Devin Faraci Calls TFA fan fiction and calls JJ Hollywood's greatest Mimic

Devin Faraci is writing from the point of view as if he knows the character better than anyone else. Its his opinion and in my mind, Star Wars nor any fans owe him anything other than a polite nod and either a respectful disagree or agreement. In my opinion the reversion of Han back to smuggler is absolutely in line with the tragedy he faced. Its not uncommon for people who suffer from tragedy to go back to the something in their past. And if it hurt him to see Leia in pain or vice versa then I believe it. Many couples get divorced or separate after a tragedy befalls their child.

I also don't think Han was given a loser treatment. He's just old. Most of his friends are gone. He's tired.

I'm simply tired of this alternate version of raping childhood. No one has taken away the ending of ROTJ. Is it not enough that our heroes got a time in their life when they got to celebrate? Guess, what life goes on. There is another day. Star Wars has gone from a fairy tale into a myth. And with that comes tragedy, hardship and still, yes, celebration.

Faraci has problems simply enjoying movies. Its his job to nit pick and be a film blogger. Its not his job to be a fan. Sadly, he sometimes gets the two mixed up and believes he's speaking for the rest of us.

 

​

--- Double Post Merged, Jan 14, 2016, Original Post Date: Jan 14, 2016 ---

I know marriages fall apart in real life after the loss of I child. Actually, I have dealt with that professionally. But this isn't real life. Our heroes are supposed to be larger than life, that's why they're heroes.

The important things that happen to them, happen on a galactic scale. Someone dies to save the galaxy, or falls in love and brings it to ruin. And as the author points out, it would have been simple to to put a heroic spin on Han being off with Chewie and the MF again. Why didn't they do that?

It's quite possible that Han didn't die for nothing, but as you said "If Kylo Ren ever turns from the dark side...". Well, what if he doesn't? We don't know what Han's death will mean. Right now, not much. Kylo isn't saved, Rey would have survived anyway, and the Star Killer was already on its way to destruction. A viewer new to SW isn't going to know anything of his legacy- he didn't even get a hero's funeral. In fact, it's almost as if he's as much an old has-been in that galaxy as in ours.

I'd be happy to be proven wrong in the next movie, believe me. But this is a really big problem with TFA, in fact it's probably the ten-ton elephant in the corner. If we can't talk about it here, that's a huge chunk of fans and fan feelings that are going to be ignored, to the detriment of all. I just don't think it serves anyone to pretend it's okay. For many fans of the OT, it's not okay.

 

Okay, I gave in and read the article. It's good. And I disagree with most of his points.

One little disagreement: I liked Ren taking off his mask in the Rey scene. It was unexpected and therefore had greater impact. And it made that scene my favorite of the movie.

But my major point is this. People want Han to be motivated, fighting to bring his son back to the light. But what exactly does that look like? Specifics please. Because real life murderers have real life fathers, and I'm pretty sure they don't have to go hunting them down across the world. The fathers know where the sons are, but what is there really to say? You can ask them why, you can cry, you can express disappointment and even love, but then it's over. They keep going, and you keep going, and there's nothing more you can really do.

--- Double Post Merged, Jan 14, 2016, Original Post Date: Jan 14, 2016 ---

That's true, but if you go down that road then we don't know what ANY of this will mean. Did the destruction of Starkiller base really matter? We don't know. Did it really matter that Rey found Luke? We don't know. I see Han love his son to the death, and I see Kylo Ren's reaction and I feel like it had an impact. I'm okay with it. But I guess a big heroic death might have worked too.

 

Precisely! Real life fathers don't have to go hunting them down across the world. But Han Solo does! This is not a normal boy, most murderers are not gifted by the Force, most murderer's fathers can't do the Kessel Run in 12 parsecs and don't own the Millennium Falcon and aren't married to a General with the Resistance, who also has the Force.

The solution shouldn't be mundane, because the people are not.

