Can IX conclude the saga?

I love ROTJ, but I understand the complaints against it.

ROTJ was more focused on Luke and Vader's arc, and portrays it masterfully. But in the end, having a small part of the Empire defeated in some backwater planet doesn't really feel like it packs the finality that it should, and indeed we even now have a ton of canon material going into the eventual defeat of the Empire.

Again, I don't think the fall of the First Order should be the focus of the film. Just that, finality is a hard thing to do right, and I don't think ROTJ did it perfectly either (outside of the Skywalker storyline).

 

The fall of the Emperor felt like checkmate to the Empire as a whole. In a sense, Palpatine was the Empire. It makes even more sense now after seeing the PT. So, I wouldn't call ROTJ just "a small part of the Empire defeated in some backwater planet". It was a decisive battle, and the beginning of the end for the Empire. And, it was.

Agreed. The First Order doesn't need to be eradicated from existance in IX, and like in ROTJ a void could be established at the chain of command instead, like Kylo turning and/or Hux getting killed. So, like in ROTJ you probably just need to cut the head of the snake to convey that the FO has been defeated. The details can then be left to the imagination or books and other materials.

 

Grand Admiral Thrawn just read that you wrote he is considered "other material".
He starts interesting itself to your actual knowledge about art.

You should clean your soul. Then have a pray. And then run... as quick as possible.

(this was a joke)

 

Grand Admiral Thrawn, you say. Never heard of him. In fact, I do recognize that name being thrown out from time to time in these forums

 

He heard of you, and this should be far more important. For you.

Did you like the blue milk ? You'll like the blue fist.

 

Well, yeah. Recontextualizing established narrative is certainly ONE facility of the prequel framing device. Another equally valid (and far applicable to this scenario) aspect is elucidation - revelatory detail introduced that doesn’t redefine the narrative, but instead works in support of it.

Here’s an example: the ‘child of prophecy’ trope Lucas inserted into the story with the prequels. From a functional perspective, this insertion serves the narrative by including an additional degree of relevancy to the climax of the story. It introduces a fatalistic component that didn’t exist there before. What Anakin does at the end of ROTJ, given this new information, isn’t simply the achievement of redemption, but the fulfillment of a preordained destiny. It adds increased weight and a greater sense of completion to the deed. Yes, it changes our perspective on the events, but it also serves to support the original narrative while increasing the tone of finality.

It’s similar in function to the ‘Faustian Bargain’ trope he injected into ROTS. What this added element does is provide juxtaposition to that climactic scene. It doesn’t serve to recontextualize the original narrative, but instead adds assistant context to it. Part one Anakin effectively sold his soul to the devil out of a warped sense of love. Part two Anakin reclaimed that soul after attaining ‘true’ love. Now that scene isn’t simply about personal redemption, or destiny realized, but atonement. Quantifiable atonement. There’s a causal relationship there. Yes, we happened to have unorthodoxly witnessed the ‘effect’ before its associative ‘cause’, but it’s still there.

What your thesis demands are two counterintuitive conclusions. By that I mean they run contrary to common sense. 1) That Lucas’s intended termination point for his morality play was ROTS and not ROTJ. You’re interpreting an intentionally unresolved narrative as the apex instead of the junction that it is. 2) That these complimentary sequences (save wife/save son) are indistinct from one another and interchangeable when plainly one exists in order to inform the other.

To be clear, I’m not dumping on your conclusion. Salvation through the acknowledged love between these two characters might very well be how this tryptic is resolved. It might be structured in an analogous but situationally reversed scenario to Anakin/Padme and succeed where that failed. That’s perfectly legitimate. What I’m speaking to is the assertion that this particular factor was left outstanding in Lucas’s six part story. It wasn’t. It exists to support the story and not redefine it.

I can absolutely agree with that. It would be beyond strange for the relationship that was constructed between these two be simply discarded at this point. It would have to play a role in some shape or form. The two have an undeniable connection. My personal preference is that it be explored as an asexual mutual admiration between two people and not garble it with unnecessary (in my mind) romanticism. But I wouldn’t throw a fit if that’s where it leads.

Maybe. Or maybe that was simply the most visually dramatic image for Finn (our eye-line in that scene) to have witnessed in order to evoke the emotional outburst that follows.

Maybe. Or maybe that was simply the most logical place to infuse a humanizing moment for the character critical for the imminent confrontation with his father (who’s needlessly mentioned in that scene).

Maybe. Or maybe that’s simply the natural response you’d expect from someone after seeing the true face of “a creature in a mask”. Not a “creature” at all. The exact opposite.

Seriously, man? So is the nonconsensual nature of this encounter also supposed to function as a rape allegory? That’s where this is going.

It presents the Kylo character in a state of expectant vulnerability by being exposed. His apparent disregard to it and her apparent aversion to it effectively places him in a position of dominance. His dominance is important to the exchange as it’s the moment the seed of doubt is sown in her. It’s when she learns his version of the truth and what sends her to the mirror cave looking for her own truth.

Hard to argue that. But is it meant to further an actual romance or merely the prospect of one? Is this dynamic being built up that way in order to underscore the betrayal they both feel at the point of revelation? They each opened themselves up in equally compromising ways and are both equivalently dejected because of it. The greater the intimacy, the greater the reciprocal result. Drama!

It's a valid interpretation, but it’s not the ONLY acceptable potentiality. In my mind, Rey represents the Light. Kylo represents the Dark. They’re two opposing, yet equal, positive and negative furies. When in conflict, they produce misery. When in balance, they produce harmony - two halves of the same whole. That *could* be expressed amorously, but for me, that cheapens the premise. But that’s just how I see it

 

Perhaps, but even then the movie seems to give far more importance to Vader's death (and the destruction of the Death Star) than the Emperor's.

