We saw a Star War! Last Jedi spoiler thread

[Ovinomancer]

A part of all of this which is silly is keeping the fleet all in one place. Regardless, that makes the destruction of SKB not a victory at all. Locally it was a win, but overall it was a failure as SKB had achieved one of it’s primary objectives.

Sure, we can debate the merits of keeping your main deterrent force in one place -- recalling that up until SKB fired, there was no threat that could possibly overwhelm that concentrated fleet, and it was it's existence and ability to respond that was the threat, a threat that would be blunted if it were dispersed. But, sure, that can be debated.

Secondly, any time you consider removing the enemy's ability to obliterate entire systems a 'local' victory, I'm not sure we're having the same discussion. So long as SKB existed, fleets were meaningless, resistance was meaningless. Any troublesome spot could be destroyed without notice or ability to resist. The removal of SKB is exactly what allows any attempted resistance to exist.

I’m thinking the failure to present the scope of the failure is a reason for discontent with the new movie.

There we agree. My primary issue with the new movies is the lack of a sense of scale.

Also, a consistence problem: A demilitarized New Republic wouldn’t be a driver of military sales as presented in LJ.

Thx!
TomB

You've almost grasped it: if the current customer base isn't paying the bills, what is a purveyor of goods to do? Find new customers! They go and encourage the old customers that your goods are needed (gotta keep up with the [-]Nazis[/-] Joneses), and business booms! Literally.

 

[tomBitonti]

Sure, we can debate the merits of keeping your main deterrent force in one place -- recalling that up until SKB fired, there was no threat that could possibly overwhelm that concentrated fleet, and it was it's existence and ability to respond that was the threat, a threat that would be blunted if it were dispersed. But, sure, that can be debated.

Secondly, any time you consider removing the enemy's ability to obliterate entire systems a 'local' victory, I'm not sure we're having the same discussion. So long as SKB existed, fleets were meaningless, resistance was meaningless. Any troublesome spot could be destroyed without notice or ability to resist. The removal of SKB is exactly what allows any attempted resistance to exist.


There we agree. My primary issue with the new movies is the lack of a sense of scale.


You've almost grasped it: if the current customer base isn't paying the bills, what is a purveyor of goods to do? Find new customers! They go and encourage the old customers that your goods are needed (gotta keep up with the [-]Nazis[/-] Joneses), and business booms! Literally.

That SKB can be re-used is a niceness, but unnecessary to the First Order. That is shown by the events of LJ. Only the first salvo needed to work.

Thx!
TomB

 

[Ovinomancer]

You said that his definition of character development is different than what most people think it is. Which is not only wrong but an appeal to a majority opinion.

Nope. I said that the definition being used by the poster is vastly different from what everyone else uses. The gist of that statement was that character development has an established definition, and that the poster wasn't using it.

We actually can deny their arcs exist because we are asked in this movie to follow the Hero's Journey of Rey, Ben and Luke but without the middle part of the adventure. Simply touching on or glossing over important events in a character's experience is not real development. All good stories have at their core heroes which undergo real transformation because of real life-threatening (this can be emotionally or psychologically life-threatening) events.

Strong quibbles about your dismissing entire parts of the movie as not existing, yes, you can ignore lots of parts and still meet the definition of character development. Again, you may not like that development, but denying that things happened is just sillytimes.

This just does not happen in The Last Jedi. The only event which comes close is Snoke's confrontation with Rey and Ben. And even then the movie just speeds past it like it wasn't important.

Let's point out an undeniable moment of character development: at the beginning of the movie, Luke had cut himself off from the force and hidden away from the galaxy. At the end of the movie, Luke is no longer cut off from the force and has reintroduced himself to the galaxy. That's character development right there. It's even further reinforced by WHY Luke does these things, and the fact that he apologized to Kylo for failing Kylo, but still stands against him. It's a massive character arc, and they even brought in Yoda to punch you in the face with it.

