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

You're right. You shouldn't and you don't have to do all of that to enjoy the film. But also, a film doesn't have time to explain every little detail inside it nor should it have to. That's where the background information comes in. It enhances the experience, but isn't necessary for enjoyment.

I'd counter that it does work well as an intro movie, but does it really need to stand on it's own? I has the support of the six other movies before it and the five (?) movies after it - standing on it's own isn't a problem.

That's your opinion and that's fine. That being said, comparing it to ESB either from expectations as "The best Star Wars movie ever!" or where the story is currently located narrative-wise is unfair.

It's filled with questions, which (not to dig at you) I don't think the fandom truly knows how to handle. We've been spoiled in the sense that for decades we've known where the story was going to go - either with Legends (Han and Leia get married and have three kids and are great parents!) or the Prequels ("We know Anakin becomes Darth Vader, just show us that!"). For the first time in a VERY long time, we don't have all the answers, and that bugs us. So we take it out as "flaws and holes" and grips and bad character development and/or bad characters in general. Now that's not to say the movie is perfect, but I think a lot of the time people mix up what they expected and what will be explained in the future with those actual plot wholes.

As for the OT characters, they explain why they're the way they are - that doesn't sound lazy to me. Han and Leia hid their grief over losing their son by going back to what they were individually good at. Leia pushed Han out and went to politics while Han went back to smuggling. Should they have been any different? I honestly can't answer that. But what route do you think they should have taken? I'm genuinely curious.

Also, fun fact, the whole "heroes of our childhood aren't perfect people or perfect parents because they're human too" is something of a trend nowadays. Star Wars, Legend of Korra, Naruto (won't go past that for spoilers). It seems the only ones who made it out alright were Harry, Ron, and Hermione...

...and what's said in the movies. Also, if those "other sources" are canon, it's fair game.

That's the point! He isn't a cool, awesome Dark Side master. He's training - he's a kid in over his head that doesn't really know what's right or wrong. He's being manipulated - indoctrinated - and is immature because of it.

Again, you're right about most great movies, but it's also part of a trilogy, so expecting everything to be answered all at once seems a little silly.

 

I agree with you, I tried to watch the movie with my brain turned off.
I was able to enjoy certain parts of the movie.

They make it look like Han/Leia and Luke are some kind of incompetent failures.

I agree with you, I posted something similar.
People should not need to read books/comments or listen to interviews to understand characters and coherences better.

 

I could be wrong, but wasn't the whole point of the Ewoks to sell toys to children or at least make it accessible for them instead of the Wookies that they were originally going to do? And don't forget the post-series books and movies and TV shows that came out after.

I consider it like a road trip - you know the destination and you know the road, but you're in a different car with different friends; thus the experience is quite different. Also, how is it a "dumbed down" rehash? I'm actually really curious. A rehash, I understand. But "dumbed down" seems a little...harsh (yet also intriguing!).

 

I guess his point was, that not everything should be explained, but if you want to understand characters and coherences better, you have to buy books, read comments, listen to interviews and so on.
A little bit of a backstory "2-4 minutes of a exposition scene would have not hurt the movie".
I prefer this scene over the unnecessary Rathar scene: (why not scratch the Rathar scene and give us something like this instead)

If they copy ANH they should have it done properly.

--- Double Post Merged, Jan 18, 2016, Original Post Date: Jan 18, 2016 ---

I don't know what this statement is for, I was not referring to ROTJ, I meant the whole OT.
Sure the Ewoks are kids friendly and I guess they wanted to sell toys or the Wookie customes were too expensive back then, but this is not the topic.
My point is, every OT movie is self-exaplanotary, there is no need to read additional material to understand characters - motivations and coherences.

 

We got the exposition we needed. Snoke is in charge, Kylo Ren's identity, why Han and Leia aren't together, where Luke might have gone and why he went, why Rey is on Jakku and why Finn left. What more do we need to know that wouldn't spoil any surprises from the next two movies? Maybe why the New Republic isn't helping, but we have the First Order, we have the Resistance, did we really need to know about them. Honestly, the only other exposition that would have been necessary would be for Rey to explain why she's a good pilot (then again, before we say Luke fly an X-Wing he'd only been driving speeders...).

Hahaha I can't blame you for not liking the Rathtar scene! I didn't mind it but yeah it doesn't really add anything. But comparitively speaking, it's like the Trash Compacter scene in ANH - I can't think of too much that adds other than building chemistry. That being said, I haven't seen ANH in its entirety in a while so...

