1. Notification emails are working properly again. Please check your email spam folder and if you see any emails from the Cantina there, make sure to mark them as "Not Spam". This will help a lot to whitelist the emails and to stop them going to spam.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. IMPORTANT! To be able to create new threads and rate posts, you need to have at least 30 posts in The Cantina.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Before posting a new thread, check the list with similar threads that will appear when you start typing the thread's title.
    Dismiss Notice

Daisy Ridley Confirms That Rey Kenobi Was An Option For Star Wars Sequels

Discussion in 'SWNN News Feed' started by SWNN Probe, Sep 9, 2020.

  1. Jayson

    Jayson Resident Lucasian

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2015
    Posts:
    1,930
    Likes Received:
    5,932
    Trophy Points:
    15,567
    Credits:
    7,628
    Ratings:
    +8,643 / 35 / -13
    It's like I said.

    Anything other than a production plan and basic key ideas is a nuanced narrative plan.

    Mapping out character arcs before starting a trilogy is well beyond typical. Vastly.

    And the things people are talking about as having problems with before then saying it should have been more planned are typically things which would be in screenplays and saying you should have three screenplays up front is going to get you laughed out of the room 99% of the time.

    There are a vast number of reasons you don't normally do that, and when those fellows from the MCU said it was a huge leap of faith...take that in fully. That's why you would be laughed out of the room.

    That is taking TV modeling to film; having multiple screenplays up front and then shooting them across separate productions.

    Also...a show bible is less nuanced than a screenplay.
    A show bible typically outlines the rules for how a show works; its basic rules.

    It doesn't have anything to do with planned arcs and storylines.

    Star Wars effectively had a show bible. Lucasfilm.

    And they had a basic production plan, and some key concepts outlined.
    People have been unhappy with this and saying there should have been more planning.

    No there shouldn't have been. They just didn't like the story. The story didn't need more planning.

    And like I said. This idea people continue to discuss of knowing more than what Star Wars did know up front - that is equal to a nuanced narrative plan - is not really reasonable since the industry itself disuades from such ideas...largely because the bean counters really don't like it, and you don't know what your contracts are really going to look like until very late into production.

    The main names; sure. Principle jobs; yes. Those are locked in ahead of time.
    But it is beyond normal to contract on the fly during production, and you need to be able to shift course if one of those disrupts the flow of the screenplay (which happens).

    Doing that three films down the road?
    6 to 9 years of production locked in, and if the second is wrong, pay for double rewrites possibly to adjust the third to the new second?

    All while juggling these contract situations, let alone material logistics and production cycle alotments for your creative departments.

    It really is a massive leap of faith that there is simply no reason to expect it - even from Disney.
    In fact, I would likely say especially from Disney.

    About the only time I see this perhaps happening is if RJ does his trilogy just because of how he works, and even he likely wouldn't hand all of them in at once. He might write a bunch down for 2, and 3. But I'd be jaw dropped if he handed Disney 3 screenplays up front.

    Anyway.
    Yeah. I agree it would not have made a better or worse film series.

    Cheers,
    Jayson
     
    #61 Jayson, Sep 17, 2020
    Last edited: Sep 17, 2020
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
  2. DigificWriter

    DigificWriter Rebel Official

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2019
    Posts:
    861
    Likes Received:
    1,347
    Trophy Points:
    5,592
    Credits:
    1,554
    Ratings:
    +2,159 / 105 / -32
    Expecting the Sequel Trilogy - or any film franchise, really - to have been following a fully predetermined narrative formula wherein every major story beat was completely sketched out by the time production on The Force Awakens began - which is what @Jayson is addressing - is the ultimate example of fallacy-driven discussion because that is not how film production works.

    Sometimes the individuals behind a film project will approach the production of said project with a fully-fleshed-out treatment regarding the narrative they want to tell, but that is a rare occurrence, particularly with regards to large-scale franchises that aren't based around adapting already-existing material.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. Use the Falchion

    Use the Falchion Jedi Contrarian

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2015
    Posts:
    1,937
    Likes Received:
    8,022
    Trophy Points:
    16,867
    Credits:
    9,028
    Ratings:
    +9,292 / 25 / -10
    Except, as Eeprom said, the MCU proves your statement to be categorically untrue. For all of the films by the Russo bros, this is exactly what happened: Fiege chose who he wanted to write and direct the films, had them sit down, hash it out, and then work with other directors and writers to make sure everything was consistent.