Again, I can totally accept ROTJ as an ending, but I can't fault someone for saying "well yeah, but they were a Galactic Empire. They lost a single decisive battle, sure, but am I supposed to believe that was enough to completely topple them?".

It's all suspension of disbelief, which is already a factor in the current sequel trilogy and it's apparent legion of fans who are somehow technical experts on the fantastical technology that exists in-universe enough to nitpick it apart.

No matter what, the need for suspension of disbelief is impossible to avoid, because all it takes is one fan to ask "But what if 'x' did or didn't happen? Plothole!". But something this obvious might be wise to avoid, especially because these criticisms already exist of ROTJ.

 

Yes, please because just being related does not tie into the Saga.

--- Double Post Merged, Sep 19, 2018, Original Post Date: Sep 19, 2018 ---

Rey can’t love Kylo without having a pull inside her to the dark side. She watched Kylo kill a mentor, a hero, his own father.

Normal people just don’t get over that.

 

So, regarding this logic the OT doesn't tie into the PT too.

She doesn't love (or want) Kylo, she wants Ben. That's the whole point...

Padme got over Anakin killing kids. ;D

 

This is just a bizarre sentiment. Given how important a role love has played in this saga, how can love possible "cheapen" it's conclusion?

No, I think Lucas's intended ending point was the sequel trilogy. Which isn't to say that he would have made these movies in the exact same way, or even that he was definitely committed to making them at all. But I do think that Lucas meant for the PT to pose questions that the ST would answer. And even if he didn't intend it, that's the way the films say.

There's a thematic gap in the OT: In ESB Luke abandons his training and puts his life in danger to save Han and Leia. But Yoda insists that this is a trap, and that if Luke truly cared about Han and Leia and what they stood for, he would stay to complete his training. Luke's actions in ROTJ, though incredibly brave and noble, don't actually demonstrate that he's learned this lesson.

The PT doesn't resolve this thematic gap; it doubles down on it. After watching the OT, we don't know why, exactly, Anakin turned to evil. But the Anakin we met in ANH is a ruthless, cruel and power-hungry tyrant. So it would only be natural to assume that Anakin turned to evil for power. But the PT paints a different picture: that it was Anakin's love for Padme that caused him to turn to evil. He made the same mistake in the PT that Luke made in ESB, but on a much larger scale, and with more permanent consequences.

And in the ST, it was Luke making the same mistake - if only for an instant - that drives Ben over the edge to the dark side. In each case Anakin and Luke have noble intentions, but see those intentions twisted by the fear of loss. The resolution to the saga, I think, will come with Ben recognizing this issue, and making the right choice where Anakin and Luke couldn't: he'll act out of love even when the fear of loss pulls him in a different direction.

 

You can love someone without being IN love with that someone. It’s the bond that matters. Making that connection romantic, for me, adds nothing to the premise. I get that, from your perspective, it’s already romantic, but for me, I just don’t see it. That development would feel tacked-on, unnecessary, and misguided to me. I’m not closed off to it, I’d just rather their kinship itself be the focus. To strike truer to Anakin’s statement “Compassion, which I would define as unconditional love...”

That’s definitely a valid perspective. And certainly a pretty crucial one when we’re talking about justifying why this trilogy should even exist. I’ve brought it up in other threads that maybe the ST is about compromise. Or rather about equilibrium. The PT is about how the Dark conquered the Light. The OT is about how the Light, in turn, vanquished the Dark. Maybe the ST is about them meeting in the middle - a balance. Rey and Kylo would then personify that concept. I like that notion at any rate.

I don’t know if that’s necessarily what Lucas had in mind though. In my observation (and that’s all it is), the wrinkles that the prequels introduce work more to enforce the conclusiveness of the sextet rather than inviting open-endedness.

While an ill prepared Luke rushed off to rescue his friends in ESB against better judgement, ROTJ Luke intentionally parts from his friends after careful contemplation. He knows that he has to confront his father. He knows that if he lingers, Vader will come for him and place his friends (and their mission) in jeopardy. He knows that he doesn’t want to fight him. He knows there’s still good in him and can be appealed to. He knows the stakes are either success or death. The circumstances, and his reactions to them, are markedly different. This version of Luke carefully weighed all his options out and chose his path out of wisdom, not impetuousness or blind attachment.

Luke had trust in his friends to complete the mission without him. He understood and accepted that if his father delivered him to the Emperor aboard the doomed Deathstar he would die there. He resigned himself to either save his father or die trying. That was the way he decided to fulfill Yoda’s words “confront Vader”. The lesson was learned.

Anakin DID turn to evil for power. The power to save someone he loved. A sympathetic ambition, but a corrupt one. It’s what he was willing to become in order to achieve that power that’s the focus. Just as ROTJ Luke is an evolution on ESB Luke. ROTJ Anakin is an evolution on ROTS Anakin. Both character arcs, and the obstacles they stumbled over, are resolved in the same sequence.

You don’t ‘have to’ see it that way. In fact, the ST works way better if you don’t, but I very much do not agree there are any intentional loose thematic threads left there to be pulled on. Lucas made noticeable effort to wrap his six-part saga up rather tidily from my perspective.

"I know what I have to do, but I don't know if I have the strength to do it"? But . . . you know . . . without the patricide? Seems well enough in line with the established theme to me. Makes sense