The Force Awakens is better than you remember

[ChrisIII]

Yeah, Imperial defectors was a plot point in some old SW stuff too, although not to the extent I think Disney mined it IMO. Even some of the recent Lego stuff too.

Even some familiar movie characters, like Wedge, were retconned to have been former Imperials where they weren't before. While of course Han, Biggs, Madine, Hobbie etc. Imperial past was also old EU canon (Based pretty much on some early story notes that formed some of the old EU's early backbone), I don't think Wedge was at all...

[godisawesome]

I think Finn massively reinforced/resurrected interest in the Defecting Ex-Imperial lead character, and maybe even proved it was viable as lead character in a big project.

Eh, it was a retread of A New Hope nothing original except Finn's story but the rest was a copy and paste. Granted it was a great nostalgia trip but that was its main selling point for me. The next two movies for all their faults were fairly original, well, other than the ultimate big.

…Eh, I got to call bullshit on that comparison - or at least, call it utter bullshit in all manners of substance, and point out TLJ is only “more original” in terms of (appropriately enough, given its themes) insubstantial stuff. TROS still gets more of its original stuff from Abrams basically trying to build something on the graveyard Johnson dug and burned, but it’s still a graveyard.

There’s nothing beneficial to about 90% of TLJ’s “new ideas,” and it went out of its way to be less original or remove originality from the rest of the ST. It’s from the “Why should we give a ****?” school of cynicism, which is why it’s just a shallow as hell commentary on Star Wars.

If TFA is just “ANH, but with a new type of conflict and new characters” (which it is, despite claims otherwise), TLJ is just “ESB, but dumb and cynical.”

TFA introduced characters who were, in comparison to TLJ, much more original - not just Finn, but also Rey, Kylo, Poe and Hux. Rey’s a hardened survivor compared to Luke and Anakin, and her denial and abandonment issues are different to them as well (and even Jyn Erso in Rogue One). Kylo is a Reversed Vader, who’s worse and much more unstable than him. Poe is a shockingly straightforward just Military Fiction hero with a prominence that hasn’t gotten in Star Wars yet. Hux is another Neo Nazi alongside Kylo, but a shockingly quiet and pragmatic one.

The war is different as well; instead of a powerhouse versus scrappy underdogs (OT), or two powerhouses slugging it out (PT), it’s two undersized but effective insurgencies duking it out, with neither of them being a powerhouse. And for the Force story, it’s not Jedi vs Sith, but Jedi vs Some New Dark Side Cult.

That’s all substance which TLJ deliberately retcons, in exchange for… what? Hipster contrariness and white dude privilege?

The Luke story is *closer* to being original (with the wrong character and on the wrong story), but EVERYTHING ELSE in TLJ wants the ST to be more of a copy and paste of the OT, just with an teenager’s idea of darkness.

“Haha! Everyone’s a self-centered prick! That’s more relatable, right? Also, I of course made Skywalker boys the real main characters, but now they’re ‘sympathetic’ because they’re assholes instead of being sympathetic! And I don’t have to use my brain to write this, because Star Wars is stupid! And it’s the Empire vs Rebels again, without any pretending it’s not that or trying to do it well! Whoo-Hoo!… and STOP remembering the characters were written better earlier, damnit! I don’t like complex or good people!”

You want to see someone use cynicism and originality, that’s in Rogue One. TLJ is going “Who gives a ****?” for its cynicism, like Youngbloods or One More Day in Spider-Man; Rogue One actually has some wisdom and experience to impart.

[Bruce Wayne]

You want to see someone use cynicism and originality, that’s in Rogue One. TLJ is going “Who gives a ****?” for its cynicism, like Youngbloods or One More Day in Spider-Man; Rogue One actually has some wisdom and experience to impart.

R1 and TLJ really represents two dueling pov.

R1 and Andor argues that freedom and dignity are values worth fighting for because doing nothing is worse as we see on Narkina, Aldhani and ultimately with the Death Star.

TLJ is more cynical both sidism and whataboutism with it tarring the legacy of Han/Luke/Leia with both the New Republic and all its issues (such as slavery and the plutocracy on Cantgo Bight) and their failures with Kylo Ren. Its message ultimately questions whether it's worth fighting for freedom since the fight in the OT leads into the failures in the Sequel Trilogy. If anything the First Order comes off no better or worse than the New Republic in the movie.