 

It's an interesting article, but he almost lost me with his argument that Han Solo is a father figure. I had an absentee dad, and Han Solo seems like he could be "fun dad", but he also lacks patience and seems like he'd rather roam around the galaxy than play catch imho.

I also don't agree that I'd buy into the idea of Han chasing down the "evil he spawned" since that assumes a lot about what made Kylo Ren who he is. It kind of makes it seem like a pretty black and white issue about the nature of Ren. When I think the movie makes it seem like it is anything but.

I am more bothered by Luke having run away into some sort of hibernation. But I do agree that it seems like the estrangement between Han and Leia wasn't really necessary.

 

Okay so I thought about what your'e saying and what a heroic galaxy saving Han Solo death might have looked like. And then one of my OTHER favorite movies of all time came to mind... heroic death, bridge over infinite chasm with no railings, tragic mourning by all of the other characters...

Warning, Lord of the Rings spoilers!

Now that is a hero's death! And if I'm honest with myself, the LOTR movies are probably better than TFA, but not by a lot. The thing is, I still like Han's death the way it is. He didn't die in some grandiose act, but instead with a small act of love. It didn't pump up Han, but he didn't need pumping up. He's freaking Han Solo. Han died to build up the character of Kylo Ren. I told my friends that during that scene I was more upset that Kylo Ren killed his father than I was about Han Solo dying. I think that's what a lot of people are calling a failure, and I understand that point of view. But for me it worked. Sometimes you have to sacrifice your Queen to win the match.

 

Who is Devin Faraci and why should we care?

Reading his article, it's become clear to me that this guy (and most others who share the same criticism) is unable to see put his own, perfect, idealised version of the Original Trilogy characters, and see them for who they really are; flawed, imperfect people.

Clearly this guy doesn't understand the story being told.

Firstly. We don't actually know the whole story about Luke. Did Luke tell us that he was blamed himself for everything and ran away to hide? No.
Do we even know that Han (or anyone for that matter) talked to Luke after the incident? No.
Han has just done what he always does, and arrived at his own conclusion.

If there's anything Star Wars has taught me, it's that you shouldn't just take someone's word for anything.

Second. We don't really know what happened with Han either.
We know Leia and Han had a son, and that Snoke was trying to seduce him from a young age.
We know that Han didn't really have a clue what was going on. He probably just thought Ben was just like any other kid going through a rebellious phase.
We know that Leia, being the strong independent woman she is, decided to send Ben to Luke, who had more experience with the problem. Han probably felt such a course of action was unnecessary, and felt a bit ignored in the decision.
We know that Luke and Ben disappeared after an incident
We know that Leia got lost in her political efforts and that Han wound up back in smuggling.

How did Han and Leia even know that Ben was the one who killed all the other students?
Did Ben tell them? Did Luke? If Luke told them, how he know? If he was there to witness it, why didn't he do something to stop it?
Who is to say that Han didn't start off reaching out to old smuggling contacts to try and find his son? Maybe that's where he heard the stories?
Maybe he tried to tell Leia of these stories, but being like most mother's, Leia refused to believe them, and so she pushed Han further away.

I certainly don't, Han Solo would have been a terrible father, especially for someone strong in the Force like Kylo.
Han Solo lacks both the patience and understanding (of the Force in particular) to be a good father.
Imagine a single father, trying to explain puberty and stuff to his daughter.
Now imagine Han Solo bring that father...
Yeah, good luck.

He's right about this...
In many ways though, it would have been far easier to ignore the original trilogy heroes altogether.
Trying to introduces audiences to a new group of heroes while simultaneously closing the book on old characters in a story which needs to function without requiring any knowledge of the past films is a nearly impossible task.

Perhaps instead of criticising them for trying, maybe people should have a go at writing something better?

Did he see TFA?
Han is killed, and EVERYONE reacts. Rey, Finn, Chewie, and even Leia who is on a planet halfway across the Galaxy.

