The Force Awakens - spoiler thread

[Tony Perkis]

You could have said the same thing about The Phantom Menace after its opening weekend. Just sayin'.

Not really. Even in 1999, the Phantom Menace had a significantly inferior RT score and average rating than TFA.

 

[flynnibus]

How did we get to this point in 30 years? How did Luke, Han and Leia allow this to happen? From what we know, this new predicament is all their fault. If they had done a better job raising/training Ben, none of this would have happened. Obviously, there are details yet to be revealed, but it doesn't make a lot of sense that after everything he has been through Luke would just walk off into the desert after his nephew pulled an Anakin Skywalker. And were the leaders of the Rebellion really so inept that they couldn't set up a form of government that would prevent the rise of the First Order?

The plausibility of this doesn't bother me so much. When the rebels 'won' they simply cut off the head of the snake.. and we're talking the entire galaxy here, not just a state or planet even. So there will always be latency and leftovers when major actions happen. So the idea that some militarized group is able to form up from the remnants of the Empire isn't too far fetched for me. The idea that the republic fails in being effective isn't a new idea to have to digest either

I think you point about rehashing is the larger off-putting element... here we go, same #@$, different day.

 

[lebeau]

I think it's an import distinction to make, if just to understand the new sects and groups established between VI and VII.

I don't need to understand the sects and groups between Jedi and TFA. That does not interest me at all unless there are going to be movies where I would need that info.

What we have in the movie that was actually made is the Rebellion 2.0 (led by all the same people who led the first one) against the empire 2.0 (led by characters who are inspired by the original bad guys with an army that wears essentially the same uniform and flies essentially the same space ships).

You're right, they are theories. But Kasdan co-wrote this film, and he has a hand in Episode VIII. I bet Kylo Ren's turn and rise will definitely be expanded upon. I actually think that's one of the few near-guarantees on what the subsequent films will tackle, because that character's development is clearly not complete.

We need backstory on Rey more than anything. While I would appreciate some backstory on Ren, I doubt there is much more left to tell.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I don't see it as the new film discounting what happened in the original trilogy. The original trilogy told the story of the Rebel Alliance vs. the Empire. By the end of the Return of the Jedi, the Empire had been defeated. But just because one evil was eradicated, doesn't mean all evil is gone forever. Every group like that has a band of overzealous and dangerous radicals within its following, and the First Order was born out of the ideals set by the Empire. The Resistance isn't the Rebel Alliance, and the First Order isn't the Empire.

You could argue that the bigger and better Death Star is the product of 30 years of advanced technology.

Lucasfilm confirmed that the expanded universe is no longer canon.

The old stuff is no longer canon, but the new books and comics are part of the canon. I don't know if it has a new title to distinguish from the old stuff.

 

[Tony Perkis]

I don't need to understand the sects and groups between Jedi and TFA. That does not interest me at all unless there are going to be movies where I would need that info.

What we have in the movie that was actually made is the Rebellion 2.0 (led by all the same people who led the first one) against the empire 2.0 (led by characters who are inspired by the original bad guys with an army that wears essentially the same uniform and flies essentially the same space ships).

I'm not sure what the issue is. If it's your criticism about the heroes and villains thematically being similar to that of the original trilogy, that's a valid complaint. It's not one I would make since I didn't mind it, but it's an understandable complaint.

If your issue is the in-universe distinction between the Empire/First Order and the Rebels/Resistance, I think that's an important distinction because it could indicate where philosophies and beliefs align and differ between their OT and TFA counterparts, as well as the pull and importance each respectively have.

We need backstory on Rey more than anything. While I would appreciate some backstory on Ren, I doubt there is much more left to tell.

Given her flashback during the cantina scene, I think there's quite a bit they could do with her backstory. Hell, the film went out of its way to hide any facts about her past.

 

[lebeau]

Not really. Even in 1999, the Phantom Menace had a significantly inferior RT score and average rating than TFA.

