Rian Johnson's Comedy in TLJ

I think there's a distinct difference between the humor types. Watch Thor: Ragnarok to see Marvel Humor at its height and most direct, then watch TLJ. They just aren't the same. One is more sillier, the other is more comical. There aren't really good moments in SW like when Banner tries to turn into the hulk, but splats onto the bridge in front of everybody, and flops. But TLJ tried to have lower-age humor like that, and I did not work for even huge fans of the movie itself.

 

fixed it

-------------------------

TFAs humor was a lot better imo.

Rians writing lacked JJs and Kasdans wit, it almost felt like I was watching a MCU flick.

 

if you have an issue with a post that you feels violates the forum rules, please bring it to the attention of the mods by using the report button.
posting the word hate over and over (and in all-caps) doesn't really help the conversation in a constructive way, does it?

 

The root of the issue is Rian Johnson's dialogue. There wasn't one line which felt grandiose or witty, it all came off like first draft material.

 

I think you summed it up describing it as slapstick.

 

My biggest problem, same as Canto Bight.

 

I wasn't a fan of the attempts at humor in TLJ.

I wasn't a fan of most of the PT humor.

The OT humor was more relevant to the story, it felt more natural rather than forced (ewoks aside, though as a kid I enjoyed it). Even TFA achieved this. TLJ touched on it now and then, but mostly it felt more in your face. It also affected characters in meaningful ways... Hux and Poe, this is where the Hux silliness started. Luke's saber toss began his deconstruction (humor with subversion, and neither landed for me).

The OT has some R2 and Threepio humor, but I took it as showing the limitation of droids more than anything else. I smiled and moved on. It didn't impact the story in a very big way, just broke tension.

In TLJ, the humor that I probably enjoyed the most was Yoda's, though I understand others didn't like it, and I understand why. I liked it because it reminded me of old Yoda from ESB. But I think if you're a PT fan and watched those movies a lot, I could see how that humor wouldn't quite fit for you because your Yoda is a more serious, responsible Yoda.

I think most SW has some jokes that don't quite fit, but what separates TLJ is that the early ones have resounding impact on established characters and subverts them. Eliminate Hux/Poe and Luke's saber toss and I think the rest wouldn't be worth discussing that much.

So for me, two jokes too many, and they set the tone for the movie being at the beginning.

 

Obviously comedy is subjective, different people find different things to be funny. My problem with the video is a problem I have with the vast majority of film 'critics' (full transparency: I have no love for art critics; I think they are the very definition of a parasite - taking from and yet contributing nothing helpful or useful to the relationship) and that is that they produce misinformation, misguide their audience and proceed from false premises.

The main culprit is what I would call "storytelling 101", or, "this is how you make a film" which is the attempt to force a single, specific structure onto a medium which is inherently fluid in structure. For instance in this video the author makes the claim toward the intro about the opening scene of a movie, and that the purpose of the opening scene is designed to do such and such (in this case, communicate the tone of the entire film). But what he's saying isn't an absolute, it is one school of thought that is only relative to one specific method of structure. The same problem arises with the use of words like "tone" and "pacing" and just about any jargon used for description of any art, in this case, film. It only has relative meaning to one specific structure, and has no meaning outside of that structural relationship.

What I mean is something like, suppose you are listening to music for the first time. The music has a basic structure intro/melody/chorus/melody/chrous/solo/meldoy/chorus/outro. Now you then move into more music and you hear a song with a different structure overture/chorus/melody/solo/chorus/melody/harmony/chorus/outro and you say "But this is all wrong, music 101, intro/melody/chorus, this is how music is written". Then you move onto more music and suddenly you're hearing a series of five songs which are all thematically connected: it's a concept album. You say "But this is not right, these songs are continuing the theme throughout one another, this is not how music is written, theme is supposed to change between individual songs and not connect together in a kind of conceptual musical whole": now you see the problem with the 'critique' of the music here?

These things are only relative to one specific structure of myriad structures, and so when critics speak of "tone" and "pacing" and such, they are engaging in misunderstanding the nature of what they are evaluating. They are trying to force one specific structure of thought onto a medium which refuses to be constrained by one proverbial straightjacket. The medium is as varied and nuanced as human beings are varied and nuaced in relation to one another.

So when the video says "the purpose of the opening scene is to communicate" he is speaking in absolutes which are not true. What he should really be saying is "according to one specific school of thought, the purpose of this is..." but if you are evaluating something, and that something is not conforming to your school of thought, then the conclusion is simply that, this is not being formed according to that specific school of thought, but is taking a different approach.

There is really no such a thing as "storytelling 101" or "tonal structure" or "pacing issues" except in relation to one specific structure, which is only one structure in myriad structures. When he says there is a tonal shift, he isn't realizing a tonal shift will always be radical. It will always be a shift. In a film that is generally serious in nature, any comedy relief will always be a 180 shift immediately upon introduction simply because comedy is a 180 shift from serious.

There is no "right" or "wrong" introduction of a new tone, at any point, any time. There is only, how do you subjectively relate to this? Do you like it, not like it, indifferent to it? No one is at fault for not laughing at a joke. The writer is not at fault for you not laughing, you are not at fault for not laughing. It is just the way it is.

