Star Wars Episode VII Discussion (MASSIVE SPOILERS)

[Doctor Evil 51]

Agh... there are no coincidences, there is only the force

 

That too, I probably should have mentioned that XD

[1Leonard 134]

Agh... there are no coincidences, there is only the force

In moviemaking, there are no coincidences, there is only the script.

[Haveayap 127]

In moviemaking, there are no coincidences, there is only the script.

Im just saying GL has himself and any other SW writer pretty much covered when it comes to coincidences in the universe... I thought that was a brilliant plan

[Markus Ramikin 107]

Oh Cthulhu, where do I even begin.

If it's garbage, then why would it be guarded?

It's not garbage, that's my point. It's a fully functional ship which just seems to stand there abandoned. No lock on the doors, no lock on the navicomputer, nothing.

 

Basic sanity check: imagine it's a modern setting and we're talking about a car. A car with a full gas tank and keys in the ignition, just standing there near a busy marketplace for the protagonists to grab, with a layer of dust on it suggesting it's been standing there for a long time without anyone just taking it. We'd think it ridiculously convenient and a weak point in a movie, wouldn't we? And that's even before it turns out the car just happens to be the very one used by the protagonists in a previous movie.

 

Welcome to plot development 101, Luke and Obi-wan just so happened to run into han and chewie in A new Hope

A silly comparison. In A New Hope Han and Chewie are just random guys we just met. It's not a coincidence, it's anthropic principle; any pilot Obi-wan happened to hire would have been part of the plot and, in retrospect, have had a chance to be an important player in the following events. But that we run into Han and Chewie again for no real reason is contrived.

 

Roll a 6-sided die 10 times and remember the combination of numbers that you got. Whichever combination you got, out of the 6^10 possibilities, there's nothing special about and it's not a coincidence. But if you repeat the experiment later and get the same combination, THAT is a coincidence of extremely low odds.

Han was integral to the plot because he was one of the reasons Ben fell to the dark side

Ugh. Please tell me you're trolling and you didn't actually fail to understand what I meant by important to the plot.

 

For a character to be important to the plot, there have to be reasons -  logical, causal reasons - for them to be involved in the goings on. A role for them to play. For example in Empire Strikes Back, Han is involved because Vader wanted to use him to draw Luke out. The plot is Vader's attempt to capture Luke, and Han is Vader's bait in the trap set for that purpose. If Vader went after Luke in some other way, Han's escape to Cloud City would have made him unimportant; it'd be good that he survived, but he'd no longer be important to the film's plot.

 

On the other hand, there is no logical reason why Qui-Gonn takes Anakin with him to Naboo to take part in the war. "So that Anakin can destroy the control ship" is not a reason, not unless Qui-gon specifically states "I sense the boy is meant to play a role in the coming war" - but that's not what happens, he expects Anakin to sit the battle out in the safety of a fighter's cockpit. Which is why that movie makes less sense than it could have with better writing.

 

Similarly, "so that Han can have a scene where he dies to Kylo Ren" is not a reason that makes Han important in TFA. He's part of the events through sheer accident. "because he was one of the reasons Ben fell to the dark side" makes him important to the background, not to current events.

 

This is part of why ESB is a good movie and TFA is... less good. The audience is not left asking "why are all these important characters at the same time and place in Cloud City, isn't that contrived?", because there are reasons for this, emerging from the plans and desires of the characters. It's not just scriptwriter say-so, it makes sense: Boba Fett and Vader would have followed Han and Leia whereever they went, and then Luke would have gone there to save his friends. In TFA, lots of stuff has no reason except for authorial say-so, and that's not good writing.

 

This is Star Wars, not Interstellar or 2001. If you're looking for scientific accuracy

I'm looking for the barest respect for the audience's intelligence, and the barest effort to come up with something that isn't that ridiculous. It would have been so, so easy to do better than what they did, it's like they didn't try at all, just someone asked "how can we top the Death Star" and that was the first draft idea that someone threw up and they just went with it without caring if it makes the barest amount of sense.

 

Counts as a melee weapon.

LOL. So does an axe. Doesn't mean it's handled the way a lightsaber is.

Maybe you should pay attention more to the movie.

Right back at you. That energy baton thing is similar to a tonfa. If you are suggesting training with a tonfa will let you perform well with sword... and lightsabers are supposed to be hard and dangerous to use.