Did you really look at the RT score in 1999? Did it have one? RT was launched in 1998 as a hobby. I'm going to need a screenshot from May 1999 before I believe that claim.

 

[Tony Perkis]

Did you really look at the RT score in 1999? Did it have one? RT was launched in 1998 as a hobby. I'm going to need a screenshot from May 1999 before I believe that claim.

The earliest, via Wayback Machine, I could give you is 2004.

 

[lebeau]

I'm not sure what the issue is. If it's your criticism about the heroes and villains thematically being similar to that of the original trilogy, that's a valid complaint. It's not one I would make since I didn't mind it, but it's an understandable complaint.

If your issue is the in-universe distinction between the Empire/First Order and the Rebels/Resistance, I think that's an important distinction because it could indicate where philosophies and beliefs align and differ between their OT and TFA counterparts, as well as the pull and importance each respectively have.

My complaint is two-fold:

1. Too similar as has been touched upon again and again because really, it's undeniable that TFA "borrows" heavily from the previous movies.

2. It's damn depressing to think that nothing Han, Luke and Leia did ultimately mattered. Thirty years later, the situation was the same or worse than it was in the first movie.

Given her flashback during the cantina scene, I think there's quite a bit they could do with her backstory. Hell, the film went out of its way to hide any facts about her past.

Yeah, obviously Rey has a lot of backstory to unload in Episode VIII. I'm cool with that.

 

[wdisney9000]

Finally saw it last night. I avoided the internet for the last few days since I could not see it until Sunday.

My opinion? It was great! I can understand why people feel like it was just a rehashed ANH, but I look at it differently. How? I look at the "rehashing" of ANH as history repeating itself in the story. As much as things change, they stay the same. Even in the Aftermath book they touch on this in terms of how all the "Empires" that rise over the years start off with the intention to make a better Galaxy but ultimately end badly and then another rises and does the same. It could be interpreted as an easy way out for Abrahams to tell the story but I think it serves a good purpose.

Is Kylo a bit of a brat? Yes, but Luke was a bit whiny and immature in ANH yet he grew into a Jedi and I think Kylo will grow into a much more developed character once his training is complete.

 

[flynnibus]

That still stands. Disney and Lucasfilm can take whatever they want from the expanded universe and make it canon in future films, but everything previously established as canon no longer is.

My point is.. your statement is correct... but that point in time is PAST. Disney has been adding canon content outside of the films.. through rebels and other media SINCE absolving themselves of the prior EU.

 

[Tony Perkis]

My point is.. your statement is correct... but that point in time is PAST. Disney has been adding canon content outside of the films.. through rebels and other media SINCE absolving themselves of the prior EU.

It gets confusing. I can't pretend to know much about the series outside of the films.

 

[lebeau]

The earliest, via Wayback Machine, I could give you is 2004.

View attachment 123904

Yeah but that's five years later. The backlash was in full effect by then. Opening weekend, reviews were positive and box office was good. I remember reading a lot of posts from disgruntled fans on AOL. And I'm sure TFA will be better remember than TPM in the long run. But right now everyone is gushing over the new movie and that praise is going to fade once people have watched in on cable in their living room a few times.

 

[Tony Perkis]

2. It's damn depressing to think that nothing Han, Luke and Leia did ultimately mattered. Thirty years later, the situation was the same or worse than it was in the first movie.

That's true with reality though. Evil is never and will never been completely distinguished.

 

[lebeau]

That's true with reality though. Evil is never and will never been completely distinguished.

If they had come up with antagonists who weren't carbon copies of the originals, the effect would have been different.

In the real world, yes Operation Desert Storm failed and we had to do the same thing all over again. But that doesn't mean that's what I want from a Star Wars movie.

 

[Tony Perkis]

Yeah but that's five years later. The backlash was in full effect by then. Opening weekend, reviews were positive and box office was good. I remember reading a lot of posts from disgruntled fans on AOL. And I'm sure TFA will be better remember than TPM in the long run. But right now everyone is gushing over the new movie and that praise is going to fade once people have watched in on cable in their living room a few times.

