Battle in the Throne Room

in some cases, what we felt was outrage; and in some cases we're still feeling it (i know i am!) ~ hahahahaha

 

1. I see no reason to think that authors can include illogical things just because it's a space fantasy movie and that it can serve as excuse to "explain" all illogical fallacies. If Kylo fell to the lava lake at the beginning of the movie and emerge from another lava lake on another planet at the end of the movie unscratched (or... unburned) just to suddenly stab Snoke for example - would it be ok with you? Because, you know, it's "space fantasy after all, and it doesn't have to adhere to someone's personal need for transparent logic". And if it would make you feel bad and criticize the movie - then do you have a "logicalmeter" which helps you track what's illogical or plain stupid enough to make you dislike it and what's an acceptable level of lack of logic/realism/stupidity?

2. I didn't say this. I said that being a dumb hero (and by "hero" I mean one of the main characters, not morality) is a possibility here, but it's not a good option either - it's as bad a bad script writing. Maybe even worse - because making him dumb would be intentional, while bad script writing is usually not intentional (thus more easily to forgive).


Again - do you like the Superman Leia? Do you think it's logical and realistic?

 

Is Star Wars realistic from the get go?

 

i hate to break it to you, but Ben Solo/Kylo Ren: he's deliberately written as dumb. he continually makes dumb decisions. TFA is just one dumb decision after another with him and in TLJ he keeps right on that trend. when you misapprehend a character this deeply, again, i don't even know what to say.

you want to call that bad writing, but that's who the character is.
you may not like him, but that's like saying: gee, the Evil Queem should be less evil. it's such bad writing that she's so evil.
except you're saying: gee, the blighted prince is dumb; he should be smart!
why? why should he be what you want and not what the creators created? tell me where the logic in that is.

i don't care about the Leia scene. it doesn't bother me. it's the Force and it's magical and there are no rules for it.
for me, it's the least interesting thing about Star Wars, frankly.

just to prove i'm capable of critiquing bad choices in TLJ, here's one: either by Johnson's direction or actor Domhnall Gleeson:

• Hux spends the whole movie chewing scenery like an angry goat. this is actually a poor continuity from the character that was introduced in TFA. yes, maybe Hux has gotten a little unhinged since Starkiller went kablooey, but i believe the direction they took him was entirely too far, too silly. to me, that's a far more egregious fault with the movie than explaining away deliberately inexplicable space magic.

look, you can continue to demand logic from a movie that intentionally does not provide it, but the irony of that is that it's a completely illogical demand on your part.

 

Misapprehend? That assumes I got it wrong and you - right. Again - this is just an assumption, can be right or wrong. I don't think Kylo is dumb. He's made wrong decisions, but they were not essentially dumb. He learnt Rey has the map to Skywalker and took her with him (and was not responsible for her escape). His failure to extract the info from her was not dumb either, because Rey turned out to be strong enough. He killed Han because he thought it's the thing he has to do. He attacked Finn because he was blinded by his ego, he ordered to shoot at Luke because he wanted him dead as soon as possible and that order was the best way to make it happen, he landed and went to confront Luke because when barrage failed he had to do it himself etc. It's a movie - so his attempts had to fail so that good heroes can win, but I don't think he's dumb. Hux was dumb because script writers could afford him being dumb, he's just a secondary character. Kylo is more misguided than dumb in my opinion.

No - that's only who you think the character is.

This "logic" is called good writing. With credible characters, their actions, setting etc. And if character is doing something against himself and his created image- it should be explained why it happened that way. If someone is written as a pure good character and suddenly stabs a kid in the stomach at the end of the movie - then it should be explained why he acted so out of character. If a movie does something like that - first create the rules or carefully build the character and then break them without explanation - then there's something wrong with the narrative. Gandalf suddenly stabing Frodo and then going back to his normal self would be extremely confusing. Just as powerful Force user who suddenly forget how to use the Force just so he could entertain viewers with a visually stunning fight.

That's very convienient for you. I, on the other hand, find it very annoying. Totally unrealistic, plain dumb. And no "explanation" is going to change that, no "it's art", "it's space fantasy", "she just focused" etc.