 

Granted, he did lose to the stormtrooper, so whatever. But his fight with Kylo shouldn't have lasted 10 seconds, and actually landing a hit on Kylo? No.

But then again you're forgetting we barely know Rey's background at all. You're jumping to conclusions when you're leaving out a ton of possibilities,

"It will make sense in the next movie" is never a good justification; 9 out of 10 the real answer turns out to be "bad writing". The remaining 1 out of 10 is often accompanied by the work acknowledging the unexplained thing (e.g. one character asking another "How did you do that? That should have been impossible"), thus telling the audience "yes, this is something unusual, and you can reasonably expect it will have an equally unusual explanation". But this movie, standing on its own, is just asking us to accept that Rey is just that much of a prodigy.

 

Im just saying GL has himself and any other SW writer pretty much covered when it comes to coincidences in the universe... I thought that was a brilliant plan

Yep, the Force can be a great explainer of such things. I am reminded of the "ta'veren" concept from the Wheel of Time, which is pretty much unabashedly explained as "main character powers" - and it works.

 

But there is a limit to it. For example, to use the Anakin on Naboo example again: if the reason Qui-Gon took Anakin with him to a warzone was the Force, what did Qui-Gon think his reason was? If he was consciously following a hint from the Force, the audience is not told this. If the Force led him to think he has mundane, sensical reasons for it, what are those reasons? Even if destiny is subtly bringing things and people together, those people still must have their own motivations for doing what they do.

 

Now Rey happening on the Falcon (and therefore later meeting Han) might have made sense as a Force-induced coincidence, even if an actual plot reason for their meeting would have been better. But the actions of whoever left the Falcon there unguarded do not make sense. Even when you are willing to use it as a crutch, you can only excuse so much with the Force.

[Doctor Evil 51]

Oh Cthulhu, where do I even begin.

It's not garbage, that's my point. It's a fully functional ship which just seems to stand there abandoned. No lock on the doors, no lock on the navicomputer, nothing.

 

But compared to what's around them it's ancient. For all intents and purposes, it's a collector's item.

 

 

Basic sanity check: imagine it's a modern setting and we're talking about a car. A car with a full gas tank and keys in the ignition, just standing there near a busy marketplace for the protagonists to grab, with a layer of dust on it suggesting it's been standing there for a long time without anyone just taking it. We'd think it ridiculously convenient and a weak point in a movie, wouldn't we? And that's even before it turns out the car just happens to be the very one used by the protagonists in a previous movie.

 

Welcome to Star Wars convenience.

 

 

A silly comparison. In A New Hope Han and Chewie are just random guys we just met. It's not a coincidence, it's anthropic principle; any pilot Obi-wan happened to hire would have been part of the plot and, in retrospect, have had a chance to be an important player in the following events. But that we run into Han and Chewie again for no real reason is contrived.

 

That's such a backwards argument and you know it, do you even read what you're saying? We run into Han and Chewie because Han's been looking to find the falcon, and since he'd recognize it's signature anywhere, it's not exactly unexpected that we'd run into him. Try again

 

 

Roll a 6-sided die 10 times and remember the combination of numbers that you got. Whichever combination you got, out of the 6^10 possibilities, there's nothing special about and it's not a coincidence. But if you repeat the experiment later and get the same combination, THAT is a coincidence of extremely low odds.

 

Oh wait, could it be that maybe all movies are extremely convenient? But sure, let's make everything stroke your ego, and have exposition to explain everything

 

For a character to be important to the plot, there have to be reasons -  logical, causal reasons - for them to be involved in the goings on. A role for them to play. For example in Empire Strikes Back, Han is involved because Vader wanted to use him to draw Luke out. The plot is Vader's attempt to capture Luke, and Han is Vader's bait in the trap set for that purpose. If Vader went after Luke in some other way, Han's escape to Cloud City would have made him unimportant; it'd be good that he survived, but he'd no longer be important to the film's plot.

 

On the other hand, there is no logical reason why Qui-Gonn takes Anakin with him to Naboo to take part in the war. "So that Anakin can destroy the control ship" is not a reason, not unless Qui-gon specifically states "I sense the boy is meant to play a role in the coming war" - but that's not what happens, he expects Anakin to sit the battle out in the safety of a fighter's cockpit. Which is why that movie makes less sense than it could have with better writing.