Han's death is given a whole lot more screen time to sink in than Kenobi's ever was... and it works better, because unlike Luke who barely knew Obi-Wan enough to react in the way he did, Chewie has been at Han's side for decades.
Chewie reacting to Han's death>>>> Luke reacting to Obi Wan's death.

ANH should have played more on the fact the Luke had lost someone who could have told him about his father.

To be fair, The Lord of the Rings was a film adaptation of a book which took nearly a decade to write.
The adaptation itself, was developed over a few years before filming. TFA was developed and written, from scratch, in about 18 months.

 

The problem I have with guys like Faraci and others out there who criticize the movie, or certain characters and where they are now (like Han supposedly being a "dead beat dad", or Luke being a "run away coward"), is that they cannot account for a number of things. (1) This isn't about where the complainer or criticizer should think that the characters should be/or would have acted, because they aren't the official storytellers. That's the job of the story group writers, producers, actors, and director. Just because these critics don't like it or don't agree with it doesn't make their position objective or official. Their opinion is the one that's subjective or "fan fiction" at best.

(2) They don't yet know what came before this movie in that thirty year gap that has caused the characters to become who they now are and make the decisions that they have made. For example, we have absolutely no evidence at this point that Han was a dead beat dad. I posted in length elsewhere in the cantina on this subject, but there is simply too much that we don't yet know. For example, we don't know WHEN Ben (Kylo) was seduced by Snoke (near Han and Leia in the New Republic, or near Luke after Ben goes to train at the new Jedi academy). We just know that Ben was starting to show Vader-like tendencies and Han and Leia had no experience raising a powerful force sensitive kid who may or may not turn to the dark side. It would be natural to turn to Uncle Luke, the only Jedi and closest member of the family, to take Ben under his wing and train him up, because Luke had already made that same choice, been trained under Obi-Wan and Yoda, resisted the dark side, remained good, brought back Vader to the light, and helped to defeat the Emperor. It was also Leia's idea to send Ben away anyway, not Han's, even though it makes more sense to send Ben with loving uncle Luke than it did for Shmi to send Anakin off world with nice stranger Jedi Qui Gonn and chance never seeing him again. Do we call Shmi a dead beat mom for that?

What Leia (and Han) did makes perfect sense considering the unique situation. We don't know when and what Snoke did to seduce Ben (like Palpatine seduced Anakin right in front of everyone), so we can't judge Han yet for that. And then we have no idea when Ben (Kylo) left Luke and murdered all the Jedi trainees as well as where he went. We don't know if Han and Leia (and Luke) tried to find Ben, if they couldn't find Ben, or if he was so hidden or far behind enemy lines with Snoke, First Order, and Knights of Ren that Han and Leia could even find him if they wanted to, or if they believed Kylo was too far gone or brainwashed (at the time) to listen to reason, or thought they would probably be killed trying to get to him. We don't know any of this at all. At this point it's all speculation. We also know that BOTH Han and Leia grew apart because of the tragedy that happened. They BOTH went back to what they knew (Han with smuggling and Leia with the Resistance). It sounds like Leia was the one really struggling with seeing Ben every time that she saw Han (even though they probably both struggled in seeing each other), and that's a big part of this split up (which wouldn't affect Ben anyway because he would already have been gone). Even then, is Leia a deadbeat mom here? There is simply too much we don't know yet to make an educated decision.

(3) Finally, we still don't know what's yet to come, and if the choices that Han, Leia, and Luke have made before (and then during Episode 7) will pay off. We do know however, that after so many years when Han FINALLY does see Kylo, He tells Leia, they are able to talk about their issues and work past them, and then the same day Han goes for Ben once he actually KNOWS where he is. He walks out on that bridge knowing that he may die, but he says and shows that he loves his boy and would take him back unconditionally, even after all that Kylo has done, and still loving his son even after Han has been impaled and is dying. I still don't see where the dead beat dad is here. Do we take Kylo's word on all that? Kylo's word to Rey? Seriously? After everything Kylo has done, and after all the brainwashing and manipulating that Snoke has apparently done, we take their word? Have some of the critics been seduced by Snoke's lies too? And then, was Han's bridge sacrifice really so dumb or futile, or in vain, like a number of critics have said? How can we possibly know that yet? We havent even seen the next two movies.