    Were there hiccups? Absolutely - Bree Larson's scenes as Carol Danvers in Endgame were made before her own movie was, and her characterization is a little off because of that. Movies like Spider-Man: Far From Home spoiled things about Endgame (although we already knew what they spoiled, so did they REALLY spoil anything?), and Ant-Man & the Wasp had a very tacked-on mid-credit scene. Heck, even in the overarching plan things changed - the Defenders and Netflix/Hulu shows are practically non-canon, Inhumans was downgraded from a movie to a television show we're definitely better off without, the Sony/Disney deal occurred, and Disney acquired Fox. But even with all of that, the main goal stayed the same and the macro-plot didn't change at all.

    For the most part, things were consistent and felt that way. And that's what we're fighting for here. Consistency. If people gain nothing else out of this response, please at least listen to this. Planning out the overarching story doesn't mean the story will be good. That was never the problem or the point. It was all about consistency, and how knowing things ahead of time ideally lets you plan for them more efficiently.

    Think about it, do you really believe that had RJ known that JJ or even Trevorrow was going to make Rey a Palpatine, that he would have kept the same arc and characterization planned? Why waste two and a half to three movies asking the question "what is Rey's heritage?" Why not answer it by Movie 2 and move on? One of the points about RJ's choice of Rey Nobody is not only that it answers the question of where Rey comes from, but it forces her to move past it, to stop being defined by the past and to start working towards her own character.

    To quote Rian himself,

    "It’s cutting loose the idea that of her being special coming from lineage. And that is true and I do like that, and I think that’s a good thing. That wasn’t, though, the motivating factor behind that decision. It was more a dramatic decision of ‘What is the toughest thing she could hear about her parents? What is the thing for her and for us what will make her have to stand on her own two feet and will make things the hardest for her?’ Because she’s the hero and that’s her job—to have things be the hardest for her."

    Back to the MCU, outside of the Avengers movies, the directors were given leeway to do what they wanted to, but there are still guidelines and goals that they need to work towards depending on their story - Guardians 2 needed to bring Nebula into the fold; Ant-Man and the Wasp needed to introduce the Quantum Realm; Thor: Ragnarok needed to have Thor, Hulk, and Loki on a ship by the end of the movie.

    And beyond that, there has been ample proof of the directors working together and talking.
    To quote the Russo Brothers:

    "I would say collectively, everyone in the Marvel universe has been involved in this movie. We're very close with all the directors, we love them all. We have a lot of conversations with people constantly, we have a lot of talks with Taika, because that movie isn’t finished and he had executed things on set that we needed real information, about tonally, about the direction it was going in. The Guardians two movies existed in the same world, so we had an understanding of how those characters behaved.

    I think James [Gunn] has functioned the same way that everyone has been functioning. I think it's a nod to James, the VP credit, that he really helped create those characters. But as far as how we're working, we're working in a real collaborative united artists approach to the movie. In respect to hearing people's ... where people are taking their characters. [Ant-Man and the Wasp] is just about to start shooting, so we need to keep in communication with Peyton constantly about story elements in that that may affect this. Coogler. Sorry, we didn't mention him. Ryan was in the middle of shooting Black Panther and he was here and we had several conversations, met with him many times, met with the crew many times with him, his production design department, we looked at fight vids from the story. We had a lot of interaction with Nate Moore, the producer, many text messages back and forth with Ryan."


    It's really just trying to do the job of managing the universe as it's progressing."
    https://screenrant.com/avengers-3-4-director-collaboration/


    On the other end with Star Wars, you have Rian Johnson talking about how he wants to be surprised and a fan of TROS.