 

Similarly, "so that Han can have a scene where he dies to Kylo Ren" is not a reason that makes Han important in TFA. He's part of the events through sheer accident. "because he was one of the reasons Ben fell to the dark side" makes him important to the background, not to current events.

 

This is part of why ESB is a good movie and TFA is... less good. The audience is not left asking "why are all these important characters at the same time and place in Cloud City, isn't that contrived?", because there are reasons for this, emerging from the plans and desires of the characters. It's not just scriptwriter say-so, it makes sense: Boba Fett and Vader would have followed Han and Leia whereever they went, and then Luke would have gone there to save his friends. In TFA, lots of stuff has no reason except for authorial say-so, and that's not good writing.

 

You're saying all this stuff and not giving any evidence. Han's importance to TFA is to Kylo Renn's character development. Second of all, he's the one who knows how to get the droid to the Resistance.

 

 

I'm looking for the barest respect for the audience's intelligence, and the barest effort to come up with something that isn't that ridiculous. It would have been so, so easy to do better than what they did, it's like they didn't try at all, just someone asked "how can we top the Death Star" and that was the first draft idea that someone threw up and they just went with it without caring if it makes the barest amount of sense.

 

Thanks for taking my quote of context, really makes you look smart... not. If it's so ridiculous, maybe explain how it is

 

 

LOL. So does an axe. Doesn't mean it's handled the way a lightsaber is.

Right back at you. That energy baton thing is similar to a tonfa. If you are suggesting training with a tonfa will let you perform well with sword... and lightsabers are supposed to be hard and dangerous to use. Granted, he did lose to the stormtrooper, so whatever. But his fight with Kylo shouldn't have lasted 10 seconds, and actually landing a hit on Kylo? No.

 

Oh boo hoo, a non jedi can use a lightsaber because all it is is just a sword made of laser beams, that doesn't mean they are good. Maybe you should look back where I said kylo is injured. Do you even read?

 

 

"It will make sense in the next movie" is never a good justification; 9 out of 10 the real answer turns out to be "bad writing". The remaining 1 out of 10 is often accompanied by the work acknowledging the unexplained thing (e.g. one character asking another "How did you do that? That should have been impossible"), thus telling the audience "yes, this is something unusual, and you can reasonably expect it will have an equally unusual explanation". But this movie, standing on its own, is just asking us to accept that Rey is just that much of a prodigy.

 

Apparently the concept of a trilogy is incomprehensible to the likes of you. Star Wars is no longer meant to be just one movie, nor has any of the movies since ESB. There were PLENTY of questions that made sense in return of the jedi, but I guess that get's a pass since it's the original trilogy. Take a look at lord of the rings and you'll see what I mean

 

 

Yep, the Force can be a great explainer of such things. I am reminded of the "ta'veren" concept from the Wheel of Time, which is pretty much unabashedly explained as "main character powers" - and it works.

 

But there is a limit to it. For example, to use the Anakin on Naboo example again: if the reason Qui-Gon took Anakin with him to a warzone was the Force, what did Qui-Gon think his reason was? If he was consciously following a hint from the Force, the audience is not told this. If the Force led him to think he has mundane, sensical reasons for it, what are those reasons? Even if destiny is subtly bringing things and people together, those people still must have their own motivations for doing what they do.

 

Now Rey happening on the Falcon (and therefore later meeting Han) might have made sense as a Force-induced coincidence, even if an actual plot reason for their meeting would have been better. But the actions of whoever left the Falcon there unguarded do not make sense. Even when you are willing to use it as a crutch, you can only excuse so much with the Force.

 

"The Force" is use to explain every single convenient thing in Star wars, and there is a lot of them. If you can't handle that, go watch another movie.

[Markus Ramikin 107]

Oh, wow. At this point you don't just fail at reading comprehension, it's clear to me you're not trying to understand anything I'm saying, because if you put in that necessary cognitive work, you'd be unable to point out nonexistent problems with it. Just one example before I'm done with you.

That's such a backwards argument and you know it, do you even read what you're saying? We run into Han and Chewie because Han's been looking to find the falcon, and since he'd recognize it's signature anywhere, it's not exactly unexpected that we'd run into him. Try again

OBVIOUSLY the proximate reason Han is there is that he's looking for the Falcon. Duh. But the overall reason, the one that changes Han from a random smuggler uninvolved in the mission at the start of the movie to an important character later on, was Rey finding the Falcon. That's the unlikely coincidence, one which makes Han's involvement a contrivance. Do I need to explain every obvious little thing because you can't make the simplest mental connections when reading a post by someone you're disagreeing with? (*)

 

It wasn't that the writers said to themselves "oh, now that Rey has the Falcon, it might make sense to involve Han" - they started with the need to include Han and put the Falcon on Rey's planet as a way to cause that. And my point is that that's lazy writing. It would have been easy to write the plot in a way that made Han's involvement necessary and not accidental, to give Han or some other character a motivation and the means to make it happen.

