Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker Discussion Thread (SPOILERS!) (1 Viewer)

[Edwin-S]

If Abrams wanted the sequel trilogy to tie up all three trilogies, it absolutely was his job to set the groundwork for that up in The Force Awakens. The first chapter of the trilogy does all of the place setting. Johnson developed what The Force Awakens set up, but then Abrams chose to veer off in a more ambitious direction that wasn't previously established.

If Abrams had been as faithful at picking up the ball from Johnson as Johnson was from Abrams, the sequel trilogy would feel more cohesive.

The idea that Johnson faithfully picked up the ball from Abrams just makes me want to laugh. And if Abrams was responsible for setting up all the conditions for all three films then he might as well have directed them all himself. At least that way, for better or worse, we would have gotten something consistent as far as the storytelling went, instead of the middle of a story that was more concerned with disposing of STAR WARS "tropes" than telling a good story.

 

[Edwin-S]

Abrams ditching the inane "love story" between Rose and Finn was one of his better decisions. Those two had zero romantic chemistry in TLJ and John Boyega actually, to me, looked uncomfortable at times during that "romance". Furthermore, all of the setup in TFA was that Boyega's character Finn had a thing for Rey, therefore trying to create some "romance" between him and Rose was just dumb.

Even in TRoS, everything points to Finn being in love with Rey. Abrams big failing is that he never tied off that thread and then tried to do it with some lame explanation that Finn wanted to tell her he was "force sensitive". BLARG.

 

[Jake Lipson]

The big problem there is that they met in the supposedly canon TFA novelization.

With respect to the authors of the novelizations and other books, who I'm sure work very hard, this is a problem with the film, not the novel. Lucasfilm should never have regulated such a significant moment as two of the lead characters meeting for the first time to the books. Abrams should have included them meeting at the Resistance base in The Force Awakens before Rey takes off to find Luke.

if Abrams was responsible for setting up all the conditions for all three films then he might as well have directed them all himself.

I think The Last Jedi, exactly as it is, is the best thing to ever happen to Star Wars and am glad that we got the version of Episode VIII that Rian Johnson gave us. However, I will agree that Abrams doing all three of them would have been a way to maintain a singular vision between the films. The alternative would have been for Rian Johnson to direct Episode IX, which would have followed through on what he did in The Last Jedi.

The problem with either of them doing all three is that Disney wanted these every two years. I doubt he ever seriously considered doing the second one. He would have had to start working on it before The Force Awakens was over, and that would have burned him out. Johnson was watching dailies from the set of The Force Awakens while writing The Last Jedi. If it was important to Disney to retain the same writer and director for all three films, they should have spaced them out by three years between installments like Lucas did with the previous two trilogies. That would have given Abrams a chance to rest and replenish himself before jumping into the next one. Disney's obsession with making fixed, inflexible release dates hurt Solo last year and also hurt the development of the sequel trilogy because they had to rush to make dates instead of taking their time.

 

[dpippel]

 

[TravisR]

If Abrams had been as faithful at picking up the ball from Johnson as Johnson was from Abrams, the sequel trilogy would feel more cohesive.

Am I the only person who sees the changes from TLJ to TROS as more of a response or "apology" to the fans who hated TLJ. They hated Rose? She'll just stand around in the base in this one. They hated that Luke didn't fight in TLJ? He'll say he was wrong to do that. Too many changes in TLJ (even though TFA was criticized for being too similar)? Back to basics- bring back the Emperor!

Personally, I don't think trying to win those people back was the best idea because a creative team should be leading the way and not the fans.

 

[Edwin-S]

Was that meme supposed to be aimed at me? I'm a hater because I'm criticizing RIan Johnson and think he made a lousy middle to the story in a STAR WARS trilogy. If that is the case then what am I when I said that his film "Knives Out" was actually a good film?

Am I the only person who sees the changes from TLJ to TROS as more of a response or "apology" to the fans who hated TLJ. They hated Rose? She'll just stand around in the base in this one. They hated that Luke didn't fight in TLJ? He'll say he was wrong to do that. Too many changes in TLJ (even though TFA was criticized for being too similar)? Back to basics- bring back the Emperor!

I don't hate any of the characters in TLJ. I hate that none of them were used to actually tell a good story that was coherent, made sense and wasn't just an exercise in deconstructing STAR WARS "tropes".

 

[Jake Lipson]

Personally, I don't think trying to win those people back was the best idea because a creative team should be leading the way and not the fans.

If there was a Love button, I would give your post that. I agree with everything you wrote, especially this. Johnson came in and shook up the series in a dynamic way, which was an invitation for the next director to come in and do something new.

Instead, The Rise of Skywalker seems as though Abrams and Terrio scoured the internet in an attempt to check off things that entitled fans want from a movie. You want Rey to be somebody? Fine, she's a Palpatine. Snoke is gone without backstory? Guess what, the Emperor made him, whatever that means. You're upset that Luke threw away his lightsaber? He'll literally tell Rey she shouldn't do that. You don't like the idea of the Force being democratized? Fine, it's all about bloodlines again, even though Lucas wrote that the Jedi aren't allowed to have familial attachments, so really, more Jedi should come from nowhere. Chewie never got a medal? He'll be given one at random now for no apparent reason just so we can say he got one. The Last Jedi was too unconventional? We'll make the climax of the movie about blowing up Death Star duplicates again, while the protagonist fights the Emperor, who was for all intents and purposes already dead until we decided we need him.

