What's the point of this trilogy?

Please no.

You know what he's going to say.

And you know he's wrong.

We don't need to encourage this.

 

No one has even given me a simple list. I believe what they want to say will embarrass them so they dont say it.

 

The Burden of Legacy.
The Jedi's Legacy of Failure that Luke has to deal with, after the specific legacy of his father's fall, Ben's dealing with the confused legacy of Anakin/Vader as well as the legacy of his parents, Rey has to deal with Luke's failure with the knowledge of her own difficult past.

In the PT, Anakin can't deal with a possible future. Luke had to deal with a haunting past. Rey now has to deal with both - the future of the Jedi that Luke dropped the ball on, and Ben's inability to move on from his own failed legacy.

 

To say, "No the force isn't divinity or reserved for a select few. It belongs to all of us."

 

I find it hard to imagine they didn't brainstorm about this.

I also find it very easy to imagine these idiots didn't brainstorm about this in the right way.

That being said:

OT's most prominent theme is more: Love/Children redeem us
PT's most prominent theme is probably: power corrupts

Secondary to those, the OT is about letting go and the PT is about obsession/clinging too tight.

Clunky PT aside, GL is freaking Shakespeare compared to RJ/KK. GL very clearly knows the fundamentals of what he's doing. He just did a bad job of polishing the PT scripts. (And we all know about the help he got with the OT.) If you take a second, you'll notice that neither OT nor PT beats you over the head with those themes. They're kind of just there.

Very very rarely do writers of pop-fiction 'set out' to write about a theme. Usually what happens is you write the story first and make it entertaining and compelling and then you look for themes and then where you can make those themes 'pop'. Nothing too much, just a touch here and there. It's a lot like painting in that touch-up process. Then you sit back and watch people call you a 'genius' and you get to lie and say 'yes i meant it all along.' That's how the OT came together.

And even when the reverse happens, as in the case of the PT, he still knew the fundamentals of dissolving those themes into the plot, as opposed to the ST and particularly TLJ where the 'themes' are outright stated in ham-fisted dialogue.

Possible ST themes would have been explorations of the idea that Jedi lasted millennia but ultimately failed because they weren't allowed romantic love. How to rebuild a social strata of responsible force-users literally refilling a power-vacuum and the burden of that all falling on one Luke Skywalker. (Can you mine the Jedi Academy trilogy for ideas? Not if you're KK and haven't read the books. Incidentally, this is why Marvel does so well. Kevin Feige is a comic book sponge and can help guide each installments' directors.)

Other possibilities: Is nobility a birthright? Skywalker heir vs 'nobody' padawans or purebloods vs 'muggle-borns'. Too-young padawans being 'deified' or 'feared' by locals who want the 'Jedi' to keep the peace after the Empire's collapse leaves power-seekers rising in its wake. How can I be a Jedi when I cause fear in others? And Luke having to guide all of them.

 

I think TFA took risks, I'm not sure why you categorize it as fan service either. Rogue One is a fan service film, so is Han Solo to a lesser extent.

TFA put a woman as a lead protagonist. How does this service a fan base that (unfortunately) is still largely male (about 60% of Star Wars movie goers are male and most of the posters on this very forum are male).

The toy companies didn't want that and didn't even believe it will work, hence the "Where's Rey" fiasco that embarrassed several toy companies.

So let's concede TFA took big risks and therefore can't really be categorized as "fan service".

As for the point?

I'm not sure even the original in 1977 had a "point", these films are fantasy. It was an allegory perhaps to the nuclear shadow of its time and provided a mythical theme that being connected and respectful of all life around you makes you powerful, much more powerful than destroying it for immediate gain. It suggests wisdom is more powerful than pure might, that patience, caution and love will conquer greed, lust and hate.

Other than that, I'm not sure the film has much of a "point".

As for the sequel trilogies, clearly the arc here is place Ben Solo on a similar path as his grandfather (albeit with far better character development than the prequels ever tried to do).

Also remember we weren't really initially sure of the purpose of OT. Remember Vader's "redemption" isn't even really introduced into the third film, where we realize Luke's primary goal comes from refusing to lose faith and love on a family member who seems irredeemable.