 

In Kotor 2, why does the Exile have the Ebon Hawk, the same ship as the protagonist of the previous game? Contrivance? No. It was brought about by the motivations of the character T3-M4, who brought the Hawk back and was looking for Jedi to help Revan. Even though the real reason was probably "so that we can reuse the game asset and give players the ship they're familiar with", the Exile didn't just inexplicably find the Hawk parked on Peragus for no knowable reason. Do you understand what I mean? (*)

 

(*Rhetorical questions, of course. I'm done with this conversation.)

[Doctor Evil 51]

*sigh* here we go again.

 

I like how instead of proving me wrong you're just being a total tool by throwing OOC insults at me. It's ok though because I can still prove you wrong through actually ADDRESSING YOUR POINTS ._.. And since you only responded to one point of mine without addressing any other (you did this in a previous post as well bud ) and went "oh im not gonna bother!" just shows how incompetent you are. Don't go questioning people's mental abilities when you take people's quotes out of context and then only respond to one point.

 

Oh, wow. At this point you don't just fail at reading comprehension, it's clear to me you're not trying to understand anything I'm saying, because if you put in that necessary cognitive work, you'd be unable to point out nonexistent problems with it. Just one example before I'm done with you.

 

I actually do point out problems with it from time to time, but the difference is that I don't obsess on it like you do. I try to also focus on what the movie DID good, which apparently you could not figure out for yourself.

 

 

OBVIOUSLY the proximate reason Han is there is that he's looking for the Falcon. Duh. But the overall reason, the one that changes Han from a random smuggler uninvolved in the mission at the start of the movie to an important character later on, was Rey finding the Falcon. That's the unlikely coincidence, one which makes Han's involvement a contrivance. Do I need to explain every obvious little thing because you can't make the simplest mental connections when reading a post by someone you're disagreeing with? (*)

It wasn't that the writers said to themselves "oh, now that Rey has the Falcon, it might make sense to involve Han" - they started with the need to include Han and put the Falcon on Rey's planet as a way to cause that. And my point is that that's lazy writing. It would have been easy to write the plot in a way that made Han's involvement necessary and not accidental, to give Han or some other character a motivation and the means to make it happen.

 

Yep, you clearly fail at paying attention to the movie. Han goes back to smuggling because of what happened to Ben solo. He can't cope with the fact that he lost his son, and thus leaves Leia to try and get away from everything. It's the same as if his son had died, parents tend to break up and have problems. This is what happens to real people.

 

Apparently you once again didn't read what I said. The Falcon is pretty easy to detect since it has a glaring ID signature, and I'm sure that Han would recieve an alert immediately if it was in his vicinity. Yes, he happened to be in the area. Maybe it's another explanation of "The force wanted it to happen" like every other coincidence in Star Wars, or maybe you just have nostalgia goggles on.

 

 

In Kotor 2, why does the Exile have the Ebon Hawk, the same ship as the protagonist of the previous game? Contrivance? No. It was brought about by the motivations of the character T3-M4, who brought the Hawk back and was looking for Jedi to help Revan. Even though the real reason was probably "so that we can reuse the game asset and give players the ship they're familiar with", the Exile didn't just inexplicably find the Hawk parked on Peragus for no knowable reason. Do you understand what I mean? (*)

 

(*Rhetorical questions, of course. I'm done with this conversation.)

 

Actually, he/she did find it parked for no reason. If you remember, the only reason why the Exile took the hawk was because it was the only ship capable of getting them out of there. The Exile has no clue of what the Ebon Hawk is except that it got them out of there. It wasn't until AFTER Peragus that Kreia and T3 explain why the Ebon Hawk happens to be there. Just like TFA, or did you miss that tidbit while your mind was trying to come up with a tirade?

 

You didn't like the movie? Fine, but don't go out of your way insulting people who actually did

 

Notice how I have the courtesy to address every single quote of yours instead of taking them out of context. You're trying too hard to appear intelligent by criticizing the "coincidences" when the movie actually explains itself.