The difference between me and some other fans is that Leia scene is usually met with unfavorable opinions so no one strongly defends it. Throne room fight is another thing - because it's visually more entertaining and gives great feels. And that's why people tend to turn the blind eye and fiercely defend it even it's about the same illogical as Superman Leia. In short - "I loved it, so I won't admit it's badly written".

It just proves you're capable of criticizing something you spotted, but it doesn't prove you can spot all things worth criticizing. Someone may criticize throne room fight for its lack of SW realism but see nothing wrong with Leia scene. It's great that you're not a fanatic and can admit TLJ has some element written badly. It's just that you chose what badly written parts you want to criticize and what badly written parts - do not.

I fail to see why I should agree that SW "intentionally does not provide logic". There are rules of the SW universe (sound in space, existence of Force, hyperspace etc) and almost always characters' actions are or can be justified. Kylo's decision to NOT use the Force can't, though some of you persistently tried ('Force armor", inability to concentrate, emotional breakdown etc). All of them has been disproved, except that he didn't want to use it, but I still find it either dumb or very unlikely.

I'm not demanding logic/realism on every level - I'm not demanding an explanation how hyperspace works, or how the Force works, or why Elves have pointy ears etc. Bt sometimes there's something so odd and out of character that it's striking. And if there's no credible explanation - I tend to suspect bad writing. Expecially when there are reasons to suspect bad writing - mentioned by me earlier need to nerf the Kylo so that (elite!) enemies could be as worthy opponents as the audience expect. Kylo cutting them down in seconds would make these "elite" guys looks not so much elite. So their image had to be protected by nerfing Kylo's figthing skills in the most obvious way - "sorry, but for next 10 minutes NO FORCE ALLOWED".

 

actually, you mean no available.
and at least you admit your bias in assuming bad writing rather than bothering to dig more deeply.

look, i don't say (and never did) that the throne room scene isn't littered with things to nitpick.
the whole movie is. all movies are.
but what is the point of that? just to be chronically dissatisfied?

sorry it doesn't meet your expectations ~ that still doesn't make it an illogical film or badly written.
the absence of answers is merely the absence of answers.
which you're still insisting that it provide instead of engaging your own imagination.

this is the fundamental difference between the way you watch the film and the way i do.
i expect to have to engage in the process. for whatever reason, you don't.

oh well?

 

Admit? Where? Because I really thought it over again and again and that's just the conclusion - the effect of "digging more deeply" and finding no good anwser. It still may be there - but so far digging returned no good in-universe explanation why Kylo did what he did. The "outside the universe" explanation just seems much more likely.

And what's the point of admitting the Earth is circling the Sun?

If something is true, then there's just admitting it's true. NO real point of doing that, it's just how it is. All we can do is just to admit it, instead of figthing it because it doesn't fit our worldview. I'm not chronically dissatisfied, but I also can't turn the blind eye when facing the illogical fallacies and claim they're not there. Sometimes it ruins the entire experience if their amount is just too high (like in the case of "Independence day") or they're incredibly stupid and sometimes it's "nah, ok" (there's also a lot of very good movies, so no "dissatisfaction" there). About the throne room fight I have mixed feelings because while I enjoy it visually I can't stop thinking it's still unrealistic, of course within the SW universe.

Except when the movie is badly written and I'm just able to see it and admit it. Not everyone can, especally both these things and when it comes to the movie they love. Because that it's indeed badly written is still a possibility which you cannot reject.

And if in Ep. IX Kylo turns into unicorn princess without an explanation - it's perfectly fine, because it would be "insanely artistic", it's a space fantasy after all and, of course, the movie doesn't have to provide answers, one need to use his imagination and be engaged a bit, not a mindless drone expecting all answers to be just presented to him. So don't you ever dare to criticize it, especially if it was done with a stunning choreography and flashing visual effects.