We don't really know why Luke left everything behind. Is it because he allowed all of the new Jedi trainees to be killed, and let his nephew (and sister and brother-in-law's kid) go bad? Is it because he went off to find the only clue or weapon that can defeat Snoke and the First Order? Is it because he got blackmailed by Snoke or Kylo to preserve Rey's life (and she is left mind-wiped and out of the way on Jakku)? It's all speculation still. We know absolutely nothing. That's why I can't agree with these kind of juvenile character reset criticisms and speculations. It's not a failure that the movie hasn't shown these past things yet. That's part of the unfolding mystery and story. The OT movies did the same thing. This may not give us definite evidence for the reason Han "wasn't there" for Kylo and returned to smuggling, or why Luke supposedly "ran away." We don't know hardly ANYTHING about it yet. That means that we can imagine whatever we would prefer, or what we think caused it, and speculate about it, but until it has been revealed to us by the official storytellers, that's all we can do: guess and speculate. But I won't trash or criticize the movie or the characters until I learn specifically what happened and why they made the choices they did.

That's why I don't take so many of these TFA movie and character criticisms seriously. Those that make them don't have all the relevant information and are making unfounded speculations in a concrete and irresponsible way. They have no idea yet, just like everyone else, yet many of us are keeping an open mind until all of the data is in. That's not a failure of the writers, since the story has only begun to be told. I mean seriously, go back and watch ANH and ESB and wonder why Obi Wan and Yoda "ran away" and didn't try to take down Palpatine and Vader (we now know near the end of Episode 3 when they had the best chance to do so) and let an entire galaxy fall and millions of people die and at least one planet get destroyed. (Once Obi-Wan had taken down Anakin, he could have made sure that it was really over with Anakin, and then he and Yoda could have ganged up on Palpatine). Is that an unfair criticism? And why do we only see 6 tie fighters defending the first Death Star in ANH? That's all they could throw up against the rebellion? (Or was it simply that the special effects and budget were limited in what could be shown on screen at the time?) Why don't we get more information about the clone wars, who Anakin skywalker was, more time picturing his relationship to Obi wan, the rise of the empire, the fall of the old republic, how the republic senate worked, or the rise of the new rebellion and Bail Organa's and alderaan's role in it? Where is the emperor during all this? Where is Yoda? We could really do this all day if we chose to.

In TFA Phasma gets criticized for letting the shields down at Starkiller base (although it could have been because she was totally confident that her trained forces would take down the few resistance fighters left, which they were absolutely doing, until Han and Chewie had to go back in and save the day, or that her bringing the shields down would warn the First Order that an attack was imminent and show exactly where the intruders where located in the base), yet in ANH, Vader (and a reluctant Tarkin) let Luke, Leia, and Han take the Death Star plans back to the rebels and end up losing the Death Star because of it. Shouldn't Vader (and Tarkin's corpse) have gotten in trouble for that? And Palpatine lets the rebels get the second Death Star plans and know the location of the shield generator and Vader lets them land on Endor. Is that better or worse than what Phasma did? We hardly mourn for the new republic and Han in TFA? Well, we hardly mourn for Alderaan and Obi-Wan in ANH. And the list goes on and on. Lob any criticism against TFA and I will find an equal criticism to throw at ANH or the OT movies. I just choose not to do so because I love the movies and choose to see the good in them. I also choose not to lob unfounded speculations at the TFA characters and plot points until we actually have all the relevant information.

 

The ewok BBQ didn't last, the happy ending was shattered and the OT characters aren't travelling the galaxy doing heroic deeds. The new republic wasn't what it was supposed to be, the new jedi 'padawan' got slaughtered and the next in the Skywalker line turned evil.