    And as much as I love RJ, to me this was a terrible thing. Making movies like Star Wars and the MCU do is a collaborative process, and at times that means that the pleasure of being a fan is stripped away so that one can make a better movie/series. The same thing is true for beta readers for books or debuggers for games. It's a sacrifice. (This is part of the reason I'd never be a beta reader, even for Brandon Sanderson. I love my polished products too much!)

    But this also highlights the ultimate difference between the MCU and the ST. The ST was a relay race. Each movie was handed off to the next person, and the amount of communication varied (there was more communication between TFA and TLJ than TLJ and TROS). The MCU on the other hand works like band. Each part knows what the other is doing, but that doesn't always affect what the others have to do at all times. The singer (Avengers) can be going to hit the high note while the base guitar (Ant-Man) stays on the same rhythm. But in another song, that same base guitar can have a wicked intro while the singer is quiet. Different themes, different goals, different instruments and sounds, but all working together towards something.

    YMMV which you prefer, but I can definitely tell which made my friends and family happier and desire to come back.

    Again, untrue. Like Marvel and DC, Star Wars cherry-picks which things it choses to adapt, but you better believe they're basing them off of something that already exists for the most part. Granted, this happens mostly in comics and shows, but it still happens, and we've seen some of it in the movies too.
    Rey is based off of Ania Solo, Finn is based off of both Kyle Katarn and Jao Assam. And we've all see the Jacen Solo/Ben Solo comparisons.
    There have been articles and posts even here about how similar TROS is to certain Star Wars comics.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Great Post Great Post x 1
  4. Jayson

    Jayson Resident Lucasian

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2015
    Posts:
    1,930
    Likes Received:
    5,932
    Trophy Points:
    15,567
    Credits:
    7,628
    Ratings:
    +8,643 / 35 / -13
    At best, you have a skant few examples while what we're saying is this is far beyond normal for expectations for a host of reasons.

    I don't expect you to care. You have a very strong judgement which doesn't care about a lot of factors, it seems.

    Overall I find this line of conversation rather pointless and just finger pointing, which is incredibly pointless.

    Just figure out if you liked it or not and call it a day.
    Trying to blame Disney for not doing something beyond reasonable expectations and/or saying that's fine because Star Wars is extraordinary is beyond silly to me.

    Cheers,
    Jayson
     
    #64 Jayson, Sep 18, 2020
    Last edited: Sep 18, 2020
  5. DigificWriter

    DigificWriter Rebel Official

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2019
    Posts:
    861
    Likes Received:
    1,347
    Trophy Points:
    5,592
    Credits:
    1,554
    Ratings:
    +2,159 / 105 / -32
    You want to conveniently ignore the rarity of the examples you're citing and instead paint them as the rule rather than the exception.

    You also want to ignore the documented fact that it was unnecessary for there to be a direct line of communication between Rian and JJ after The Last Jedi because of the fact that the latter was a credited Executive Producer on that film and was therefore already acutely aware of what he and Chris Terrio needed to follow up on.
     
  6. Use the Falchion

    Use the Falchion Jedi Contrarian

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2015
    Posts:
    1,937
    Likes Received:
    8,022
    Trophy Points:
    16,867
    Credits:
    9,028
    Ratings:
    +9,292 / 25 / -10
    I care just as much as you do, just differently.
    And you treat Star Wars like it's some mythical thing, going on about how amazing it is when it's really not. Chiastic structure doesn't do anything any good if it's reductive to the series overall. Star Wars is a mess. A beautiful, amazing mess that I love, but a mess all the same.
    As for why we try to treat Star Wars as something special is because many of its fans and the brand itself treats Star Wars as special. (As far as I'm aware, there aren't thought pieces, essays (video or otherwise) or dedicated forums to Jurassic Park/World or The Fast and the Furious franchise.) That's all fine, but it means Star Wars as a whole has to start living up to that. And frankly, it hasn't been. That doesn't mean I don't love it or enjoy it, but I'm going to call out what I find lacking and why. Not to hate on it (too much at least), but so we as fans and Star Wars as a whole can figure out what to do in the future.