One of the truly remarkable aspects of the OT is Luke wins by "throwing away" his weapon, by refusing to fight and instead having faith in his own father's humanity. That's an extremely rare moment in action films catered to alpha-males who want to solve all problems by punching them in the face.

And I wager Rey will "win the day" in a similar way, note how she already believes there is good in Ben. And even if Ben goes off the deep end in Episode IX (which I predict he will and become quite an omnipotent ruler), I still believe Rey will ultimately get Ben to find the good in his own soul, and she will do it, eventually by refusing to give into violence and hate, much like Luke had to.

The thing about a lot of these threads it is assumes only the exposition is important. That theme, allegory, allusion and character arcs are not factored in. Star Wars will always come up a little short if you critique the films based solely on the narrative. There's much more at play in these films and those elements are abundantly present in the ST.

 

"We'll cross that bridge when we get there" has been voted the most by far. Quite telling if most people don't know the direction the trilogy is going after two movies. I seriously hope Rian's new trilogy will be a lot more consistent and not made up on the spot.

 

The purpose of this trilogy is to kill the Skywalker family saga with bad writing.

 

The point of the ST is to move beyond the storytelling constraints of the Skywalker lineage and to nudge fans in the direction of getting over what came before it.

The OT was largely made up as they went along, the Prequel Trilogy was planned out but everyone HATED those when they originally came out and The Clone Wars TV show was originally considered a terrible idea after "fans" saw the first movie. There just isn't winning. It seems like pretty much anything SW has to go through at minimum a year of backlash before people get on the bandwagon.

 

You consider killing Luke Skywalke as killing the whole Skywalker family? You know there are still Kylo and Leia left, right? Both are most likely set up to survive this trilogy.

 

I have the impression that we see a "theatrical GFFA mirror" of our first world troubles in the real world.
I would write that a title like "more of the same with some grains of additional extremism".
Extreme love for totalitarism and fear from chaos on one side; extreme love for the light side and personal freedom on the other.
..and of course hate for the opposite party.
BUT maybe they will go on to show the failure of all the black and white schemes...
and we get an "Impublik" at the end. . Who knows?

 

actually, people with ideas about where it's going appear to be probably the majority (55.4%). not everyone who selected "other" may have a clear ideas, but at least some portion of people not willing to state the case until the bridge gets crossed are merely just patient to let it unfold. and the numbers have nothing to do with consistency. if anything, it's a healthy sign that there are plenty of possibilities rather than one glaringly obvious answer.

 

it's an odd question to ask with poll results. "what's the point..." always sounds like a negative thing to me. do things need to have a point? I don't stop my neighbor when he's in full flow telling me about his crappy day and ask him "what's the point?".. sometimes we just need to watch or listen to the story being told to us.

saying that, i know what @DailyPlunge was getting at. Since seeing the end of ROTJ for the first time, i've always viewed the on-going resistance/rebellion vs Empire/FO as a side-show to the Skywalker goings on. am i bothered about the FO being defeated? nah not really lol

it's become a cliche of sorts, but it is all about family to me.

i also remember the question GL asked of JJ when JJ was answering fans questions from an ipad way back when.. and GL simply asked "what happened to Vader's grandchildren".

it's what i'm interested in too

 

yeah, i don't take the question negatively. i assumed it was about theme or over-arching goal. which is absolutely difficult to answer without having seen the whole enchilada. but i do think we have a strong sense of what it might be given the emphasis on family, balance, legacy, and purpose.

 

Before it got started, my guess was that the ST would act in the capacity of affirmation for what came before.

The PT was about the corruption of a peaceful democracy falling victim to its darker impulses and warping itself into a tyrannical dictatorship. This was represented by Anakin, protector of the Republic, allowing himself to be twisted into Vader, an enforcer for the sinister Empire by way of his own dark predilections.

The OT was about the inheritors of the Old Republic rebelling against that tyranny in order to bring about a resurgence of democracy and return to peace. This was represented by Anakin’s own inheritors, Luke and Leia, defying the path of their father and redeeming the righteous man he once was.

The ST, in my mind then, would be the validation of that arc. Just as Luke was tempted by the darkness and rejected it in a way his father couldn’t, to be confronted with the prospect of repeating the sins of the past and overcoming them - the New Republic would have to do the same. It would have to face a conflict just as insidious as what the Old Republic had, but not make the same mistake. To be taken to the brink and almost succumb, but persist and demonstrate that the lesson had been learned. Progress. Actualization. Success isn’t measured by victory alone, but how well that victory is maintained afterward. This would logically be represented by another generation of Skywalkers being faced with another analogous familial divide.