I can understand how some would want a straight sequel to episode 6 and see their beloved characters trying to right all the wrongs. That's not what's happening here. This is a new story and the OT were just there, older, sadder, to pass the baton. Just like Yoda and Obi Wan did before them.

It's a new story about new people and I do understand people's disappointment with that. To me, it worked. How could it not when the new characters were so well written and the new actors are fantastic? To me they were. I also felt the old characters were treated with respect. Others did not. Expectations got in the way for some.

To me, the true triumph of the new film is how fast the (disgruntled by the PT) original trilogy fans took to the new characters. That's quite a feat and something that did not happen when the previous trilogy launched.

 

Threads merged.

 

I'm sorry, but Han Solo was a freaking hero in this film. He may have went back to his old ways, but that was only to distract him from the loss of his family. Han jumped right into the fight and gave his life trying to save his son. How anyone could interpret Han as being "reset" didn't really understand him to begin with and probably isn't a father or husband.

Think about this, Han Solo basically was the husband of a powerful politician. They had a son. Much like many kids of powerful political families, the kid was probably troubled. Jealous of his parents, etc. Only this kid has the blood of Darth Vader running though his veins. Han, like many dads, could not relate to his son. He didn't have his powers. Unlike Rey who Han related to quickly thanks to her mechanical and piloting interests, Kylo probably didn't share anything in common with his father.

Fast forward to TFA Han. Once Han knew the kids were looking for Luke, he was back in. Even Maz said "you're right back in the mess". When Leia reunited with Han, she gave him the look like "how do you always end up in these messes?". Han ends up in the mess, because Han is trying to help. Once he sees Leia. He's back.

Remember when Ackbar gets all negative and says "they have defensive shields our ships cannot penetrate".
Han is like "you idiot - we disable the shields" I added what he was thinking. BTW, Ackbar never thinks they can win, Lando had to put him in his place a few times too. "We can't repel firepower.....blah blah blah". Ackbar is a hack.
Anyway, after they rescue Rey and are escaping, he sees the X-wings are having trouble. It's his idea they GO BACK and try to help by planting explosives.

Han admitted he didn't think he was good enough to help his son. He was a humbled broken dad trying to help the women he still loved. He sacrificed himself by getting back in the fight, against his own son. Finally he faced the son he felt he lost forever and with nothing but love offered to help him. All Han does is try and help. In my opinion the Han Solo we got in TFA wasn't the reluctant hero of the OT. He was the hero that just wanted to help his family.

 

Devin Faraci is an ass anyway.

 

I just think it's funny that some complained that not everything worked out perfectly at the end of ROTJ. I don't know where they got the idea that everything was settled and done. Just because there was a victory party on Endor (which is all we saw until 1997 special editions)? Or even then, that people on different planets rose up to celebrate or tear some Imperial statues down? They also had a celebration and ceremony at the end of ANH, when the first Death Star got destroyed, but we all knew by the time of ESB that things were far from settled. It got even worse. Even then, some of the people who complained about the characters and galaxy not having a happy ending after ROTJ also complained that TFA went a different direction from the expanded universe stories. However, these critics should be the first ones to know (from the expanded universe stories) that even there, things weren't settled at all after ROTJ.

In the Truce at Bakura, just days after ROTJ ended, things get even worse in the galaxy. Or did they read the Thrawn books, and others etc, etc? The Empire regrouping, Palpatine clones rising, Skywalker and Solo kids falling to the dark side or getting killed, other more powerful alien forces rising up to attack, etc. I could go on and on. I love that things after ROTJ weren't tied in a perfect bow, that the struggle goes on, that characters stumble and fall and have to get back up, that the planets and governments and leaders don't learn the lessons of the past and commit the same mistakes again. That a new generation rises up and has to learn from the past generation what happened so they can play a role in making things right in their own time. Those are stories that need to be told and lessons that need to be learned.