You're still insisting that what you wrote is an answer to all problems and can "repair" any illogical situations. While I believe that you truly believe in it - I hope this exaggerated example above shows you that it's not true. Such scene would be a disaster and no explanation presented here could undo the damage. And if your explanation fails to work there - it also fails to work in any other case - including the illogical throne room fight.

I don't think you have enough data to make such claims. The whole time I spent finding an answer to the "WHY HE NO USE DA FORCE!?" question proves I am quite engaged in the process of understanting motives behind that scene. Just because I reached a different conclusion than you doesn't mean that you "are engaged" and I'm not.

Besides, this discussion reminds me of the other one I had here - back when people were still claiming Snoke was Plagueis, he wasn't really dead, he faked his death, he's going to return etc. I was just calmly pointing out that what they believe in doesn't seem to be true, while they fiercely defended that Snoke is Plagueis and he's not dead at all. Well, they are free to believe in whatever they want, I respect that. I have my own opinion, I know how to defend it (I have an opinion because I have arguments which support it, without them I would have a different opinion) and I won't hesitate to present it.

 

Yes, I've mentioned this over and over. For whatever reason it's not enough to simply dislike the film or a scene. Nope, it's not a matter of taste, but instead there has to be something objectively wrong with the film. Obviously this is just silly in this case. Hate it or love it, The Last Jedi is a well constructed film. The Shape of Water is a best picture winner that's beautiful, but I hated it. It's a matter of taste.

 

Honestly, you can pretty much sell just about any scenario with good writing.

 

no, it answers it sufficiently for me.
seriously, i don't care what you believe any more than you should care what i believe.
you can dismiss all the potential explanations you want. have at it for whatever that's worth to you! : D

you call it illogical. i say you can't call the lack of an answer illogical.
if we have no answer, how do we know if it's illogical or not?
and frankly, it's immaterial to the narrative, ultimately.
how Ren fights the guard has no impact on the fact that he and Rey win the fight.
it's about as critical to the story as Leia's hairdo.

i (and others) filled in the blanks in our heads because that's part of engaging with the story.
you did not fill in blanks (for whatever reason; i'm not you).
you believe it's somehow an error even though we don't know the reason.

so i can't help you with that. it's for you to supply or to go on dwelling in dissatisfaction.
me? i can't call something that isn't written and doesn't really matter "bad writing."

and now i've stated this at least half a dozen times and you still say i'm defending the movie irrationally.
so i'm just going to go irrationally enjoy the battle scene now. : D

that's funny. i didn't care much for it either and i feel like i should have.
it was just kinda blah in the end despite how well it was made. it seemed to lack some essential spark.

but yeah; i don't understand what people get from nitpicking at this level.
i could probably write a list of dozens things that are dumb in TFA and TLJ; but what for?
i can be excited and happy about seeing Han Solo aboard the Falcon one last time, or i can drum up "plot holes" about rathtars and riot troopers and fighting Finn with a lightsaber, and Ren's stupid cowl that appears and disappears every other scene in the third act.

oh: here's a throne room bit of terrible village-burning-level bad filmmaking:
Ren loses his lightsaber and then wakes up with it on his belt. no explanation provided!
totally illogical. : o p

oh. well.

 

Again - that's not the case. There's still the possibility that there's no answer, because there's no logical answer?

Then why people tend to rate duels from their most to least favourite? Why so many fans dislike CGI Yoda's fight? I some time ago saw here someone saying that "CGI Yoda's duel with Count Dooku destroyed his childhood memories of Yoda". Why people tend to praise the "ST new style duels" above "bad PT duels", especially Grevious' one? That's because it is important how they are done by filmmakers. Maybe for you it's not that important, maybe you focus just on the outcome and it's impact on the story. To me the impact on the story is important too, but how it's done in no less important.

Again - maybe you are satisfied with flawed "explanations" just to keep the story and your good impression going. I just can't and when I reach the conclusion there's no logical or satysfying answer - I just admit it, whether I like it or not. It's still better than lying to myself that everything with that scene is fine.

If you like it - then by all means, go and enjoy it! I enjoy it too, definately not as much as you do, but no one said I have to. There are other movies I love and have absolutely no problems with them.