He speaks about Hux not being taken seriously, and yes, that is the point of the scene. Hux seems like a person who wants to be heard. He is all about being heard. This is communicated by the way he wants to make sure he is being heard by Poe. This is telling us about Hux. Tone is not only communicated by words, it is communicated by imagery and music. The tone of the opening scene of TLJ is like a dark painting with fourishes of light points. There is nothing "wrong" about the painting, the painter certainly isn't at "fault" for painting the way he paints. You may look at the painting and say "I like this painting, I like the way the flourishes highlight and even deepen the darker whole", you may say "I find the flourishes jarring and distracting" you may say "I would've gone with broader flourishes, in different places" - none of these are "right" or "wrong" experiences, and no one is at fault for their contribution, neither the viewer nor the painter.

BUT, if you say "this painting is wrong, painting 101, you do not put light flourishes on a dark painting, it ruins the tone, and the painter is at fault for producing a bad painting" then I would suggest that the only one really at fault here, is the 'critic' for not understanding the nature of what he is looking at, and inappropriately trying to place blame on someone for his lack of enjoyment of the painting.

If you made it to the end of this post, congrtulations. Your endurance is impressive.

 

I was an early critic of the comedy in TLJ, but after a few viewings I am starting to change my tune. While I wasn't in love with the Poe/Hux cell phone joke, it does fit his humor from TFA where he mocks Kylo Ren, "Ok....who talks first....." so I can take that with a grain of salt now as it's consistent with his character. I do think some of the Luke/Rey comedic exchanges hold up well on multiple viewings. When Luke jokes after Rey says she is from Jakuu and he says, "OK, that is nowhere!" and when Rey says, "I've seen your daily schedule, you're not that busy!" I may have the exact words wrong, but they are funny lines. I do laugh when Rose calls Finn 'THE Finn' and he sort of stands up straight like he is a big deal now. Even the Porgs don't bother me, or the other creatures on Ach-Tu who don't like Rey. I say all of this because whenever I watch the PT movies, the humor makes me cringe as that did not hold up well, or actually never held up to begin with.

 

Wow... is it possible to give a person more than one "Great Post" rating?

Personally, I laughed at most of the jokes during my first viewing of the movie, and so did most of my theater. Upon that viewing, the only jokes that I didn't care for were some of the jokes on Canto Bight that reminded me of Jar Jar Binks level humor (namely the blobby-opera-alien-lady and that small mustache alien that burped and tried to put his coins into BB-8). In retrospect, the Poe-Hux joke at the beginning doesn't hold up so well on multiple viewings, but most of the other jokes still don't really stick out to me.

 

Just because you are a "filmmaker" doesn't mean you are a comedian or an editor. A talented editor could have made TLJ an amazing Star Wars movie.

 

100% this. we can choose to engage with the art and enjoy it or not.
it's pretty much as simple as that.

no amount of divisiveness or hate or failure or hammering critique (even legitimate critique) can make me dislike something if i want to enjoy it.
in the same way no amount of praise or box office cred or youtube slobbering or accolades can make me enjoy something i don't want to.

i am the captain of my own ship. : D

 

it's a tad long for a bumper sticker.. but this needs to go up somewhere !

well put FN! and very nice post @metadude


on topic:-
depending on what happens in ep9.. i might have preferred less comedy at Hux's expense (if he boils over and turns on Ren in ep9 then i think comedy in 8 is fine)

i 'might' have done the Luke light saber scene differently. maybe just hand it back to Rey and walk off dis-interested instead of throwing over his shoulder.
the scene didn't bother me exactly, but i didn't see it as all that funny.

i don't like the rock falling near the caretakers after Rey cut it in half - i think it was funny enough that Rey did it by mistake.

small nit-picks.

 

The Hux/Poe run in at the beginning, as said on a previous post, was funny on first viewing and got a laugh in the cinema. But the more I've seen the last Jedi the more it doesn't work and seems to destroy the credibility of one of the main villains in one exchange. I love the film but it seems to me that Hux represents the military arm of the First Order and, with Snoke and Phasma gone, is one of only 2 main villains left. So to make him into a character who can be poked fun at and is supposed to be viewed by us with amusement in my opinion doesn't work for the General of an organisation we are supposed to fear.

The comedy moments in the rest of the film did work well on first viewing however don't raise much of a laugh when watching again and this can affect the flow of the film.

 

depends on your definition of fearful perhaps?
if you're looking for another Palpatine or Darth Vader you'll likely be disappointed.

Hux is indeed a "rabid cur" as Snoke describes him.
in my estimation that makes him far more dangerous ~ especially now that he's been brought so low.

he definitely could have treated the saber with contempt without it being a deliberately comedic moment. it works for me, but i get why other people are jarred by it. i don't really get the cries of "disrespecting the legacy" though. the saber is nothing. it's a weapon that murdered children. it's only "honor" lies in that Luke once wielded it and so i think it's entirely his right to do with it as he sees fit. XD

really? do you think it's too mean for it to hit the wheelbarrow? or just overkill? i love this moment and how contemptuous the caretakers are of Rey. which she deserves, frankly, for calling them "things" ~ hahahahaha

 

TLJ took the greatest hero of our generation IMO and turned him completely pedestrian, He mopes around and takes action at the end, but not really. Yeah, it was a piss off for me.

 

It doesn't make him pedestrian. It makes him human. Not the deity he had been built up as.