The Confusing Philosophy of The Last Jedi

Han is a father figure in VII, he has none of those characteristics in the OT. Obi Wan goes from not being able to kill Anakin to sending his child to murder him. He goes from a cavalier Jedi to a wise old monk over that same course of time. Yoda is the exception but remember that 30 years to someone who is 900 is not comparable to half of a human's lifetime.

 

Of course he does. Han very much has the characteristics of an older brother in the OT. To transition from that role to someone else's father figure 30 years later makes perfect sense. Many of the same feelings apply, especially the desire to be protective.

Transitioning from Luke's "older brother figure" to Rey's "father figure" 30 years later is 100% consistent. If anything, this is something which would be expected. It is not some sort of radical change in the character's approach to other people.

 

Han was poorly utilized in TFA. The man who went out in the deadliest snow blizzard to save Luke, suddenly decides to become a smuggler just because his son became a gang banger? B.S

 

I don't pretend to know him, I do know him. I grew up with him, he was the closest thing to a male role model that I had. Don't discount the feelings that some fans have, they are real and shouldn't be dismissed.

 

Well I disagree but we're probably not going to convince one another. I see Han much more like a friend than a brother. Maybe you've never had a brother but the, "only I get to pick on my brother" dynamic isn't present between Han and Luke when I watch the OT.

You might feel like you know him but that's not the same as actually knowing the character. My point is that you can't say something is outside of someone's personality when you got a view into a few weeks of their life and then saw them again for the first time in 30 years.

I'm sorry if you feel betrayed by LFL's portrayal of a character because I have a similar relationship with Luke and I felt like they gave him the perfect ending. His story ends after his most (or second most) Jedi moment in the saga.

 

One thing I don't understand is how people complain about Luke's character changing (over 30 years!) but also complain that Leia wasn't "motherly". Leia is a great character, but what was especially motherly about her in the OT?

It's almost like people change their arguments to fit their desired narrative...

 

*gasp*

 

I know I sound like a jerk and I'll get attacked for this, but Star Wars fans who actually like The Last Jedi are suffering from 0 imagination. I just can't see how anyone could be content with such lazy story telling. And time for people to tell me to die. lol

 

You're not the first person who didn't like the film who has insulted the majority of people/critics who enjoyed the film. I'm curious why some people who don't like the film think it's necessary to belittle others for enjoying a piece of entertainment.

 

Well, maybe you've never had a brother because the dynamic is actually "only I get to pick on my brother, *or* other family members and friends."

So sure, if I am out with my brother and some rando gives him crap, that person will have to answer to me.... but if we are at family dinner and my sister makes a wise crack, or if we are watching the game with some buddies, then it's open season. If anything, I'd join in.

Sure sounds like the Han/Luke relationship to me.

--- Double Post Merged, Mar 10, 2018, Original Post Date: Mar 10, 2018 ---

Amen and I've said it before: If I went back in time to November and wrote fan fiction which was TLJ - or simply just described the general plot - I'd be ridiculed out of the forum for how atrocious it was, even by the TLJ apologists.

 

I guess I’d rather be perceived to have 0 imagination than to be so sad and confused to spend time posting on a forum about a film I supossedly don’t like. lol

 

Same... it feels great to realize that I have absolutely 0 imagination. I didn't know that this would be the consequence of watching and enjoying a MOVIE!

 

I have the opposite problem with Leia.
You’re right she never was “motherly” in the OT not only because
she had not child. But because even tho she was a female character, even tho
she fell in love etc... when it comes to her role whitin the rebellion
she was a leader not matter her gender.

I personally find disturbing that in TLJ she is portrayed as a general yes
but that plays her role... as a mother.
Not that is or should be a problem to underline a surrogate mother/child
relationship with Poe, in the right context ( for instance the scene of her unconscious
and him holding her hand).
But it cannot be and it shouldn’t be only that.
It’s not that since you are a woman you must interpret that role as a mother would.

In fact... did you ever see a male general slapping a soldier?
Not, unless the goal was to make a villain of him.
But mommy Leia can to the 34 years old kid that needs a lesson.
Sorry but this is a stereotype.

As stereotypes are the other female characters, not matter their roles.

Holdo plays her role as the bicthy teacher.
Rose is essentially a fangirl.
Rey is the nurse.

Stereotypes.
And as a feminist I find amazing that those who praise the movie made not distinction
between number of female characters and what they are actually doing.
What their arcs really are.
And I’ve found even more amazing people blaming the feminist agenda
of the movie. Because there’s not at all. Women should be offended
as some men are.

This is not feminism. Not even equality.

This is sexism.

As it is sexism to portray all men as morons.