As for the scene you've chosen to show, that's like Han explaining the Force and where Luke went.

--- Double Post Merged, Jan 18, 2016, Original Post Date: Jan 18, 2016 ---

Sorry! I misinterpreted the point then. You were saying that the OT wasn't influenced by money making or the market like the ST is and I wanted to counter that.

Is RotJ self-explanatory though? I mean, in one sense it is due to the opening crawl, but in another sense you do need those first two movies to get all the necessary backstory and plot beats. To start at RotJ makes no sense narrative wise. It stands on the shoulders of the movies that came before it, just like TFA does. And Star Wars is more than just the OT now. It's a modern day saga, with each part building on the others. Ironically, TFA is the most like the OT of all the new material since the OT in terms of plot and narrative (origin story/Hero's Journey), how much it explains (enough so that you understand but not so much that it needs to explain everything) and even the characters, yet you seem to dislike it (which is totally fine! I'm just here to try to understand where you're coming from).

 

I will try to explain my viewpoint in a short sentence:
Action scene after action scene, no real explanation for most part of the story and characters/motivations, things happen, many coincidenes.
The fast pace distracts from a shallow/hollow product.
ANH is still superior in my opinion. (maybe due many lucky circumstances back then)

--- Double Post Merged, Jan 18, 2016, Original Post Date: Jan 18, 2016 ---

What is the point with ROTJ?
I guess when we watch IX in some years without watching VII and VIII it would make no sense narrative wise too.
My point is ANH works great as a standalone movie and as a prelude.
Like you stated TFA had ROTJ to build on, but they don't explained nothing between the 30 years gap.
Everything just happens, sorry my fault, I have to read additional material to understand a movie better nowadays and to make them richer.
I hope you understand me better now. (maybe I'am getting to old for Star Wars)

 

Hahaha and that's fair! I can't counter than nor would I want to. ANH started everything so it deserves it's place.

This is your opinion, and I respect that. However, personally I feel a bit differently (not for what happens, since it is a lot of action scenes one right after the other). The story to me is explained (it is the search for Luke (like how the ANH started with the recruitment of Obi-Wan) that gets put on hold so that BB8 can be returned to the Resistance, and stopping Starkiller Base (which, when all is said and done, was kind of like a detour from the mission...), as are the character's motivations (Rey wants to keep her promise to BB8 and meet Luke Skywalker, Finn wanted to run away but is willing to fight for his friends, Han is...Han...).

 

If any fan says this movie is "just like ANH" or a "rehash of ANH" I would say that such a fan seriously misunderstands A New Hope. Not to mention The Force Awakens. I wouldn't say such a person is not a true fan, but I would say such a fan is pretty ignorant and deserves a day of contemplation in the deathstar trash compactor.

 

Interesting discussion on this thread since I left. As for people stating that you shouldn't need supplemental material to enjoy a movie, I agree 100%. A movie should always stand on its own, unless it's the last in a trilogy or something of course. My feelings on TFA however is that it gives us everything we need. I didn't have any issues understanding the plot or the character motivations in the film.

The one area that I thought was a bit to vague the whole relationship between the New Republic, the Resistance and the First Order. I assumed that it was probably a bit of a Cold War issue between the New Republic and the First Order, hence the fact that there was a Resistance separate from the Republic, but I honestly wasn't 100% sure. It was confirmed that was indeed the case in interviews and other sources like the Visual Dictionary.

However, most moviegoers are not going to scour the internet for answers or bother picking up the Visual Dictionary. Of my friends that are more casual Star Wars fans, that is the thing that tends to confuse them most about the film. Apparently there are deleted scenes that would have cleared that up, it's to bad that JJ wasn't able to work those scenes into the final cut of the film.

Now some people may point to ANH and point out the fact that we don't get much politics in that film either, but there is a clear difference. In ANH it is clear cut and simple as can be, there is an evil empire simply called the Empire and a group of freedom fighters simply called the Rebellion. There's a vague reference to the Old Republic, but it doesn't confuse things because they are clearly out of the picture at that point.

Conversely, in TFA we have three different factions with vague connections. We know that the Resistance opposes the First Order, but their role in galactic politics, especially regarding their respective relationships with the New Republic is pretty muddy in the cut of the film that we got. Additionally, even though I thought the opening crawl covered it pretty well, casual moviegoers seemed a little confused about the origins of the First Order as well.