[Rinku 22]

I don't get how people come up with this notion that lightsabers require special powers to use, where at all was it said that non-jedi can't use them very well? If anything, they just prefer blasters because you can only be GOOD with a lightsaber if you have the force because that helps you block blaster bolts.

 

I think it definitely comes from the fact that we generally only see Jedi and Sith with lightsabers, so it is a new concept. Yet, I vividly remember reading Timothy Zahn's Thrawn trilogy and in it the enemy uses ysalamiri. Luke says he never knew how heavy and hard it was to wield a lightsaber without the force- nonetheless, this point would be considered "invalid" as it was part of the old EU.

 

My two cents worth on the movie are: 1) I really liked the movie, and I think that Disney decided to make it reminiscent of ANH to solidify the popularity foundation for the future movies...because if the movie was an utter flop then a lot of people would probably not go and see the others - I know some people who did that with the prequels. They stopped halfway-ish through AOTC and never watched ROTS. 2) As has been said multiple times, no more superweapon moons/stations/planets please (however, if anyone ever read the EU books you will realize that there were some far more ridiculous superweapons there ie Sun Crusher).

[Markus Ramikin 107]

I think it definitely comes from the fact that we generally only see Jedi and Sith with lightsabers, so it is a new concept. Yet, I vividly remember reading Timothy Zahn's Thrawn trilogy and in it the enemy uses ysalamiri. Luke says he never knew how heavy and hard it was to wield a lightsaber without the force- nonetheless, this point would be considered "invalid" as it was part of the old EU.

There's that. But more simply and commonsensically, melee weapons require serious training to use with any effectiveness against other competent practitioners. It's not just a question of grabbing a stick and beating on a target. Also, training is specific; for the most part competence with one weapon doesn't carry over to another, with a different grip, weight, balance and/or reach.

[Eauxps I. Fourgott 81]

 

I think it definitely comes from the fact that we generally only see Jedi and Sith with lightsabers, so it is a new concept. Yet, I vividly remember reading Timothy Zahn's Thrawn trilogy and in it the enemy uses ysalamiri. Luke says he never knew how heavy and hard it was to wield a lightsaber without the force- nonetheless, this point would be considered "invalid" as it was part of the old EU.

 

As I said before, I got it from the KOTOR manual, when it says about lightsabers, "Only Jedi have the skill to use these weapons. Any other users would be more likely to injure themselves than their opponents."

 

I think the difficulty might come from the fact that a lightsaber beam is weightless (at least according to the KOTOR manual), which would especially throw off those used to other melee weapons.

[Rinku 22]

There's that. But more simply and commonsensically, melee weapons require serious training to use with any effectiveness against other competent practitioners. It's not just a question of grabbing a stick and beating on a target. Also, training is specific; for the most part competence with one weapon doesn't carry over to another, with a different grip, weight, balance and/or reach.

 

As I said before, I got it from the KOTOR manual, when it says about lightsabers, "Only Jedi have the skill to use these weapons. Any other users would be more likely to injure themselves than their opponents."

Both of these make sense. In response I'd like to clarify that I wasn't criticising anyone for beliving only Jedi/Sith can utilize lightsabers. I was trying to put forth additional concepts to aid in explaining why the belief may be held

 

 

 

I think the difficulty might come from the fact that a lightsaber beam is weightless (at least according to the KOTOR manual), which would especially throw off those used to other melee weapons.

That could definitely help explain the difficulty. I wonder if they have tried to explain anything in the new EU....

[Doctor Evil 51]

As I said before, I got it from the KOTOR manual, when it says about lightsabers, "Only Jedi have the skill to use these weapons. Any other users would be more likely to injure themselves than their opponents."

 

I think the difficulty might come from the fact that a lightsaber beam is weightless (at least according to the KOTOR manual), which would especially throw off those used to other melee weapons.

 

That's because it's a game design rather than an actual canon fact, it was that way so soldiers and non-jedi classes had an excuse as to why they couldn't use lightsabers.

[Hassat Hunter 571]

Glad to see someone else (Markus) also beat his head on the stone wall.

 

Finding the Falcon was actually explained though, Han (and the First Order) where tracking it.

[Doctor Evil 51]

Glad to see someone else (Markus) also beat his head on the stone wall.

 

Needlessly considering the "answers" he was seeking was pretty much in the movie, and in Star Wars itself.