Seems like a lot of EU in turn copies Finn's story. There's a large number of Disney characters in the books, comics, games etc. who are ex-stormtroopers, officers, or TIE pilots.

The ex-stormtrooper turned rebel trope is older than the Disney Sequels. Kyle Katarn from the Lucasart Games is probably the most famous example second to Finn.

[godisawesome]

R1 and TLJ really represents two dueling pov.

R1 and Andor argues that freedom and dignity are values worth fighting for because doing nothing is worse as we see on Narkina, Aldhani and ultimately with the Death Star.

TLJ is more cynical both sidism and whataboutism with it tarring the legacy of Han/Luke/Leia with both the New Republic and all its issues (such as slavery and the plutocracy on Cantgo Bight) and their failures with Kylo Ren. Its message ultimately questions whether it's worth fighting for freedom since the fight in the OT leads into the failures in the Sequel Trilogy. If anything the First Order comes off no better or worse than the New Republic in the movie.

I would add that a weird problem TLJ has going up against Rogue One on the dark, cynical POV on one hand, and going up against TFA in the hope and inspiration level (since TLJ *does* try to be a sort of “optimistically cynical”) - that TLJ is extremely sloppy, lightweight, and almost entirely dependent on an empty emotional appeal for trying to morally equivocate between the heroes and villains.

Like… TLJ is cynical, and is perfectly willing to use retcons, contrivances, and it’s own biases to try and mock conventional heroism, morality, and established heroic characters… but it does so by often going for unimpressive, stupidly written subversions that lack an edge because the film is so myopic.

- Finn, Rose, and Poe’s story depends on going “Ha! You thought the heroes would have to be clever and cunning to save the day, but by writing the story badly enough, I made it so if they just followed the orders from their badly written commanders, they’d win!”

- Luke’s story is dependent on going “Curse me! I pulled a lightsaber on my nephew, who was innocent-ish!…If we ignore that he then immediately killed everyone else in the school, which would probably justify me having a freak out. I also blame the Jedi for allowing Palpatine and Vader to happen!… Even though they oversaw 1,000 years of peace, and this is my excuse for abandoning my sister nad billions of people to die and be enslaved.”

- Rey and Kylo’s story depends on going either “I, Rey, am too naive and foolish to see he’s playing me by standing there being obviously evil and not very deceptive!” or “I, Rey, correctly have empathy for just this one Neo-Nazi School Shooter, because **** everyone else, look at how well his lower lip wobbles when he has self-pity!”, followed by “I, Kylo, am still going to put Rey through torture and violation for my own gain, and am still just a self-centered sociopath, though the writer think that makes me relatable for some reason…”

That’s all insubstantial, and dependent more on moral apathy than actual moral ambiguity.

In contrast, Rogue One and Andor are 100% ready and willing to embrace the darker tactics, thought processes, and motivations of its heroes against the badguys; assassination and sabotage carried out by individuals who have more personal grudges and greed than empathy is part of the story. It also embraces how disappointingly banal and petty villains can be while doing horrible stuff; villains have people killed for career reasons rather than conviction in their cause or psychosis. Your most dedicated heroes are your most unscrupulous and ruthless… but that’s because what’s happening matters, and thus the badguys’ horrors justify the darkness of the story.

But weirdly, even though TFA is explicitly more idealistic and conventional, with Rogue One and Andor’s being designed specifically to contrast with that type of “We’re just applying the morality of Lucas’s OT to this film” ethos of TFA… I’d argue TFA is closer to Rogue One and Andor in attitude and substance than TLJ is. Rogue One/Andor is still contrasting with TFA, have no doubt, but TFA actually also says what’s happening matters, and also has an edge, even if it intentionally doesn’t sharpen it compared to RO/A. Finn and Rey have a lot more traumatic motivations in TFA and suffer more severe consequences, Han’s death has a greater tragic tinge to it, and Kylo being disturbingly pathetic in his evil is actually recognized in TFA; TLJ mostly just says… “Who cares?”

Tragedy, “grey” morality, and ruthlessness are both weirdly more welcome in TFA than in TLJ.

[kcekada]

I saw the first part of the newest trilogy in the theater, but have not seen the final two until today on TNT. I always found the new characters, especially Rey, very appealing. I wasn't crazy about Ben Solo's casting -- and especially his character. But after seeing all three parts, can see why they made his character the way they did. I missed a lot of the finale -- including Leia's death so had to read about what happened online. I'll watch it again the next time it airs. Over all, I liked all three. Wasn't a big fan of the previous cycle showing how Aniken became corrupted.