Because sexism is both the damaiselle in distress that needs an prince to save her
and/or the man that needs the female perfect angel that saves his life.
Maybe the latter is less common. But it is as old as the former
and as much conservative as the former.

Both these tropes are in fact.... sexism.
Because them both were invented and used for centuries
when the world was not particularly interested in equality....

Equality is men and women equally responsable of their own choices and fates.
That work together and help one another.

 

What's really confusing is a film that some hate and spend 24/7 and expending their energy to force others to hate it with them. I guess misery really does love company.

 

If The Last Jedi's "stereotypes" bothered you then stay away from The Shape of Water.

 

Or Phantom Thread. Especially Phantom Thread.

 

I know And that's what I've done.

 

I like your post and it got me thinking but I wonder how much of this is Rorschach Test stuff where we read SW through a lens of our choosing rather than the context of the medium.

You may chose to see Holdo as a bicthy woman but I don't feel that's a key correlation in the story.
She's a no-nonsense miltary commander.
Labeling her a sexist bicth stereotype is like labeling Tarkin or Vader sexist grumpy-old-man stereotypes just because they order people about and don't suffer fools.

She was starstruck in one short scene and it was part of demonstrating her dedication to her post and her character growth.
Reducing a complex character to one element and spinning it as derogatory based on her sex is textbook sexism.

Then so is Luke with his penchant for compassion and sensitivity.
Rorschach stuff again?

The distinction you find amazing makes a lot of sense.
Lucasfilm's so called "feminist agenda" is about equality of faces on screen, equality of screen time, and equality in character depth and complexity.
It's not an agenda to beat one sex up, make a certain sex look foolish, or to spin a story where every sex on screen is presented as some role model for audience members to aspire.

It's a fairytale in space.

I think your observations here are sensitive and pertinent.
The problem is that by this logic alone no story device is safe.
If any male saves a female it could be "sexist" and if any female saves a male it could be "sexist".

Personally I require a little more evidence than sex and narrative action alone to be comfortable adapting this reading.

Edit:grammar

 

First, thank you. Nice to have this conversation but I really don't want to bhoter anyone with my..... "feminist agenda"
so I'll try to clarify few things and then move along.

You're right: this is a fairytale in space. So the tropes are those of a fairy tale.
But the point is - from my point of view - that fairy tales and their tropes were born long ago.
Among societies that didn't hold care the notion of "equality", because it didn't existe at all at that time.

This is an "recent" issue, that was raised not before 30, 40 years ago...
And it's not that every movie, novel etc... that came out in last 40-30 years is sensitive to this issue.
I'd say the contrary.
Our world, our way of life evolved, tropes not that much.
Which, imo, is unfortunate.

Like @DailyPlunge underlined (and I caught the... "irony" or maybe "sarcasm") The Shape of Water, this year academy award
winner is a movie that someone like me may not welcome as something particularly... "innovative".

But beside that, sure nowadays you see (in movies but not only) more women and women doing jobs men do, but still
they are portrayed very often with "traditional" (maybe it's a better word) nuances...

Meaning that essentially, it looks like their story arc are driven by romantic love and/or men/children care.
As if what women are "essentially" supposed to do or interested in, cannot be something else.

Complexty, should be to show that women are/may be not only or more than that.
Or that they're not that at all (those women existe).
And again, it's not their job that tells us - per se - that they are more than that. But how they do that job.
How they relate to people etc...

Looking at the TLJ, I believe it's pretty obvious that women are portrayed as those
who "take care", "save", "teach" etc... not so wise men.
I also think that was meant as a compliment... As a quality women have.

But again, this is a tradinotal (conservative) trope. If you're not the damaiselle in distress a prince has to save,
then you are the one that "saves" the man, taking care of him.
These are the two faces of the same idea... or ideology, I would say.
It's not something different...

Women are still defined by their relationships with men/children.
They are still perceived as those who have to take care of them.

However... I know I am in minority.
I always was, I'm used to it and it's not a big deal, because in all truth I always believed 70es Leia
to be one of those fortunate exceptions.

It's just ... I really find weird that in all this madness, no one is pointing to something that at least for a minority
of people is pretty obvious. That "feminism" is not equal to the number of female characters, not to them being perfect
or better than men, but something a little bit more complex.

 

wow, this is such a perfect post and I cannot agree more. You are 100% on spot. I see exactly this in the country where I live and even within my own relatives (that's the reason contact stopped). They are so much used to the idea every women needs to have a man and a relationship/marriage that you become a strange person and partly invisible if you don' fit to this ideal. You have to take care of the household, the kids and if there is still a little time you have to do a part-time job to improve the income of your husband. Yes, old tropes sadly still exist everywhere and most movies don't show women as independent and taking care of their life of their own.