Snoke age confirmed by Andy Serkis

Dude, it's a 9 part story - like it or not. Unfortunately, for me, 7 and 8 do not meet this requirement. They disregard the previous episodes and what is already set up, because of the ego of the directors in my opinion, and you have written absolutely nothing to change that.

EDIT: I believe The PT flows well into the OT. However, the ending of the OT does not flow well into the ST... but we digress.

We obviously require different things from the ST. For me, if it truly is a "sequel" trilogy, the story needs to flow from 1 thru til the end. It would seem to me that many other people are happy with a stand alone trilogy tacked on at the end, that utilises a few core characters from the saga. Good for them I say, but it's not good enough for me.

Different strokes and all that.

 

This this this.

In E4, Obi-Wan gives us all the backstory we need. The Jedi Knights were the guardians of peace and justice in the Old Republic. Before the dark times.... before the Empire. The audience recognizes that the state of the galaxy is one of oppression. We don't really need to know how it got that way.

E1 has the same advantage. Since there's no "before" E1 (EU does not count) there doesn't need to be a detailed backstory on how we got to where we are. The audience accepts initial conditions. For example, E1 has a line about how "The Sith have been extinct for a millennium" We don't need to know details of how that happened. Since it took place before E1, we accept the state of the galaxy we have jumped into.

E7 has no such luxury. When last we saw our heroes, they were partying hard on Endor. Good writing has to explain how we got from Point A (end of E6) to Point B (start of E7). I am not saying it needs to all be explained right away, but there should be some backstory provided at some point. The ST has (so far) failed miserably in that regard.

--- Double Post Merged, Mar 16, 2018, Original Post Date: Mar 16, 2018 ---

Of course he was made out to be massively important. He is a Force user presumably on par with the Emperor, he is the Supreme Leader of the 1st Order, Leia specifically mentions him by name as having turned Ben, and he specifically tells Kylo Ren that he will continue to train him.

How can you say that is not a massively important character????

 

the entire SQ is as a result of his actions. that's a big gap to fill, seems pretty bad without some type of backstory for him. realistically Rey would ask Luke who he is and we'd of got a better idea. but nothing.

 

I don't think it's an ego think with the directors or the producers or Kathleen. Obviously they really care about this Sequel Trilogy, and they want to make it enjoyable and a great story. I haven't gotten a sense of egotism from Rian Johnson or JJ or Kathleen Kennedy personally when I watch them in interviews.

People said the same thing about GL when the prequels were coming out, claiming that his ego had gotten to him and that's why the PT was a let down.
There's still a lot that's gonna happen in Episode 9 and the story could still come full circle and fit better with the other two trilogies.

 

The ST is in a better place now that Snoke is dead. He was not a strong villain. There were a lot of people complaining about the character after TFA, I remember the threads. I hope he stays dead, having Kylo in charge of the galaxy entire is a great way to set the table for Episode IX.

Ego? The only ego involved in the ST is called profit and they are making lots of lots of it. Star Wars is a bigger success now than it has ever been in the brand's lifetime.

 

The ST may be an enjoyable romp to some, and to some degree that what it has become for me (ish - but most certainly not part of the Skywalker Saga), but I really do not feel it's a great story. JJ has alot of work to do to connect the story from 1 thru to 9, and based on what I saw in TFA I believe he won't. The most I'm expecting is a connection to TFA.
Regarding ego - RJ has expressed many times how he was telling his own story. He disregarded set ups from the previous film. He disregarded the actual story of the saga, in order to make his own film. If that's not ego, I don't know what is...
Where were the frickin' SW wipes? I've noticed 1 in my 4 viewings. But saying that, the new shots for each new scene make the wipes very difficult. Say what??? IMO he should have adopted his style to fit the wipes to keep it in line with the other films of the saga (I don't care about that stuff for the spin offs - I want to see different film making styles, etc, etc - but the saga?), but he didn't, he made his own film. Jeebus, the bloke has his own trilogy to make his own, he didn't need to do that on a running series of films that supposedly fit together.

But you know, it is what it is. I am pleased for all the people that like it.

Damn, didn't we digress - On topic, it's great that Serkis confirmed Snoke's age...

 

We didn't know anything about Palpatine in the original trilogy and we really didn't need to either. I wouldn't mind doing knowing more about Snoke, but it's not necessary to the plot at all.

1. Kylo Ren iis the main villain, not Snoke.
2. Technically, we can still learn more about Snoke in flashbacks or visions.

 

maybe it was ego for Rian in a way, but I never saw him as someone who felt like he had the best plan. he seemed to be pretty humble to me when he was addressing the crowd at SW Celebration.

 

There was no background at all during the OT. Here, you just can't pretend that some folks named Vader and Palpatine weren't ruling things while Snoke was around.

He would have been a much greater threat for the emperor than the rebels.

 

'He was so powerful that they only thing he feared, of course was........ losing his power: which he did eventually..."

 

You mean like when Plagueis, Palpatine and Yoda stayed hidden during the prequel (or just before in Plagueis’ case) and original trilogies?

Plus, as someone already mentioned, it's not really Andy Serkis' place to confirm or deny anything. this is by no means a confirmation of anything.

 

Yoda and Palps were hidden in the prequels ?

I don't get you.

 

The reason why the OT "gets a pass" is because when you are dropped into the middle of a story, the viewer can accept the current state of affairs without needing to know details regarding how they got there. Episode 4 is our starting point. We can accept the current state of the galaxy as-is.

However, when you transition from the end of one chapter (Episode 6) to the beginning of the next chapter (Episode 7) then there should be some explanation of how we got from Point A to Point B.

 

For some reason people who don't like the new movies – Snoke in particular – seem to ignore these facts. It's fine if they don't like the movies, but you have no credibility one your criticisms have no merit.

 

One criticism that you don't agree with means that I have no merit? The prequels didn't exist till the early 00s. So that large time gap between 6 till 1 still has merit. This is an evolving story now that Disney is in charge of Lucasfilm.

 

I think we have to consider that these films aren't made in a vacuum.

Do we need backstory for Snoke, Vader, Palpatine, etc? No, not really.

Were we expecting backstory for Snoke, particlarly after what we've gotten in Star Wars so far? I mean, it certainly seems that there were at least some fans that were.

At this point in the trilogy, I think it's impossible to say what is a subversion that may pay off later, and what is just a tone deaf mistake, but I'd be surprised if LFL was totally unaware that people would be interested in learning at least something about Snoke. And I really do trust LFL to make quality decisions, so I'm still holding off for us somehow getting some payoff from this in the future.

 

You seem to have misinterpreted what I was saying. I highlighted the part of your post that I was addressing, but I think you might have missed it.

You are correct – Snoke does get more screen time Palpatine did in the first two movies of the original trilogy. I don't know why people ignore that. It's an invalid criticism to say we don't know anything about him, because we know even less about Palpatine.

 

I thought the "you" was referring to me.

 

Why? There was no precedent - again, we didn't get one for Palpatine.

--- Double Post Merged, Apr 30, 2018, Original Post Date: Apr 30, 2018 ---

No problem.

 

I mean, depends how far you want to go back.

Obviously Palpatine was in the prequels, so we at least got some pre-Emperor info on him.

I don't think there is "no precedent", because clearly fans were expecting something. And again, that doesn't mean that as fans we're entitled to exactly what we want, but just that there is definitely some rhyme and reason to why fans feel the way they do, justified or not.