 

There never has been anything logical about Star Wars.

 

Rey clearly tucked him in before leaving. #ReyLoConfirmed

 

The throne room battle its beatiful and was imagined like that to show us a Kylo/Rey partnership. No force tricks was necessary.
Same with old Ben and Vader in ANH. It was shot like that to explain us more about the history of the two charaters and tell us a little bit more about the force.
Qui Gon x Maul in Tatooine was pretty nice too and they dindt use force tricks also (except the Qui Gon big jump to escape the confrontation.

 

The "bad PT duels" are rated low because they look so fake and exaggerated perfect. Its no fight, but a dance show. Furthermore these fights lack emotions (Anakin vs Obi-Wan is an exception though).
The ST duels actually feel like fights between real people (similar to the OT). You can see the impact of the fights on the characters. The characters are sweating, make mistakes etc.

Just look at Kylo's fights in TFA and TLJ. In TFA he's a brawler and swings the saber like a maniac at his enemy. But in TLJ he's calm and almost fights like a Jedi knight.

 

Ki Adi Mundi was caught off guard and we all know he's a scrub!

--- Double Post Merged, Apr 15, 2018, Original Post Date: Apr 15, 2018 ---

I just wonder why those haters are still speaking about a movie they desperately try to hate.

 

"Messi, He was cut in half. Check was not necessary.
But would you not think they would instinctively do that. That would have made the scene seems more realistic for me.

 

Then I should ask you right now - how many real life sword fights have you seen? I mean real life, not things we see in movies, because fencing shown usually in movies is terribly, terribly wrong. When it comes to real life technique - Kylo lacks it. It's just a choreography designed to be visually good looking, but it has nothing to do with "realism" - it's just another movie-style sword fighting. And fake and exaggerated perfect? I wouldn't say so. I have to admit the PT duels have a lot of fake, unnecessary moves performed "just for the show" (well, Kylo in TFA did the same thing to be honest) and could've ended way faster (a lot of wasted opportunities to strike and kill), BUT they still look quite as I expect from a trained Jedi. Same thing with LotR (yeah, I love both these universes, they are both fantasy so there is quite a few analogies) - where wood elves are presented as very agile and extremely deadly with their bows. Why? Because these elves are immortal and had much more time than anyone else to master their skill. That's why an average elf will always be much better at it than average human. Same here with Jedi - they are training their almost whole life. Lightsaber is their weapon of choice - their speciality. Moreover - they are not an ordinary characters - they are especially gifted - by the Force - and it gives them superpowers. So it's absolutely no surprise that when they fight - they fight like absolute masters. It would be very, very disappointing to see "the mighty Jedi" (who trained their whole life how to use their only weapon and are guided by the Force) fight like an ordinary people.

True, and I mentioned it before few times. I just say this is the conclusion I reached and so far it seems (at least to me of course) to be the most reasonable explanation. No explanations provided here so far is convincing enough for me to change my opinion. You may say I'm simply stubborn, and I'll say the explanations are just not good enough.

In the Hobbit. 60 years earlier and when no one knew about the One ring. There's no hint at all that Gandals spoke with the eagles about it during LotR.

Which changes nothing, it's still much better than sending nine guys on a few month long trip across dangerous lands with huge war looming on the horizon. On eagles they could've reached Mt Doom in few days or maybe hours, take Sauron completely by surprise and overwhelm any defenders with superior numbers (there's more eagles than nazguls and, if taken by surprise, Sauron wouldn't have even time to scramble the nazguls).

Then why he didn't say it before it? Why their plan was to go to the Mordor on foot since the beginning?

It's not NORAD where jets are scrambled withing few minutes after alert. Even when spotted by some watchmen on the Mordor border - the eagles would still reach Mt Doom faster that any notification reach Barad-Dur. And eagles can fly much too high for any archer to hit them. They are out of range. Nazguls would be the only real threat - and since they were focused on western borders and there was only nine of them...

They were not when they transported Bilbo in Hobbit. And they definately knew the situation was dire, Sauron had to be stopped etc. I'm sure they would contribute to the fight if they learned of that plan - they actually fought during the Morannon battle.