 

I fail to see why the story decisions in TFA are inconsistant with the characters. Han has to be some do-gooder? WTF!?
It's just more crap from this gasbag.

 

Perhaps not a dead beat dad, but certainly not a father prepared to raise a child like Ben.
In the novelisation, Leia states that Han has "wonderful qualities,... but patience and understanding were never among them." So he may not have been one of those dead beat dad's that sits around watching the football and drinking, but I doubt he was the kind of person who would be winning father of the year awards.
Han Solo is a pretty reserved guy with a bit of a rough exterior. He's not the kind of person who really discusses his feelings, and with his background, he's probably not the best person for advice. Combine that with Ben's strong connection to the Force, which Han could not possible understand, and you've got a paternal relationship that is bound to struggle.

This is entirely fitting with who Han Solo was in the Original Trilogy.

Not entirely true. In the novelisation, Leia says that Snoke had been always been watching him, long before she even realised. It makes it sound like Leia sent Ben to Luke, in an effort to get him away from Snoke's influence, but she made the choice to do that on her own, because she wanted to protect Han from the truth of what was happening to their son.

That may just be how I'm reading it though.

Exactly.
Even Leia believes that her decision to send Ben away is what ultimately drove Han away.

People make the mistake of treating Han's comments on Luke as gospel truth, but even Han doesn't really know.
He doesn't even know if Luke has gone in search of the first Jedi temple, calling the reports rumours and stories.

If Han had spoken to Luke since the betrayal, why would he know less about Luke's whereabouts than other people?

And who says Han didn't go looking for his son?
And maybe Han never stopped looking? Maybe Han simply ran out of leads?
It's a big galaxy. If someone wants to hide, it can be pretty hard to find him.

But I am judging this on what is in the movie.
Han says so himself:
"There're a lot of rumors. Stories. The people who knew him the best think he went looking for the first Jedi temple."
Notice that Han doesn't say "when I talked to him last, he was looking for the first Jedi temple."
Han is recycling second hand information. Who told Han these stories and rumours? No idea, but he certainly didn't hear it form Luke, otherwise it wouldn't be stories and rumours.
The movie itself makes it blatantly clear that Han has no clue what the deal is with Luke.
I don't see why it's so hard for people to see that.

Although Rey doesn't know Han Solo personally, the film gives her more reasons to care.
1. Rey knows about Han. He's a legend, not just some old hermit living out in the desert.
2. Rey longs for familial belonging. Rey witnesses a father trying to reconnect with his son, and then sees the son kill the father. Rey literally saw someone destroy what she has been waiting her entire life for.

Also, I don't have an issue with Luke's initial reaction, on the Death Star. What makes Rey's reaction more believable is the fact that she doesn't sit on the Falcon and mope about it saying "I can't believe he's gone" like Luke did. Instead of dwelling on Han's death, Rey's shock turns into disgust towards Kylo.

 

Empire Strikes Back, Return of the Jedi, Fellowship of The Ring, Two Towers, Return of the King, Harry Potter movies all faced the similar kind of criticism by what can at best be considered a very very marginal group. With Star Wars it is always "its too similar to the last movie" and with movie adaptations of literature it is always "this is not like the book, they have turned it in something else".

And I agree that 90% of the negative criticism is either click bait or narcisism.

So no one has to worry about these people, not pay attention to them. It has happened before and will happen again (in fact the criticism for Battlestar Galactica's remake....so poetic if you think of it.)

 

So people who claim that Han Solo wasn't himself or Luke acted cowardly and so on are right because that's what's in the movie and the people who think they behaved and reacted realistic are just speculating and wrong?

Okay ...

 

I'm absolutely biased on behalf of Star Wars, therefore I will not comment.

Same here and that's why I consider the scene to be extremely ambivalent. I absolutely don't mind that Han didn't get the heroic death one might have come to expect, but the fact that I didn't "feel" it until Chewie did is what continues to puzzle me.