That being said, none of the people I have talked to seemed to have let that aspect of the film bother them that much.

 

That's happening because of something called "Disney" unfortunately .

 

Well I have some magazine articles/reviews from the 70s which clearly state that they didn't really understand what 'the senate', 'the empire', 'the academy', 'the jedi' and the "rebellion" was all about. It is only in retrospect that we know these things.
As for The Force Awakens, it seems that some modern viewers are less inclined to accept lacunae in their movies, even if they are intentional. Now all that exposition about politics would give us a prequel movie with bad pacing and boring scenes with people discussing politics while standing in circles. The original Star Wars films always had lacunae, some purposefully, others not. You don't really need to understand the relation between the Republic and the Resistance to understand The Force Awakens. The politics is a sort of 'umwelt' which doesn't really infringe on the story. What matters is the story areour characters. If there are people who are seriously upset by the fact that there was 'too little' explained in the movie, I would advise them to go and read any good piece of real literature. Go read the Lord of Rings trilogy and see how much of that political backstory is actually filled in, and how much is in fact lacunae. Good stories are the one's where the audience needs to fill in some stuff itself. What would Homer's poetry, the Beowulf or Dickens' work have been without their lacunae?

 

While I don't disagree with you, the difference between ANH and TFA is that ANH presented those things as side things to the plot. We don't need to know the whole history of the Jedi or the Old Republic to focus on the main conflict, the Good Rebellion vs the Bad Empire. The fact that there are only two factions in the OT makes things incredibly simple and easy to grasp. Had there been a third faction with nebulous connections to the other two, it would have indeed made things a bit more confusing.

Like I said, I don't have much of an issue with it, but it did confuse people, and it could have been taken care of with a bit more of in film explanation, which even could have been worked into action sequences. Fans like us understand these things, but it did confuse people like my Dad who had no context of the New Republic and their relationship to the other two factions. My Dad never had issues with the unexplained backstory in ANH because it didn't have much of a bearing on the main story. With the New Republic however, it raises questions that could have been answered fairly easily. Had we had more of a connection to what was going on in that respect, we would have had more context as to why it was a big deal that The First Order blew up the Hosnian System for instance.

Once again, these things didn't ruin the movie for me, or hardly any moviegoers for that matter, but some of them could have been better addressed.

 

That doesn't justfy it.
Hence why Episode 1 is actually my favourite of the prequels, even with Jar Jar and the podrace sequence, which doesn't really belong in a Star Wars movie (it has absolutely nothing to do with a galactic conflict or character growth).

They aren't needed, but they're nice to know. Everything you need to know is there in the movie.

Which speculation is that?

Holes? What holes? The single biggest hole in the entire movie is Han giving Finn back his blaster, seeing Finn still carrying the blaster when he rushes off to tell Han what was happening in the sky, and then Finn telling Maz that he doesn't have a weapon. What happened with the blaster?
This bugs me more than anything else in the film.

Everything you need to see this depth, is in the movie. The overwhelming need to prove himself to Snoke and rivalry with Hux, his conflict struggle with the light and dark, and his fear of failure. It's all there, plain as day. All the books do is make these matters unmistakble.


In ANH, Vader was just a bad guy with nothing else happening. Don't get me wrong, I love Vader, but he's about as one dimensional as villains can be (in ANH).

Kylo hates his dad because he sees him as weak and foolish. Which is entirely understandable based on Han Solo in the original trilogy.
What was Han supposed to do? Go and hunt down his son who can stop blaster bolts in mid-air? There was nothing Han can really do about it.

The backstory and reasons why these things are the way they are, are not important to TFA.

I agree, but the thing is, you don't need them. TFA's problem is a pacing issue (which is odd, because a lot of critics have praised the pacing). Where a book moves at the reader's own pace, the movie moves at a "blink" and you'll miss it scene. Multiple viewings of the film are about as good as reading the books... especially if you can get a copy and just watch different bits over and over.

Not entirely true, especially if you just base things on the first movie:
Luke - Why is Luke on Tatooine? Why does he want to stay? Why does he care?
Han - Why is he on Tatooine? Why does he decide to come back and save Luke?
Leia - Why did she become so actively involved in the Rebellion, and how did she get the Death Star plans?
Obi-Wan - Why is he (or anyone) living on Tatooine?
Vader - Who is he? Why isn't he in charge?

There are so many things about the main original trilogy characters which are never explained, even by the time you get to the end of the trilogy. Some of them you need to watch through to ROTS to get answers to.