 

But let's forgive the OT for making the a lot of the same "mistakes" that this movie has made simply because it's the OT

[Markus Ramikin 107]

Glad to see someone else (Markus) also beat his head on the stone wall.

Haha, yeah. I might have expected it if I'd read what you went through earlier in the thread more carefully.

Finding the Falcon was actually explained though, Han (and the First Order) where tracking it.

Yeah, Han finding the Falcon is explained.

 

But Han finding the Falcon and this being in the movie is conditional on the Falcon already being in the movie. My disappointment was with how that was accomplished.

 

And by extension, with the overall shape in which the plot accomodated Han's involvement. Instead of making it a random accident, it could have been because Han was already involved with something plot-relevant that would cause him to cross the protagonists' paths, maybe part of the Republic's operations, maybe trying to find Kylo, maybe some other reason. Or maybe someone was looking for Han, because Han or one of his crewmembers had something plot-relevant that someone else in the movie needed (such as information about Luke) etc. There could have been an actual reason written for him being there, rather than the writers just dumping the Falcon in front of the Main Characters in a jaw-dropping display of laziness.

_____________

 

In other news, I didn't like how Han and Luke went nowhere in the last 30 years.

 

Han, after the character growth from the selfish smuggler with debtors after him to General Solo, the hero, is back to being an unimportant smuggler with debts. I get it, his son is at least part of the reason, but it's still character regression. It's not satisfying when the accomplishments of one movie are erased offscreen before the next one.

 

Then there's Luke. At the end of ROTJ, Luke has come into his own, he overcame the darkness in his father's heart and became a Jedi himself. The Republic is triumphant, the possibilities are endless. Fast toward 30 years and Luke's life accomplishment after the second Death Star is a few dead apprentices and one Dark Jedi. Since then he's just been sitting on ass. Seriously? Every time you see someone killed by Kylo or the Stormtroopers, remember that, at that precise time, there's a Jedi Knight sitting on a rock somewhere, doing nothing to protect them. Is this what Yoda and Kenobi trained him for? It just makes me want to re-read Timothy Zahn's trilogy. Sure, the Expanded Universe has its problems, but Luke wasting his life is not one of them.

 

(One might think of at least a superficial similarity to Obi Wan's exile on Tatooine. Different circumstances, though. He and Yoda had fought and they lost. Kenobi was hiding from the Jedi purges, in a Galaxy overrun by a dictatorial state, while waiting for Luke to grow up.)

 

BTW, were we told why Leia wasn't trained in the ways of the Force? ROTJ made a big thing out of her having the potential too...

[Eauxps I. Fourgott 81]

In other news, I didn't like how Han and Luke went nowhere in the last 30 years.

 

Han, after the character growth from the selfish smuggler with debtors after him to General Solo, the hero, is back to being an unimportant smuggler with debts. I get it, his son is at least part of the reason, but it's still character regression. It's not satisfying when the accomplishments of one movie are erased offscreen before the next one.

 

Then there's Luke. At the end of ROTJ, Luke has come into his own, he overcame the darkness in his father's heart and became a Jedi himself. The Republic is triumphant, the possibilities are endless. Fast toward 30 years and Luke's life accomplishment after the second Death Star is a few dead apprentices and one Dark Jedi. Since then he's just been sitting on ass. Seriously? Every time you see someone killed by Kylo or the Stormtroopers, remember that, at that precise time, there's a Jedi Knight sitting on a rock somewhere, doing nothing to protect them. Is this what Yoda and Kenobi trained him for? It just makes me want to re-read Timothy Zahn's trilogy. Sure, the Expanded Universe has its problems, but Luke wasting his life is not one of them.

 

I would beg to differ on Han. I really can't see the Han Solo from the beginning of A New Hope doing what he did to lead to his death. He might have been spending most of his time smuggling, but he did go with the plan to save Rey, and then to try to destroy Starkiller Base, and he tried to turn his son back, which cost him his life. I would say that those are the marks of a still-heroic character.

 

Meanwhile, with Luke, I think his self-imposed exile is reasonable enough. He had spent who knows how much effort trying to rebuild the Jedi Order, only for it all to be destroyed by one of his trainees. Moreover, I believe the case is that he blamed himself for what went wrong. I would want to just run away and hide after something like that happened, and he also probably thought that it was the safest thing to do for the galaxy, as that way he couldn't cause any more destruction like that.