Denying it exists, or just denying that it was character development, just shows that you don't have any idea what character development actually means. Disliking it, as many posters have eloquently done is perfectly fine, denying it is ridiculous (Ranger Wickets does a great job of criticizing this arc without denying it, even though I disagree with his criticism it's at least well founded).

The amount and quality of character development in this movie is on par with the development of Optimus Prime in the Transformers movies. Yeah, he changes a bit and is roughed up here and there but there's no great transformation in his character. No pun intended.

You have a valid point of criticism in the quality department, but not in the quantity one.

And, if you equate character development with having to have a massive transformation, then apparently only Vader in the original trilogy qualifies? Let's explore a moment, pick a movie of the original 3, pick a main character in that movie that isn't Vader in RotJ, and tell me what you think their development is in that movie. Whatever you pick, it's at least as great a development as what happens in this movie. And my favorite would be Han in ANH - from selfish scumbag to selfless hero. Rey, Luke, and Finn all move as much. Luke gets a even more awesome payoff scene, Rey gets a few pretty awesome payoff scenes, and, sadly, Finn doesn't get as awesome a payoff scene.

I'll allow your appeal to the masses if I'm allowed an appeal to authority.

Well, there was no appeal to the masses, but go ahead, I'm interested.

I've read close to two dozen of the positive critiques from the top critics compiled on Rottentomatoes. Those critics, when illuminating the cons of the movie, cite the lack of character development and pacing problems as their biggest dislikes. While it's unfair to say that there's no character development, you really have to go looking for it like people went looking for plot and meaning in Prometheus.

Okay, I just read six, and all of them praised the characters as the high point of the movie. You're going to have to provide some evidence to back up your claims, because I'm not seeing it and I'm not going to go digging through a bunch of reviews to find the nuggets you've seized upon. Like, in the six reviews I read, every one of them mentioned the characters journeys and that the depth of the realization of the characters was one of the strongest parts of the film.

Most of them did list the diversion to Canto Bight as a weak point, however, and I can't really disagree, even though in the full context of the movie it's much more understandable, Rian doesn't give you any of those indications during the excursion, so at the time it feels disconnected.

Enjoy the extra armrest.[/QUOTE]

 

[Water Bob]

I wonder why Luke didn't feel through the Force the way Kenobi did when Alderaan was destroyed.

...Han's death.

...the destruction of the Hosnian system, capital of the New Republic.

...the destruction of an entire planet in the form of Starkiller base.

...Leia's near-death.

 

[Ovinomancer]

That SKB can be re-used is a niceness, but unnecessary to the First Order. That is shown by the events of LJ. Only the first salvo needed to work.

Thx!
TomB

So, when Corellia spins up building warships, and it a tough nut to crack, causing the 1st Order to divert lots of resources to it, you're saying that having the ability to just threaten to end Corellia is somehow unimportant?

Dude, we really need to have a talk about how the Cold War developed based on the existence of world ending weapons, and how it would have been a drastically different world if only the US (or Russia) had nukes. SKB is the ultimate nuke, solely owned by the 1st Order, and they've shown the willingness to use it. It's existence would massively distort the political picture of the galaxy, much less the military one.

Example:
The Resistance thwarts the 1st Order in, let's say, Duro. The 1st Order obliterates Duro with SKB for daring to support Resistance operations (regardless of whether or not they did -- that point is irrelevant). Who, now, it ever going to support any resistance to the 1st Order when the result is immediate retaliation by destroying the entire system. You'd need to do that once, or really just threaten to do it once after the destruction of the New Republic, and the systems themselves would strangle any resistance or Resistance.

 

[Ovinomancer]

I wonder why Luke didn't feel through the Force the way Kenobi did when Alderaan was destroyed.

...Han's death.

He cut himself off from the Force.

...the destruction of the Hosnian system, capital of the New Republic.

He cut himself off from the Force.