TFA has the problem that its characters are a bit more complex and their motivations are harder to sell. For instance, Finn makes a huge change when he abandons the First Order. People are happy with allowing Han to come back and help Luke for no other reason than he is a good person, but that same reason is too simple for Finn, because there's an added question of "how does Finn overcome the programming of the First Order." Han also get's an hour to learn about his character before he goes through that action, while Finn makes his choice in the beginning of the film.

We know Han's interpretation of why Luke left... whether or not that is actually the case is something we'll just have to wait and see.
And we only know a part of the reason why Rey was on Jakku.

Then again, you don't really need to understand this. It has no real bearing on the journey of Rey and Finn, or their quest to find Luke.

It's too bad we didn't just get a longer cut of the film... Why did they only want 136 min? They could have made it 150 min, and I don't think too many people would have complained.

 

So after reading this David Faraci's article I cannot help but just chuckle. First, I had no idea who Faraci was so I tried to read the article as objectively receptive to his arguments as possible, but sadly I think they fell flat. His premise relies entirely on the false narrative of "originality" and hence why he calls JJ a "mimic." Sadly this is all too common, many people fail to see that the "originality" they claim to crave for is non existent. First, everyone that creates a work of art, whether it is a painting, song, or movie is ALWAYS inspired by someone else. Any sort of creativity has its roots in something the creator of the work has experienced or learned. For instance, when Lucas created Star Wars he was inspired by a variety of other previous works such as Flash Gordon, of course this is well known. Third, I think the problem many times has to do with something being called "derivative." I think people just do not like hearing that something is derivative of something else. Unfortunately the reality is that everything is derivative of something else. The important part is not that it is "not original" or derivative but how the new artist presents their work of art. For instance, JJ in TFA used the OT storyline by taking the best parts, slimming it down and using it NOT as the main plot, but as a backdrop so that viewers feel a familiarity aspect while at the same time introducing brand new characters, with new dynamics, and expanding on the nature of the force (the idea a person can be "seduced" by the light side of the force, etc.) Fourth, I think that true fan fiction, is exactly that fiction made by a fan that is purely for shits and giggles. To call TFA, a 200 million dollar production, with some of the best people in movie making today "fan fiction" is actually a disservice to fan fiction, because fan fiction depends on films like TFA to further expand the fandom that initially sparked the fan fiction itself.

 

Show don't tell.

TFA has done a lot of the latter.

 

What's "FA" ?

 

I actually discovered on my latest viewing that in the quick interaction between Rey and Finn after their escape from Jakku that Rey says "I've flown some ships but I've never left the planet" and I'm not even kidding you can look for it the next time you see it.

 

It does, because it's already screwed up.

No, to be honest, there is not much content.

Luke is a orphan and got raised by his uncle and aunt, his father is supposed dead.
He does not want to stay, he wants to join the academy.
He cares about his uncle and aunt, I guess it's called conscientiousness.
Han is on Tatooine, because he is looking for a job, maybe dealing with - or hiding from jabba.
He is saving Luke because he likes him at the end of ANH and don't want him to die on the Death Star attack.
Yavin IV the secret rebel base with Leia in the control room was in big danger too.
Han decided to help out his new found friends.
Leia dislikes the empire, there is a hint about her father fighting alongside with Obi Wan Kenobi in the clone wars.
At this point in 1977 we did not know, if the empire was involved in the clone wars and who was fighting who and for what.
So it could be a natural viewpoint for Leia to hate the empire, maybe she belongs to the defeated and enslaved citziens from this war.
Obi Wan is a old hermit and retired war hero.
Vader is Tarkins henchman doing the dirty work who nobody wants to do. (his character was not full elaborated in ANH)
He has a past with Obi Wan and is a remnant of a old religion.
I guess this is enough information to start a adventure. (no need to read a book to understand the movie)

Sure some coincidences going on, but it's the first entry in the series and excusable.

I know what you are trying to tell me, that ANH has flaws.
Yes it has flaws, but it's still superior in my opinion.
Explanation follows below.

In my opinion it does hurt the experience during watching the OT.
TFA is a different, case, it hurts my experience, because they had 6 movies to build upon.
ANH was not in this lucky condition back then.
They started from scratch or better said they borrowed from:
"The Hidden Fortress" "Dam Busters" "Flash Gordon series" and mythology literature like the hero's journey.

 

TFA doesn't benefit from what came before in my opinion .