[Moon Ronin]

My opinion, I see it more the other way around. In the beginning (or new beginning?) I really liked TFA, then after the trilogy was completed and viewing the entire story as a whole I now see it for what it really is. Cinematic salty garbage.

The biggest take way form the movie was not what happened but what will happen next. Which would be an awesome thing and I like many others was excited at the vast possibilities in the galaxy far far away that I've known the majority of my life. Then after watching TLJ with such anticipation and leaving the theater perplexed as to how Ryan Johnson could burn down every thing that TFA set up. Then with some small hope watched TROS with a prayer that this would be course correction and the 2nd act would be an outlier with JJ coming back to finish off the story he started. I'm still waiting to hear back form Disney for a refund on the wasted hours of my life I spent watching their dud of a Star Wars Trilogy

At best TFA is a Fabergé egg. Expensive, pretty, and the appearance of something complex. But, in truth it is completely hallow and fragile. I realized After the trilogy was completed that it's biggest flaw was in the beginning. That Abrams built a house on sand with no foundation, Johnson didn't destroy anything that was set up in TFA becasue nothing was really set up, only the possibility of something maybe set up that could happen, or not. Johnson did what ever he wanted becasue he was given pretty much a clean sand box to play in all thanks to TFA having no real weight in the over all story. TFA had so many open doors of possibility that they totally forgot to build any walls. And that is the problem with the entire new trilogy it is completely meaningless form one move to the next.

The Force Awakens is a badly written over produced New Hope fanfic rewrite with no shape that suffers from most of Abrams projects, so much focus on induvial scenes and very little on story. Its's all filler with no substance.

[Bruce Wayne]

Like… TLJ is cynical, and is perfectly willing to use retcons, contrivances, and it’s own biases to try and mock conventional heroism, morality, and established heroic characters… but it does so by often going for unimpressive, stupidly written subversions that lack an edge because the film is so myopic.

I think the core of TLJ and what Rian Johnson was trying to do was deflate and destroy the myth and aura of heroism in the Star Wars Saga. It's epitomized by what he does with Luke. But it's also with Finn who's turned into a joke for most of TLJ or Poe who's turned into a irresponsible hot head and mutineer. Arguably it's the same with Rey and her naivety with Kylo.

The story's meta is very much an old man yelling at kids that real heroe don't exist. There was a podcast Johnson did after TLJ where he says the scenes of Luke on Crait is basically Luke trying to live up to what's he not (a hero). I think what he said in the podcast helped me understand somewhat what's he was trying to do: to basically kill the hero mystique that was at the center of SW. But unfortunately (imo) he did irreparable damage to the franchise. The myth/archetype of the hero in the Star Wars franchise is more important than all the aesthetics includings the aliens, spaceships, robots and even the weird hokey mystic powers. Rian Johnson was out to break the franchise and he was almost successful at it.

TLJ mostly just says… “Who cares?”

I think that's another problem TLJ. It doesn't sell the audience on why the characters fight/sacrifice (for freedom, or to overthrow tyranny). Instead the movie bends over backwards to show the Republic/Resistance in the worst light and that really helps undermine the conflict in the Sequel Trilogy. We are
a) shown Canto Bight which sells us on the rot within the Republic
b) we have a character that literally is about how both sides are untrusty
c) the hero of the resistance is Holdo who doesn't tell anyone her plan and sends everyone down to Crait where most of the Resistance gets wiped out

Given what the audience sees and the paper thin movie doesn't deliver any counterweight to many of these points, it leaves the audience wondering if the Resistance is even worth it and the movie doesn't tell/show you on the necessity of freedom/hope either via the characters telling you about it (like Jyn and Nemik in R1/Andor) or by showing you via contrast on how it sucks to live under tyranny (the Death Star/SKB, ISB, Narkina, etc).

I think leading back to it TFA clearly shares a similar worldview of freedom vs tyranny that's even embodied with Finn's rebellion as a stormtrooper. While TLJ tries to be more a contrarian movie that tries to sell you on the idea that either both sides are bad or it's not worth it and instead much of the movie comes off as a meaningless detour because of this. It doesn't help that the character work for TLJ isn't very good. Poe learning to be more respectful of the chain of command is just not an interesting place to take the character and for Finn it's a reaffirmation of his arc in TFA.

