Deep Depth Analysis Of The Teaser

FWIW, JJ said in an interview after the Celebration Panel the meaning of the title should be apparent after watching the movie.

 

I hope it will be, but after TFA and how it was supposed to be crystal clear who "Rey's parents" were, I remain skeptical.

 

I honestly didn't know who TFA title refered to after seeing the film only one time. Could have been R2D2 as far as I could tell. Only when Snoke Said the 'Darkness rises and Light to meet it.' in TLJ was I sure TFA was about Rey.

But a first film is allowed to be more vauge coz we don't know what we are in for in the first installment. Like The Phantom Menace. I'm sure as a kid I thought that was a reference to Darth Maul.

I do think however 'Rise of Skywalker' will be a more obvious title to understand that those ones. i mean, its not vauge as a statment same as Revenge of the Sith and Return of the Jedi. I am excited to see who its about. I do have my money on Kylo Ren. I mean, each Film title kind of talks about the trajectory of the Skywalkers. Anakin enacted Revenge of the Sith, heading downwards into Darkness . Luke enacted Return of the Jedi heading upwards towards the light side. It only makes sense that Kylo Ren's journey would be akin to Anakins like a mirror but with him Returning to the good side, hence rising from the darkside. I mean the first line in TFA to him is 'The First Order rose from the dark side, you did not.' So it makes sense for a 'Rise' title to be about Ben Solo.
Also if he continues the descent into darkness I really don't see how his arc is at all different from Anakins.
its like Anakin's ark within the PT was was from Light -> Dark.
Luke's within the OT was Light -> Light
Kylo Ren's will be Dark -> Light.

like a mirror of the series, it rhymes. a Dark-> Dark progression would be too negative to end the Skywalker Saga on. Thats my guess anyway.

 

I like your ideas, but I'm wondering if they are going back to the past to fill in some missing things we didn't know about the Skywalker line and somehow Rey learns about her own. There's a connection, but not necessarily a blood relation.

 

Not to stray to far off topic here but I too felt it was pretty obvious TFA was referring to the force awakening in Rey. Max says to Rey

I am no Jedi, but I know the Force. It moves through and surrounds every living thing. Close your eyes. Feel it. The light... it's always been there. It will guide you. The saber. Take it.

Then Rey starts to actually discover the Force and how to use it during the interrogation scene. She then fully gives into it when Kylo mentions it during there lightsaber fight.

 

^ Both of the titles of the previous films in the Sequel Trilogy have referred to Rey. This is confirmed by both both the films themselves and by people associated with them.

 

I agree, the ST isn't any more about Kylo than the OT was about Darth Vader. Kylo and Darth were the foils to our heroes.

 

Here's the officially confirmed meanings of all the Saga film titles.
The Phantom Menace: Palpatine/Sidious
Attack of the Clones: The Clone army
Revenge of the Sith: The Sith
A New Hope: Luke and Leia
The Empire Strikes Back: The Empire
Return of the Jedi: Luke, Anakin, and the Jedi Order
The Force Awakens: Rey
The Last Jedi: Rey and Luke

Although the Saga films are ultimately about the Skywalker family, at this point the majority of their titles officially refer to things/entities/people other than members of that family, which is interesting.

It's also been confirmed by both the film and other sources that the title refers to Rey, so neither of us are wrong. I'm just giving the title's association with Rey more focus because she is the protagonist of the Sequel Trilogy and Luke isn't.

 

The director of the TFA isn't going to make HIS hero... not the hero. C'mon people. I assume Kylo will be a huge part of RoS, but as huge as Vader was in RotJ.

 

^ I don't see what you're objecting to in my post or trying to say by quoting it.

"The Rise of Skywalker" could refer to both Ben/Kylo and Rey, but I suspect that it will first-and-foremost refer to the latter because she is the central protagonist of the Sequel Trilogy and JJ Abrams' viewpoint on the thematic elements of Star Wars is very straightforward and simplistic (in comparison to George Lucas and Rian Johnson's views on the franchise)

 

Who says I'm disagreeing with you?

 

I didn't mean to be accusatory; I was admitting that I wasn't sure what you were trying to say and looking for clarification.

 

In my opinion, "The Last Jedi" was mostly about Luke. However, at the end we understand that Rey is also the Last Jedi, after Luke was gone. The words were spoken by Luke himself: "... I will not be the Last Jedi... ", and then the camera focus on Rey, immediately after. I will not argue, or even know, which has more weight with respect to what the directors have said, but my interpretation is that it's mostly about Luke, and Rey as well. Always those double meanings, the Star Wars titles have.

The Rise of Skywalker could refer to Ben, Rey, Luke, and even Leia, and Anakin. We all have our preferences and I love to read about them. My favorite theory so far is that "The Rise of Skywalker" will be about Luke rising from the dead, like a super force-ghost AND about Ben Solo's redemption. I don't believe Kylo Ren will be the super villain in IX, but anything can happen, as far as I'm concerned.

 

The Emperor was the super villain in RotJ. Luke the hero, Vader conflicted than redeemed.
The Emporer?(not Kylo- but someone else) the super villain in tRoS. Rey the hero, Kylo conflicted needing to be redeemed.

 

This.

Yes, I can see where you coming from- in TLJ Luke says that he "won't be the last jedi", but this doesn't cancel out that he is indeed the last jedi in that very moment, yes, there will be others someday, but for now he is the LAST one.