I admited previously there is indeed such possibility, but so far it is still less plausible. It would be much more probable if it was a real life situation, because there's no bad scenario writing in real life. And movies are just movies - sometimes they are badly written and the sole explanation of the goofy movie elements is... bad writing, nothing else. The infamous Superman Leia - it's completely unnecesary, totally unrealistic and cannot be plausibly explained. BUT Rian still decided to film it. And now we have two options - either say it's dumb and unrealistic or try to defend it somehow by creating the idea of "Force bubble" or something like that. I prefer the first option since it's according to the Ockham's razor. That it's just an example of the bad writing is the simplest explanation, not requiring creating new, unproven theories and elements.

That's right, because the Force (and Force users) is overpowered. SW is vast and created a lot of elements which create new problems themselves - we all know that there are Force ghosts who can appear anytime and anywhere they want. We all know Anakin returned to "good" at the end and can manifest as a force ghost. Then why he didn't appear to Kylo and tell him that Darth Vader should be despised? Why he left his grandson alone? It's a huge plot hole, but it HAS to exist because if we were to follow the SW logic established by OT - writers would have to alter the ST with Kylo not being drawn to the dark side and trying to follow the steps of Darth Vader. Is it a bad writing? Well, yes. We all know Anakin could speak with Kylo and yet there's literally no mention of it in the movie. Nothing, the topic is totally omitted. Possibly because including it would ruin the scriptwriter's concept. And of course we can start a long debate why Anakin didn't slap stupid Kylo's face and say "stop it, grandson, you're stupid!", but that would actually be quite pointless. Because first was the written script which forced Anakin to be absent and silent and the explanation is NOT in the SW universe, Force ghosts abilities, Anakin's mood but in the mind of the scriptwriter.

Assuming there is a plausible in-universe explanation. Superman Leia don't have it, and yet it is in the movie. Not because Leia indeed has such power, not because vacuum of space in SW universe is different from the vacuum of space in our universe, not because Leia is another human species and is more resistent than "our" human species - it's because Rian wanted to give Leia her own "the Force" moment and decided it'll look like that. That's it, nothing more.

And yet Kylo was able to use the for there - manipulating the Luke's lightsaber three times (turning and activating it, pulling to himself and then at he end when they literally torn it apart. Oh, and he also used it on Hux there after Rey escaped.

Then it makes him dumb, a possibility I also mentioned earlier.

As above - but double dumb because at the end he was clearly losing. Moreover - he lost his lightsaber but didn't reach for it with the Force. Nor for any other weapon.

Battle wise strategy recommends using your most powerful weapon at the beginning and then finish off the rest. If you have a loaded gun you don't grab a stick when a bunch of bandits is attacking you. You reach for the gun and shoot them.

Because it's the best way to point out flawed arguments. Those who loved that fight try to defend it by creating a specific line of defense. I'm just trying to point out that it's not a good line of defense, because it wouldn't work in a more exxagerrated example. If it fails to work there - it's better to understand it also fails in the throne room. Saying that "it's art" and "there's surely an in-universe explanation" is not going to fix the throne room fight automatically. Some people think they can fix all movie fallacies with these phrases, but in reality it doesn't work that way.

The difference is that there's no "limited use" here.The Force is absent totally there. Just one little bit and it'd be completely different situation. I understand it's only a movie and there is a balance of realism and fun (just like in PC games where there has to be balance - if game is too realistic it tends to be also less fun) so I'm not asking for a "Kylo destroyed them all in less than one minute". But director decided otherwise - he wanted a different fight. And that's the reason it is that way - it's not Kylo's fault to forget how to use the Force - it's Rian's choice. So it's a outside universe reason and example of bad, inconsistent writing so that the battle could be more, according to the director, visually interesting.

 

"DailyPlunge, Whether or not you like The Last Jedi I'm not sure how anyone can complain about that throne room scene. It's almost like people want to hate everything.
so essentially you saying that everybody has to like what you like, is that it?