At best TFA is a Fabergé egg. Expensive, pretty, and the appearance of something complex. But, in truth it is completely hallow and fragile. I realized After the trilogy was completed that it's biggest flaw was in the beginning. That Abrams built a house on sand with no foundation, Johnson didn't destroy anything that was set up in TFA becasue nothing was really set up, only the possibility of something maybe set up that could happen, or not.

Disagree, TFA had very clear and novel narrative conflicts that Rian Johnson flat out ignored because his sort of cynical filmmaking isn't suitable towards exploring them:

For example:
-Rey vs Kylo embodying the struggle for the legacy of Anakin/Vader whether to become the good man that was a Jedi with Rey coming in possession of his lightsaber and embarking on the hero's journey or to "finish what Vader started" with Kylo carrying both the biological (as his grandson) and spiritual legacy of Vader via his burnt out helmet.
-Freedom vs Slavey in the person of Finn who goes from a brainwashed stormtrooper who slowly turns away from the FO and realize that he has to take a stand and not run away like he wants to.

Rian Johnson basically throws these arcs into the dumpster because he doesn't know what to do with them.

[godisawesome]

My opinion, I see it more the other way around. In the beginning (or new beginning?) I really liked TFA, then after the trilogy was completed and viewing the entire story as a whole I now see it for what it really is. Cinematic salty garbage.

The biggest take way form the movie was not what happened but what will happen next. Which would be an awesome thing and I like many others was excited at the vast possibilities in the galaxy far far away that I've known the majority of my life. Then after watching TLJ with such anticipation and leaving the theater perplexed as to how Ryan Johnson could burn down every thing that TFA set up. Then with some small hope watched TROS with a prayer that this would be course correction and the 2nd act would be an outlier with JJ coming back to finish off the story he started. I'm still waiting to hear back form Disney for a refund on the wasted hours of my life I spent watching their dud of a Star Wars Trilogy

At best TFA is a Fabergé egg. Expensive, pretty, and the appearance of something complex. But, in truth it is completely hallow and fragile. I realized After the trilogy was completed that it's biggest flaw was in the beginning. That Abrams built a house on sand with no foundation, Johnson didn't destroy anything that was set up in TFA becasue nothing was really set up, only the possibility of something maybe set up that could happen, or not. Johnson did what ever he wanted becasue he was given pretty much a clean sand box to play in all thanks to TFA having no real weight in the over all story. TFA had so many open doors of possibility that they totally forgot to build any walls. And that is the problem with the entire new trilogy it is completely meaningless form one move to the next.

The Force Awakens is a badly written over produced New Hope fanfic rewrite with no shape that suffers from most of Abrams projects, so much focus on induvial scenes and very little on story. Its's all filler with no substance.

My one big objection to that is that I think the argument is ultimately nonsense when it comes to characters - which to me are generally the most important components of a Star Wars property.

I can see that the larger conflict and especially the connections to the earlier films are way to predicated on the next film - and why I’ll argue that the ease of obvious connections and answers to give puts more onus on the successor than the starter, I also can’t pretend that there wasn’t a massive vulnerability to them.

…But not with the actual characters.

And that’s probably Lawrence Kasdan’s work, and not Abrams.

Kylo in TFA was maybe the best hateable villain in the Disney Era…until TLJ fucked it up. Rey’s equal to Jyn Erso, Din Djarin, and the other main protagonists when it comes to her first appearance… until TLJ fucked it up.

And Finn’s fucking awesome, and still has the best single film arc and story in the films… until TLJ fucked it up.

The characters were set-up, likely because Lawrence Kasdan’s whole schtick is character creation and cast structure; Abrams *does* have skills at cast selection and chemistry, but Kasdan has always excelled at making ensemble pieces rock from a strong center to a strong periphery.

So it’s nonsense to argue that there was nothing set-up, and the characters were still strong… but yeah, I can’t pretend that the rest of the film wasn’t intentionally left at the mercy of LFL.

[j9ac9k]

I never thought it was bad in the first place. Not great, but I enjoyed it more than "Phantom Menace,"

[Celgress]

I never thought it was bad in the first place. Not great, but I enjoyed it more than "Phantom Menace,"

I'd rate every movie in the New Trilogy above Attack of the Clones and the Phantom Menace. These two movies are trash-tier, IMHO.

My List

Return of the Jedi
The Empire Strikes Back
A New Hope
Revenge of the Sith
Rogue One
The Force Awakens
Rise of Skywalker
The Last Jedi
Solo
The Phantom Menace
Attack of the Clones