    When it comes to structuring things, this isn't exclusive to Star Wars at all. I support this for pretty much EVERY property that knows it's going to have a fixed amount of entries in it. I try to hold my own writing and stories by that same code. Sure, things like books and television shows have room for more leeway, but structuring things still helps. That's why it annoys me so much at times - I've seen it work wonderfully (and not so well), I'm trying it with my own stuff, and I wholeheartedly believe that Lucasfilm could have pulled it off and can do so in the future. And structure doesn't mean that there isn't room for spontaneity or change, just that it rarely overrides the story laid out.

    And try and figure out what I liked? Which part? TFA? I LOVE TFA. TLJ? I have a lot of respect for it and there are things I love about it, but that doesn't mean I have to agree with everything and I'll make that clear. (But I still want RJ to come back to Star Wars, if he still wants to.) TROS? No, frankly, I don't like TROS. Not anymore. I'm happy people like and love it, but I can't in good conscious agree that it's great. So that's what I object to. (Me trying to figure out how it could have been better is a selfish thing I do with all properties.) And that's fine. I like dozens of things that are subjectively and objectively terrible.
    Star Wars as a whole? Yeah, I love it. My love for it has cooled since it can't provide me what I want or need as a person or as an aspiring writer, but it does provide me with hard lessons. In the end I'm still here, and outside of talk about the ST I try to bring as much positivity and nuance as I can to a discussion. (Frankly, that's why I stopped posting so much in the ST forums; it stopped being beneficial or uplifting.)

    The Rey Palpatine twist? Honestly, I didn't like it until YOU @Jayson changed my view on it. Contrary to what you might think, I am open to different opinions; and regardless of how you feel about me, I greatly value your voice and perspective in this community (even if I can't fathom it myself sometimes).

    But my problem isn't with the family tree, as it's a fairly neutral thing. My problem was with the reveal, how it happened, and how little it does for Rey. Had they played up Rey's connection to the Dark Side, then it might have been fine. Had Rey been someone who hated the Empire for some reason, then it may have been interesting. But as it stands, Rey's connection to Palpatine does so little for her character because 1) there's so much focus on Rey in connection to her family that we rarely get to explore anything else (more of a missed opportunity than anything, and one that can be easily corrected in EU material), and 2)Rey's goals, desires, and quest is not affected by this reveal. Rey was training to be a Jedi at the beginning of the movie and her connection to Palpatine changes nothing about that. It doesn't scare off her friends, endanger her relationship with Leia or Luke, or do anything really of note other than give her a connection to the Big Bad that was otherwise unnecessary.

    Rey Kenobi falls under the same problems. While it works similar to Rey Palpatine in terms of narrative symmetry (Kenobi fails to save Skywalker, Skywalker saves Skywalker, Kenobi succeeds at saving Skywalker & my grandfather taught you, so now you teach me. VERSUS Palpatine corrupts Skywalker, Palpatine fails to currupt Skywalker & Skywalker redeems Skywalker, Skywalker fails to corrupt Palpatine & Palptaine redeems Skywalker), it doesn't help build Rey as a character and would overshadow the young woman's own achievements and story. I said this MONTHS before TROS came out.

    Instead of worrying about Rey's heritage, we could have explored what a Dyad was instead of using it as a plot point. We could have sat with the ramifications of what Palpatine's return meant for the Jedi, as well as the Jedi's ultimate legacy - Anakin failed to stop Palpatine and now it's been undone; Luke failed to stop Ben and now Rey's the last Jedi; is Rey's ultimate destiny to fail?

    Overall, my problem is that TROS didn't add anything of note to the series, franchise, or story. (The same could really be said for AOTC as well, being completely honest, since most of the ground covered in AOTC is covered far more thoroughly in TCW.)

    But yes, trying to blame Disney for something they can clearly do is absolutely beyond reasonable expectations.