[Doctor Evil 51]

So it just passed avatar is #1 grossing film in America of all time http://www.avclub.com/article/force-awakens-now-officially-no-1-movie-all-time-u-230344?utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=SocialMarketing&utm_campaign=Default%3A1%3ADefault

 

Regardless of what you thought, a lot of people love it apparently, a lot of people I know are going to see it multiple times

[Haveayap 127]

So it just passed avatar is #1 grossing film in America of all time http://www.avclub.com/article/force-awakens-now-officially-no-1-movie-all-time-u-230344?utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=SocialMarketing&utm_campaign=Default%3A1%3ADefault

 

Regardless of what you thought, a lot of people love it apparently, a lot of people I know are going to see it multiple times

I have seen it 2 times in cinema, its a good film, but it is held back by a few of its issues

[Doctor Evil 51]

Just saw this and lol'd

 

 

TR-8R is apparently the best new character of the film, he's even a meme. Love it

[Eauxps I. Fourgott 81]

So another thought that occurred to me is, how exactly did Anakin end up bringing balance to the force at the end of Ep. VI? I know he killed the Emperor and ended the war and so on, but just thirty years later, the force seems to be rather unbalanced to me. Kinda makes the whole prophecy thing a bit pointless.

 

On a different note, did it occur to anybody else that when Ren said that he had killed Ben Solo, the producers were retroactively justifying Obi-Wan's "certain point of view" from the OT?

[milestails 264]

So what do you all think of Rey being the granddaughter of Obi-Wan Kenobi?

 

http://www.businessinsider.com/rey-in-star-wars-obi-wan-kenobi-2016-1

[Haveayap 127]

So what do you all think of Rey being the granddaughter of Obi-Wan Kenobi?

 

http://www.businessinsider.com/rey-in-star-wars-obi-wan-kenobi-2016-1

I honestly think Rey being Obi-wans grand-daughter damages the character that has been developed... He may have loved that mando chick (who died during the clone wars), but he always showed restraint and IDT he would risk his duties for the sake of love like Anakin did. I honestly hope Rey is more of a descendant of some old jedi or sith rather than being directly connected to the main characters (Maybe a descendant of Kanan, because their still has to be a connection made between Rebels and the new trilogy, especially considering the several meetings Filoni and JJ have had over the last few years which suggests they are trying to keep something between the movie and show inline).

 

Also, Anakin has actually brought balance to the force. Both Snoke and Kylo are not true sith (which has been 100% confirmed) and Snoke has actually picked Kylo as an apprentice because he believes Kylo's balance of light and dark side could make him very powerful. You could argue that Snoke is the sith's equivalent to a Grey jedi, in that who chooses the dark side over the light, yet he believes in a sense of balance

[Hassat Hunter 571]

Love lead Anakin to the Dark Side... yeah, LET'S MAKE BABIES.

That would be... very stupid.

 

So it just passed avatar is #1 grossing film in America of all time http://www.avclub.com/article/force-awakens-now-officially-no-1-movie-all-time-u-230344?utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=SocialMarketing&utm_campaign=Default%3A1%3ADefault

 

Regardless of what you thought, a lot of people love it apparently, a lot of people I know are going to see it multiple times

Or are just interested. I watched Indiana Jones IV in the cinema too, since I loved the first 3. It was horrible, probably one of the worst movies ever...

[Doctor Evil 51]

Love lead Anakin to the Dark Side... yeah, LET'S MAKE BABIES.

That would be... very stupid.

 

No, fear of losing padme lead to the dark side. Very different thing. Guess Leia is on the dark side then since she loved Han.

 

Obi-Wan was quite different in his padawan days, and a bit unorthodox. I wouldn't put it out of his capabilities to be more than close with women, say Satine.

 

Or are just interested. I watched Indiana Jones IV in the cinema too, since I loved the first 3. It was horrible, probably one of the worst movies ever...

 

Cool story, but if it was bad then people wouldn't be going back to re-watch it. People knew TPM and KoCS was garbage after their first viewing, and if they aren't thinking TFA is bad now, then it's actually good. If it takes 3 viewing just to pique your interest, then you have problems.

 

Sorry to burst your bubble, but a lot of people genuinely like the movie because its a good movie

[Hassat Hunter 571]

It sure worked out VERY WELL for Han and their son...

 

Oh, wait.

 

Are you intentionally trying to sabotage your point?