It was 5 years later, but the rating didn't change much until the film was re-released in 3D years later. Critics didn't amend their original ratings, and I doubt enough new reviews were added to drop the rating 20-30 percentage points between 1999 and 2004.

 

[Tony Perkis]

If they had come up with antagonists who weren't carbon copies of the originals, the effect would have been different.

I don't agree with this. The new characters have quite a bit different characteristics to distinguish themselves from their original counterparts.

In the real world, yes Operation Desert Storm failed and we had to do the same thing all over again. But that doesn't mean that's what I want from a Star Wars movie.

Then there's no point of a new Star Wars film.

 

[wdisney9000]

It's damn depressing to think that nothing Han, Luke and Leia did ultimately mattered. Thirty years later, the situation was the same or worse than it was in the first movie.

This was touched upon in the Aftermath book as well. Even though they defeated the Empire, the Rebel Alliance was not big or strong enough keep the entire galaxy in check and up sprung all the new factions. IMO, it makes sense that this would be a possibility or even more realistic than a fairy tale ending which even if it was, there wouldnt be much to make a new movie about unless we wanted to see Luke and Han chilling on the beach sipping some blue milk.

Granted, Abrahams could have just created a new enemy and/or plot that rose up but thats kinda what Kylo Ren exactly is with more of a link to the original characters. He also would have been accused for simply doing exactly what he did with Star Trek and create a new Universe/reality. Star Trek fans were ticked that he just created an alternate reality. For Star Wars, If Abrahams had gone a completely different direction and didnt tie it all together I think people would have been more upset and blamed him for trying to reinvent the wheel. He was in a tough spot as far as trying to please everyone, which is impossible.

 

[doctornick]

No but as far as I am concerned, that's a distinction without a difference. If it quacks like the empire, it's the empire.

Philosophically, they may be similar, but a significant difference IMHO is that the First Order is not as large or dominant as the Empire -- they seem to be restricted to a remote part of the galaxy and are operating with far less resources. The are more like a terror organization than powerful nation state (to use real world analogies) while the Empire was akin to something like, well, the Roman Empire.

The Resistance seems more similar to the Rebellion, though it appears to be tacitly sanctioned by the New Republic and are not explicitly fugitives. Still, I'm a bit surprised given the circumstances that the Rebellion isn't more strongly equipped and manned.

I don't disagree with the point that the battle lines are similar to the original trilogy, but I think there is enough distinction to allow the conflict to have its own character.

 

[Wendy Pleakley]

In a way, the new movie completely discounts everything that happened in the original trilogy. At the start of TFA, every victory from the original movies has been overturned. Sure, the Empire and Rebellion have new names now. But essentially we're right back where we started with the first movie except things are arguably worse.

That still stands. Disney and Lucasfilm can take whatever they want from the expanded universe and make it canon in future films, but everything previously established as canon no longer is.

The point is that the new EU does explain the new dynamic of the galaxy. From what I've heard there is a new Republic that has largely ignored the relatively small First Order. Leia, not wanting to let them grow in power, leads a Resistance against them (with silent support from the Republic).

The Empire was very much overturned after Jedi, but certainly not overnight. Just like the Empire could never wipe out the Rebellion, nor can the Republic stop any enemy from forming, hence the First Order. No different than the real world, there are always bad guys out there to wage war against.

Only after using Starkiller, wiping out the central government and much of the Republic fleet, do we again find ourselves with a battle between relative equals.

 

[doctornick]

You could have said the same thing about The Phantom Menace after its opening weekend. Just sayin'.

Not really. I know we've already had this discussion before, but while there were hardcore fanboys praising TPM, the movie was widely panned and early. I didn't see the film until about 2 weeks out and I had already heard that the film wasn't very good. The critical response to TPM was far more mixed and negative than it has been to TFA.