    No, I'm making sure the comparison works within the frame that others have brought up. I didn't point out The Fast and the Furious franchise because no one brought that up. I didn't point out Jurassic Park/World because nobody brought those up. If someone had said "hey, Star Wars works like The Fast and the Furious" then I'd probably say "Oh snap you're actually right in a lot of ways," but that wasn't the point. The point was that under the Disney umbrella, the MCU proves that it's possible to do what people say Star Wars can't do. Through the EU and all of the connections there, Star Wars itself proves that it's possible to do what people say Star Wars can't do. That's what I'm trying to say. Besides, if fans and Lucasfilm want Star Wars to be more than franchises like F&F (which I unabashedly love) and Jurassic Park/World (which I'm pretty neutral on), then they have to start raising the standards. And that starts by pointing out the work rivals and competitors put in.

    Of course he was aware on what he needed to follow up on, but that's different from asking "where do you imagine this story going?" I can figure out what plot lines A Song of Ice and Fire needs to wrap up in The Winds of Winter and A Dream of Spring because I've read the books, but that's a different question than "George, what do/did you intend for these characters? Where was your head space? How do these (unasked for but still quite interesting) backstory books fit into the whole picture?" From there, you sort out where YOU see the story going, and figure out what's the best way to reconcile it all. Making Tyrion Lannister the "third head of the dragon" and a Targaryen just because I wanted him to ride a dragon and GRRM said "I want to be surprised, and Tyrion is my favorite character," wouldn't make sense. Tyrion's backstory has been established and his plot is moving in a different direction. Sometimes if you don't have the time ideas you love have to be cut for the sake of the story.
     
    • Wise Wise x 1
  7. DigificWriter

    DigificWriter Rebel Official

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2019
    Posts:
    861
    Likes Received:
    1,347
    Trophy Points:
    5,592
    Credits:
    1,554
    Ratings:
    +2,159 / 105 / -32
    Unless I'm mistaken, no-one has said that there couldn't have been a Sequel Trilogy that followed a beat-by-beat framework akin to what certain parts of the MCU did.

    What we're saying is that such meticulous planning is A) an exception in film production, B) is not something that should have been expected, and C) was unnecessary within the context of the overall narrative framework of the Star Wars franchise or the Sequel Trilogy itself.

    The Sequel Trilogy works perfectly fine as-is, particularly since we know that there was a far greater sense of behind-the-scenes cohesion than certain fallacial points of view would have people believe.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  8. Lock_S_Foils

    Lock_S_Foils Red Leader

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2017
    Posts:
    3,016
    Likes Received:
    68,995
    Trophy Points:
    175,157
    Credits:
    49,832
    Ratings:
    +73,396 / 47 / -43
    If you want to see the DEFINITION of a "mess" in film planning and production, read "The Making of Star Wars", which covers Lucas' early days.

    The version of Star Wars we got on the screen in May 1977 was radically, RADICALLY changed during the planning and production process from Lucas' original vision.

    In case you didn't know, the character that ended up as Han Solo started out as a green-skinned alien.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Great Post Great Post x 1
  9. Veronica

    Veronica Rebel General

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2020
    Posts:
    282
    Likes Received:
    588
    Trophy Points:
    3,642
    Credits:
    1,018
    Ratings:
    +740 / 24 / -12

    Rian Johnson revealed in an intervview that Ren never lied to her. He was just telling her what he saw as the truth.

    I think that by time we get to the events of TROS, Rey has accepted that her parents were awful in selling her---but that's not where her value as a person lies. But emotionally it's a different story.


    But remember there is a year time span between the end of TLJ and TROS. And no matter how Rey has accepted the truth with her head. Her emotions are another matter all together. She has had 14 years of trauma and pain (much of which has been suppressed in order to survive) so that won't disappear over night. I mean she has accepted it to the point that it no longer cripples her, she doesn't want to go back to Jakku and wait for them. Or allow herself to be paralyzed (in every sense of the word). but the subject is still a touchy one, so when she attacks Ren it's understandable. Not much different from the way that Ren flew off the handle at seeing Luke.



    Exactly.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. eeprom

    eeprom Prince of Bebers

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2016
    Posts:
    2,172
    Likes Received:
    5,445
    Trophy Points:
    15,317
    Credits:
    5,422
    Ratings:
    +8,245 / 34 / -9
    Agreed. It’s a tactic usually only reserved for properties that warrant that level of front loaded investment in time and money and materials. Established properties that can be reasonably expected to make that initial proposition worth the financial risk. Properties like Star Wars.