...the destruction of an entire planet in the form of Starkiller base.

He cut himself off from the Force.

...Leia's near-death.

He cut himself off from the Force.

 

[Water Bob]

Of course! (Slaps head).

Makes sense.

 

[tomBitonti]

So, when Corellia spins up building warships, and it a tough nut to crack, causing the 1st Order to divert lots of resources to it, you're saying that having the ability to just threaten to end Corellia is somehow unimportant?

Dude, we really need to have a talk about how the Cold War developed based on the existence of world ending weapons, and how it would have been a drastically different world if only the US (or Russia) had nukes. SKB is the ultimate nuke, solely owned by the 1st Order, and they've shown the willingness to use it. It's existence would massively distort the political picture of the galaxy, much less the military one.

Example:
The Resistance thwarts the 1st Order in, let's say, Duro. The 1st Order obliterates Duro with SKB for daring to support Resistance operations (regardless of whether or not they did -- that point is irrelevant). Who, now, it ever going to support any resistance to the 1st Order when the result is immediate retaliation by destroying the entire system. You'd need to do that once, or really just threaten to do it once after the destruction of the New Republic, and the systems themselves would strangle any resistance or Resistance.

Sure, the destruction of SKB was important, just not enough for the New Republic to call the outcome a victory. The New Republic was still crippled.

What was left was mopping up the remaining NR leadership and forces. In the end of LJ the NR makes off with less than they might have if they had just scattered in the beginning. Which makes the NR loss in LJ almost complete. The only saving grace is that they are re-united with the Force. The attack by SKB effectuated the result of LJ.

Thx!
TomB

 

[Ovinomancer]

Sure, the destruction of SKB was important, just not enough for the New Republic to call the outcome a victory. The New Republic was still crippled.

You're confusing a victory with winning the war. The New Republic was crippled by the initial SKB attack, yes, and they are clearly losing (if not outright lost) the war at this point, but the destruction of SKB was a clear and definitive victory.

What was left was mopping up the remaining NR leadership and forces. In the end of LJ the NR makes off with less than they might have if they had just scattered in the beginning. Which makes the NR loss in LJ almost complete. The only saving grace is that they are re-united with the Force. The attack by SKB effectuated the result of LJ.

Thx!
TomB

Yes, clearly the Resistance is crippled and the New Republic is nearly lost. That doesn't change the fact that the removal of SKB was a major victory. History is full of major victories in battles where the war is still being lost. Had the Resistance NOT destroyed SKB, there wouldn't even be a shred of hope, regardless of the Force. One side had nukes and the other doesn't. There's only one winner there. Now, neither side has nukes, but one side still has the bigger army. There's at least a chance there.

 

[tomBitonti]

You're confusing a victory with winning the war. The New Republic was crippled by the initial SKB attack, yes, and they are clearly losing (if not outright lost) the war at this point, but the destruction of SKB was a clear and definitive victory.

Yes, clearly the Resistance is crippled and the New Republic is nearly lost. That doesn't change the fact that the removal of SKB was a major victory. History is full of major victories in battles where the war is still being lost. Had the Resistance NOT destroyed SKB, there wouldn't even be a shred of hope, regardless of the Force. One side had nukes and the other doesn't. There's only one winner there. Now, neither side has nukes, but one side still has the bigger army. There's at least a chance there.

I’ll agree to all of that. I still think it all just confuses the narrative, in that even thought it is a substantial victory (and we feel that NR “won” at the end of FA), the NR really had only changed an overwhelming defeat to a defeat. Then in LJ, the NR situation doesn’t convey well. But I thing we agree there.

Pulling together the overall arc, it rather seems that either the NR was negligent, or the galaxy as a whole didn’t sufficiently care. The first undercuts the heroic arcs of the major characters of movies IV-VI, while the second makes for a meh story: why should I care about a galaxy that ignores a clear threat?

Thx!
TomB