Each episode in Star Wars is a three act structure. Each trilogy is, in turn, a three act structure. Stands to reason then that a trilogy of trilogies would, itself, be a three act structure. The PT is the setup, where the inevitable conflict is presented. The OT is the confrontation, where that conflict is then materialized. And so the ST would be the resolution, where that conflict is ultimately decided.

That’s how it’s always made sense to me anyway, but that’s not the exact direction DIS/LFL is approaching it. To take a stab, it seems like the aim here is instead more about generalizing the conflict away from societal specifics. Basically, Maz’s sentiments from TFA. What we’ve seen thus far is really only the tip of a much larger conflict that’s been waged forever: between the light and the dark. Whatever they happen to call themselves from one era to the next, the fight is the same: a cycle vacillating between two positive and negative furies. A pendulum swinging from one side to the other, dictating the state of the galaxy.

My guess was that, from this perspective, the ST would be about finding an equilibrium (a balance) between those two extremes and stopping that pendulum. The two sides, perpetually at odds, finding a harmony and working toward a common cause. A theme represented by the relationship between Rey and Kylo. Two sides of the same coin, fighting in opposition, but with the potential to become something greater by joining together. Not the dark conquering the light, or the light vanquishing the dark, but an acceptance and tolerance of one another - a true concordance.

I think that would also be a fairly satisfying resolution, but so hard to say at this point. At the end of the day, there may not be an actual point to all this. It’s random disparate ideas all thrown together for the impression of relevance alone. Either way though, we get to go back through and make up our own interpretations and wax philosophical about the genius of nonsense. And that’s part of the fun

 

I think that people had a pretty good idea what was going on in LotR after seeing "The Two Towers" or what "The Deathly Hallows" will be about after reading Harry Potter 1-6. This doesn't mean they knew what the finale of the respective sagas would look like but they had a pretty good understanding of the general direction the stories were going. The ST seems to lack a distinct identity which is why most people answering this poll have no clue what IX will be all about. It also lacks a carefully planned out plot which means that now people are even speculation whether IX will be the final installment of the ST or not. You may like this but to me this is terrible storytelling, made up on the spot without any clear identity or intention.

 

doesn't bother me if you think it's terrible storytelling. [shrug]
but we're still drawing generalizations from a weakly worded forum poll with less than 100 votes in a Star Wars forum.
so really, this is a measure of a whole buncha nothing.
just from chatting around here, again, people seem to have a pretty good grasp of the themes, even if they don't know precisely the plot.
more power to it, i say.

 

To continue telling space fairytales while generating as much cash as possible?
Just kidding...I think I know what you mean by “the point” but because I don't know it I'm going to interpret the question in a thematic sense.

I love how the Saga tackles similar motifs and inverts, subverts, and highlights them differently.
Some big themes I see running in the Saga and through the ST are:

• cycles of autocracy and democracy,
  
• finding family/belonging,
  
• the tension between destiny/legacy and freedom/agency,
  
• and the construction and deconstruction of hero's and villains.

But if I were to interpret “the point of the ST" (so far) through a lens of revisiting themes from the saga and exploring them in new ways, I'd settle on these specific messages:

• Face your fears but refrain from bending fear to anger.
• Don't let your past or your "shadow" define who you are.
• Don't destroy it all - save what you love and learn from your failures.

 

Why is Luke supposed to be dealing with the Jedi Order's failure in this trilogy? Why? Their failure was dealt with when Anakin killed Palpatine. What fallout happened after Palpatine's death? Or Yoda's death for that matter?

I had a pretty good idea what was going on in "LotR" when I saw "Fellowship of the Ring". I didn't have to wait for the second or third film. And I got the impression that many others managed to do so as well.


So, what is the point of this trilogy other than a re-hash of the Rebel Alliance/Empire conflict?

 

Anakin just killed Palpatine, this doesn't erase the failures made by the Jedi.

Well, Luke trained a new generation of Jedi and the same mistakes were made.

Ending the Skywalkers' curse, hopefully...