, then almost everything in this movie wouldn’t be there. Almost everything in every movie ever wouldn’t be there.
I am looking at key story elements here. Obviously Chekov's gun is only useful for key elements of a story, not stuff that goes on in a background. I mean, if Chekov's gun were to be completely applies, one of the best things about Star Wars: the bizarre extras, just wouldn't be there.
However -- Chekov's gun is still a useful principle to have when you are examining key story elements.
When the script of one movie describes a certain hug as being motherly that is evidence that the director of that first movie was trying to hint at something.
Honestly -- Disney's mistake was not letting JJ write the WHOLE story down. Having one person write a section of a story and getting another one to write the middle of it is only going to cause problems. The reason TFA was so similar to A New Hope was because they were trying to create a setup -- and what better way to create a setup than to write a completely new story using a structure that has already been successful?
The problem is that TLJ removes some of the building blocks that TFA had set up, and tries to make the egregious claim that those story elements didn't matter, and then tosses them over the shoulder much in the same way Luke does to his lost lightsaber (which, how it was recovered is still completely unexplained). By trying to assert that Rey's parents are 'nobody' they turn the relationship Rey had with Han and Leia into something of a red herring.
It just says that the hug Leia gave Rey was like that of a mother. That's what the word motherly means. That's it. MatPat made a whole other video about how it was a mistake to make theories like that because it affects what audiences expect from the film. Rey's relationship with Han and Leia wasn't heavily suggesting they were related, it didn't remove that as a possibility, but it definitely wasn't trying really hard to make you think they were parents and daughter.
And actually, J.J. and Rian discussed the movies with each other quite a bit, believe it or not. J.J. even changed some things in TFA based on Rian's input and the plans they were making for the next movie. They weren't doing these things completely isolated from each other.
Honestly, I don't think that any of her non-Force abilities are even close to Mary-Sue-y-ness. She can fly and repair ships because she knows how they work from scavenging for parts her whole life. I thought that was well-established. She's good at fighting because she's been using a quarterstaff to defend herself her whole life, also well-established. She also is seen climbing around inside Starkiller Base, even going inside some wall of something, which is reminiscent of the first scene she was seen in, when she was climbing around inside a wrecked Star Destroyer.
The techniques for using a quarterstaff are completely different than what you would use for a sword (or lightsaber for that matter). And to be honest -- the one thing Rey has going for her in the department of whether or not she's a Mary Sue is, quite bluntly: her swordplay sucks. However, this is a double edged sword: because even though it's great character design to show that she's not handy with a sword, it also makes it hard to understand how she beat Kylo Ren in their first encounter. I'm not mad about this or anything -- but I do think that having Kylo beat Rey in that first fight would've lent him credibility as a strong villain, and it would've shown that Rey is capable of losing fights, which would've given a lot more tension to subsequent movies.
To be honest, I'm hoping that in Episode IX she goes back to her quarterstaff-wielding roots, and makes a double bladed lightsaber. 1. Double bladeds are cool. 2. It would let her wield the kind of weapon she's actually good at using 3. Not ONE good guy outside of Star Wars video games has used double bladed lightsabers, which is a shame since they're such a cool concept.
If quarterstaff fighting is different from sword fighting, and Rey is pretty good at lightsaber combat but far from perfect, then that makes total sense. Also, Rey had already lost to Kylo earlier on Takodana. She was hardly even given a chance to fight. That does lend some tension to the battle in the climax.
Yes, that would be cool. Now that she's had more practice with a normal lightsaber, though, it wouldn't be outrageous to assume she might just make another of those. So while it would be cool, I'm not going to count on it happening, because false expectations are what ruined VIII for so many people.
"A lot" as in hardly any. Most of the big critics loved it, it is just the "fans" who hate it!
Right. But the big critics don't matter. By definition it is the fans for whom the movie is made, and it is their opinion that needs to be respected.
Being a fan of a franchise doesn't mean blindly loving everything it puts out. Being a fan of a franchise means loving the franchise itself -- and wanting the best for it.
As it happens, fans know that TLJ is not the best movie for them.
You must see, though, that there are plenty of "fans" who just don't actually care. By no means am I accusing you of being one, but many of TLJ's haters just found things to hate about it simply because it was distributed by Disney. There are so many people on the Internet who are constantly accusing Disney and Kathleen Kennedy of ruining Star Wars to push a political agenda, when THEY'RE NOT EVEN THE ONES WRITING THE MOVIES!!!! Disney is a corporation, for bricks' sake, not a person! And Kennedy is just a producer of the movies, she hasn't been writing or directing a thing! Those "fans" are the ones I believe he was referring to with the quotation marks, the ones that are just trying to hate it just for the sake of hating it. They are so annoying! The ones that dislike some elements of the sequels, but can still find things to appreciate about them, and maybe even have some praise for Rogue One, those are who I call real fans.
Sorry for the rant, it's not even much of a direct response to you, but hopefully you can see where I'm coming from. I don't want to force anyone to think my opinion is "correct," because opinion is opinion. However, I still do my best to help some who will be reasonable to see the good in this film, because people should be able to enjoy movies rather than nitpick them for no reason. Obviously, not all fans like it, and not all fans dislike it, but the same is true of every Star Wars movie, and we should still be polite to each other.
"Remove everything that has no relevance to the story. If you say in the first chapter that there is a rifle hanging on the wall, in the second or third chapter it absolutely must go off. If it's not going to be fired, it shouldn't be hanging there."
"If in the first act you have hung a pistol on the wall, then in the following one it should be fired. Otherwise don't put it there."
It states that if it’s there, it must be important to the story. If it isn’t important, then don’t have it. If we go by that, then almost everything in this movie wouldn’t be there. Almost everything in every movie ever wouldn’t be there.
I get what you're saying and totally agree. It's ridiculous to assume that every little detail must pay off somehow. So while I don't think that it's entirely fair to use this principle on things like rifles on the wall, for big story beats and plot twists, it should be applied.
I totally agree. Also Im pretty sure the Yoda in the last Jedi doesnt even count as a force ghost as he wasnt even see through and was more like a luminous muppet character or something radioactivly charged. I also dont think it was the original puppet. As well what really anoyed me about the film was that Han wasnt given a proper funeral and that Luke and Leia hardly aknowledged his death other than that weird handing Leia the golden dice scene. Perhaps Luke thought they might bring Leia some luck if she wanted wanted to drown her sorrows in a little bit of light gambling on canto bight. Those dice might as well of been the Falcons incense card on a string for all the audience knows about that object yet, though I feel they may have been the dice used by Han to win the Falcon from Lando
Problem?
They couldn’t have a funeral as they were busy being chased by the First Order.
Even so they could have at least aknowleged Hans death better.
They couldn’t have a funeral as they were busy being chased by the First Order.
Even so they could have at least aknowleged Hans death better.
They acknowledged his death enough. What if there was a random scene where Leia, or Luke, or Rey or even Chewie sat down and felt sad about Han? It would be boring and detract from the movie.
She can fly and repair ships because she knows how they work from scavenging for parts her whole life. I thought that was well-established. She's good at fighting because she's been using a quarterstaff to defend herself her whole life, also well-established. She also is seen climbing around inside Starkiller Base, even going inside some wall of something, which is reminiscent of the first scene she was seen in, when she was climbing around inside a wrecked Star Destroyer.
