this post was submitted on 05 May 2024
317 points (91.8% liked)
Movies and TV Shows
2135 readers
32 users here now
This is a community for entertainment industry news and general discussion about movies and TV shows.
Rules:
- Keep discussion civil and on topic.
- Please do not link to pirated content.
- No spoilers in the title of submissions. And please use spoiler MarkDown in the body of discussions. This is a courtesy to other users.
- Comments solely criticizing headlines and/or journalism will be removed for being off-topic.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
that story got told, over 40 years ago, by the first three star wars films
trying to continue to tell the same story over and over—trying to continue feeding the same meat into the same grinder—is what gave us episodes 7-9, and to a lesser extent 1-3
but there's still plenty of life in the world building and universe those films created
have you watched andor?
Hey, 8 tried to tell a different story. It's a story about how the legend of "Luke Skywalker" is overblown and doesn't do justice to the man himself or to anyone around him. It's a story about how war has a big negative effect on the rest of the world, even places far away from the war. It's a story about how sometimes the world doesn't work the way myths do, with awesome magic powers and heroic sacrifices. It's a story about how everyone is important, and the "great man" idea of history is false. Those are stories that Star Wars hasn't told before.
8 redeemed the mistakes of 5 and fixed Star Wars.
if it was a standalone movie, sure
but it wasn't a standalone movie
it was a sequel to a movie and basically just served to undo everything 7 did
why make a trilogy if you're just going to have the first two films cancel out? just make 1 film
Name one thing 8 undid from 7.
snoke as the overarching villain
wow that was difficult
So, you also maintain that 6 undid 5 by killing off the Emperor, right?
setting up a character to serve as a villain for three films then killing them off partway through the second is very clearly different than setting up a character to server as a villain for three films then killing them off at the end of the third film
by the logic you seem to be using, 9 also didn't undo anything 8 did, which is patently absurd
Snoke wasn't set up to serve as villain for three films. He was set up to serve for two films, same as the emperor. You're just salty that your fantheory didn't come true.
Well it didn't "undo" anything in 8, it just undercut and betrayed its core themes. That doesn't erase 8, it just spits in 8's face.
It's impossible for 8 to have undercut 7's core themes, because 7 doesn't have any.
if for some reason you believe it's impossible for a film to retcon things, why not just save us both some time by opening with that, rather than having this pointless little back and forth?
it's a really weird time to argue for death of the author when we're talking more or less specifically about directorial intent and we have the interviews from people involved
it's also kind of weird to argue for death of the author while also insisting the emperor was only established in 5, when he's mentioned multiple times in 4
i'm not sure i'm the salty one here
8 didn't do any retcons. A retcon would be "actually Snoke isn't the main villain, he's just a clone created by Palpatine." 8 was perfectly happy to play nice with all the facts established in 7, and then have Ben kill Snoke as the first dramatic climax of the movie. 8 gets to have two dramatic climaxes because Rian Johnson is a brilliant filmmaker.
by the logic you're using, that still wouldn't be a retcon, because it would've been the intention the entire time
i'm also stunned you think anything about "he turns the lightsaber to face his TRUE ENEMY" was well handled