    I can’t speak for anyone else, but my posts were solely in response to the assertion that such a thing is so vastly beyond the pale of common convention and human reason so as to be the subject of untamed ridicule and mockery. It’s not. Disney itself employed this same production method a decade earlier with Pirates of the Caribbean 2 and 3. It isn’t the standard yardstick by which all studio projects should be measured by, but then neither is something like Star Wars. It is itself exceptional.
    Agreed. But it certainly was a choice that was made. And opinions on the efficacy of what choices were made during a production should be allowed at the table of discourse . . . constructive opinions, preferably. Not protracted bemoaning about how whoever ruined whatever.
    That’s also a matter of opinion. There are plenty of compositional elements to the narrative structure of these films that could subjectively be considered ‘unnecessary’. That doesn’t mean they don’t possess value or result in an overall positive impact.
    Agreed. It’s perfectly fine. Not terrible. Not exceptional. Fine. It did it’s job. Could it have done its job better though? Sure. Nothing’s perfect. Is constructing a single unified story ahead of time a possible way it could have been improved? Maybe. Maybe not. We’ll never know. But it’s worth at least discussing at any rate.
     
  11. Jayson

    Jayson Resident Lucasian

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2015
    Posts:
    1,930
    Likes Received:
    5,932
    Trophy Points:
    15,567
    Credits:
    7,628
    Ratings:
    +8,643 / 35 / -13
    It is modern myth, yes.
    Go read classic myths. They tend to have holes and messes all through them as a consequence of the motive which drives the narrative of most myths.
    Narratives motivated by allegory and doing things for that over standard methods of writing are going to be caused to have holes and messes by their very engine. Parallelism or not.

    We might as well suggest that a new religious text someone writes should not have narrative holes, messes, and make rational sense.
    It's unlikely due to the nature of the art form.

    I do the same, quite honestly. If it seems that I don't, for some reason, perhaps it was just missed - I'm not sure.
    I've written critically about the PT (at rather long length, without just bashing it about), ESB, and ROTJ.
    I've written about ANH's flaws and how one could draft it differently to button those up - e.g. it is very strange that Vader and Luke never meet each other in ANH. The only other film I can think of that does that is The 5th Element.

    Also consider what I've written about the throne room fight in TLJ, and the enjoyable (for me) flaw of the pacing of TROS and Finn's dangling narrative.
    And while I've said remarkably less about TFA, and indeed haven't any strong critical issues with TFA that are unique to it, I have discussed how the whole entire ST differs from Lucasian cinematographic form very strongly - Johnson being actually the closest to it, but Abrams is miles away from it. It's the biggest thing I was actually disappointed with, while at the same time thrilled with how it gave a lot of new energy to Star Wars in ways it never had before.

    Meaning: I've leveled my fair share of criticism at Star Wars - it's not all rosy flattery.

    They have less, actually.
    TV shows commonly have multiple screenplays ready for multiple episodes previous to the current episode.

    Where it tends to go wrong for serial stories in television is when the production network changes the plans on the show runners.
    That's what happened to GOT, that's what happened to LOST.

    That's not what happened to 12 Monkeys, and as a result, 12 Monkeys (the series) is amazing for its serial narrative planning and articulation. Seriously one of the best out there (if you can forgive some melodrama sprinkled about, that is - I just skip those, they're not for me).

    Happy to help. :)
    Not just happy because you have a more positive view, mostly just that I was able to help you see a piece of art in a different perspective of appreciation (using the word technically, here as "art appreciation"). Whether that means you like it or "meh", etc..., that's a win in my book! :D

    It does everything for Rey. Take it out and her character doesn't have any internal character struggle.
    It's actually the biggest punch to the gut she could have received.

    She wanted parents. She found out she was alone. She came to terms with being alone. Then she finds out, right when she gets used to being alone, that her family is the most evil person in the galaxy. It causes her to feel absolute doubt whether or not she can trust herself at all. She fears her own self 'going evil'.

    I strongly disagree that it does nothing for Rey. It does everything for her.
    The point of the story is Rey and Kylo and their respective relationships to good, evil, and inheritance. If you wanted something other than that story, then you wanted something other than that story, but anything that doesn't support that narrative meat and potatoes is a derailment from the narrative thrust.

    Yes it is. Massively.

    That is not what the story is about. That is superficial. But also, it did actually impact that. She, at one point, was straight on the path to abandoning everything.
    Luke pushed her back on track.

    None of that is the motive. That's melodramatic motivations, and that's not why she's given this relationship.
    Rey's character has never been about her relationship with her friends and how they think of her.
    It has always, from TFA on, been about how she thinks about herself.

    In TFA she has no self value. In TLJ she learns to have value in her self. In TROS she fears the value of herself.

    TFA, TLJ, and TROS combined tell a classic Hero & The Dragon cliche story.

    A Hero, who is lost and looking for value and place in the world, heads off on an adventure where they run into obstacles and challenges which cause them to learn their value and place, and through such gain self confidence in their own identity, which is then challenged by a facing a great Dragon or Beast which fundamentally tests all of the resolve they gained through their adventure so far.

    That's what these three stories do.

    They also tell the inverse variation of that with Kylo. Kylo is a great Noble's story. Almost the stuff of Jane Austen, really.
    It's very similar to Pride and Prejudice's Mr. Darcy character in many ways - they are both self loathing men of lineage who view themselves as bad, do not appreciate their heritage, repeatedly damage their own situation out of self hate and frustration, and both are changed by a strong and challenging woman whom is caught up with an internal self struggle of her self value, and whom they become cosmically entwined with.

    It's a pretty interesting mixture to essentially view Mr. Darcy as a villain, which after you watch the ST and then you go back to Pride and Prejudice, you kind of see him that way with the aftertaste of Kylo in your mind.

    My point here is that her support line is unfaltering, just as Elizabeth of Pride and Prejudice's is, because the character's own internal self struggle is the story - not her friendships.

    So I suppose what I'm saying is, the ST is Star Wars' Pride and Prejudice.
    Which is a story about each of the character's internal self-worth and struggles, and not much about their interpersonal relationships with friends.


    I completely disagree.
    TROS adds to the narrative of Rey and Kylo and their internal struggles, and draws them to a conclusion after pushing both into an obstacle of existential self doubt and examination which previously was not present in Kylo, and was not tested in Rey - which TROS, as mentioned, did.

    It also forced Rey and Kylo to choose good or evil.
    Kylo, through a highly symbolic baptism, regained his good.
    Rey, through her self sacrifice, chose good and denied the evil welling up inside of her.

    Rey chose "Skywalker" because "Skywalker" symbolically means "Good". All it means when she says "Rey Skywalker", is "Rey Good".
    "Rey Palpatine" means "Rey Evil". And "Just Rey" means, "Rey I-don't-know-what-I-am".

    I just completely disagree that TROS doesn't add anything.
    It only doesn't add anything if what we're looking for is world building.
    Yes. It's not a world building story. Pretty much none of the ST is really world building story telling.

    That was one of my critiques. Not the world building exactly, but that they lack the Lucasian cinematographic manner of shooting which puts a larger degree of world show-and-tell into the lens than modern styles do.
    TLJ did it a bit more, and was decent at it, but TFA and TROS didn't do much of anything at all.

    That was my actual critique with the ST. It's highly focused on character narratives like modern story telling, and less on telling a story in a world which is an epic in form. This goes all the way from the screenplay to the lens. All of it works together to tell that kind of story.

    But TROS definitely added to the story. Just not to world building.

    Cheers,
    Jayson

    p.s. Forgive my typos. I had back surgery yesterday, an I'm on a fair amount of drugs. I think I edited them all.
     
    #71 Jayson, Sep 18, 2020
    Last edited: Sep 18, 2020
    • Like Like x 1
Loading...

Share This Page