The movie felt like it was pandering to fans with callbacks and doing safe things, instead of embracing the chance The Last Jedi set up for it to do something we haven't seen before. That's just not strong storytelling; it's leaning directly into the tropes that have always been there.

What really surprises me about this is that Abrams was listed as an executive producer of The Last Jedi, and he said in the run-up to its release that Johnson's script was so good he wished he was directing it. Obviously, that ended up being lip service, because Abrams' choices throughout The Rise of Skywalker are in an argument with Johnson's choices on his film. I feel like if you don't like where the previous film took something, maybe you shouldn't take the job of making the sequel to it. Rian obviously saw the great cliffhanger from The Force Awakens as an opportunity for storytelling, and Abrams saw the end of Johnson's film as something to brush aside in favor of redoing the old tropes.

A New Hope, Return of the Jedi, The Force Awakens, Rogue One and now The Rise of Skywalker are all about the heroes having to destroy a Death Star or (essentially) renamed Death Star. That's five movies out of eleven. But Johnson leaned away from the traditional, and Abrams wanted to lean back in. It's a fundamental philosophical difference in how they approach filmmaking, and this film suffered for that.

 

[TravisR]

If there was a Love button, I would give your post that. I agree with everything you wrote, especially this. Johnson came in and shook up the series in a dynamic way, which was an invitation for the next director to come in and do something new.

Instead, The Rise of Skywalker seems as though Abrams and Terrio scoured the internet in an attempt to check off things that entitled fans want from a movie.

I can't even really blame them for wanting to give the fans what they want but to me, TLJ was such a bold move forward for Star Wars that it's a shame to run right back to the well. That being said, I still liked TROS but I loved TLJ.

 

[Edwin-S]

The Last Jedi set up for it to do something we haven't seen before.

Like what? Because I didn't see anywhere the story could go after Johnson demolished everything.

 

[Tommy R]

Like what? Because I didn't see anywhere the story could go after Johnson demolished everything.

I have no idea what they could have done either, but then, I’m not a professional screenwriter.

For the record though, I actually liked TROS, but it most definitely could have tried to be more original. Which is my main problem with TFA. But I give J.J. credit for keeping Luke out of the movie until the final seconds. He subverted expectations with that more than Rian could have dreamed of. J.J. should get more credit in that regard.

 

[Jake Lipson]

Like what?

For example: At the end of The Last Jedi, Kylo Ren is actually in charge of the First Order. Even Darth Vader was never the guy in charge because he was subservient to Palpatine. It would have been an interesting new dynamic to watch Kylo Ren in a genuine leadership position. Instead, they essentially regress him to supporting status by replacing Snoke with the Emperor. Rey even calls him out on this in the movie, but just because she says it doesn't make it any less stupid to go backwards. What happens when Kylo Ren, Han and Leia's son who Leia would not want to die, is the bad guy that has to be taken down and he's not hiding behind a more powerful figure? We'll never know the answer now because instead of exploring that idea, they undid Palpatine's death and returned things to the status quo from before Snoke was killed.

If the journey of the first six movies was for Anakin to bring balance to the Force by destroying the Emperor, then what did he really do now? Because Palpatine is not dead, we now have six movies about a guy who almost killed Palpatine, instead of six movies about someone who killed Palpatine as a redemptive act. Making Kylo the big bad of Episode IX would have maintained the integrity of Return of the Jedi's ending. Instead, Abrams went the other way.

Also, the ending of The Last Jedi talked about Luke's sacrifice being the thing that would rebuild the Rebellion and inspire hope. Johnson played with the idea that access to the Force should be democratized, both in his answer about Rey's parentage and in the end with the kid with the broom, which I think is the best ending shot for any Star Wars movie. But now none of that matters, because it's all about bloodlines again in The Rise of Skywalker.

 

[Jake Lipson]

I can't even really blame them for wanting to give the fans what they want

The thing is that giving the fans what they want and moving the story forward in new ways are not mutually exclusive. The same parent company did it all earlier this year with Endgame. That movie was able to honor the history and lore of all the films that came before it while also simultaneously giving us something that felt fresh and exciting. The difference there is that Marvel has Kevin Feige. He has figured out how to allow individual directors to play in the sandbox in different ways while maintaining a consistent vision for the overarching narrative as a whole. Kathleen Kennedy is a talented producer, but she did not have that kind of vision for what this trilogy should be.

 

[Edwin-S]

I have no idea what they could have done either, but then, I’m not a professional screenwriter.

For the record though, I actually liked TROS, but it most definitely could have tried to be more original. Which is my main problem with TFA. But I give J.J. credit for keeping Luke out of the movie until the final seconds. He subverted expectations with that more than Rian could have dreamed of. J.J. should get more credit in that regard.

The only thing they could have done that would have been original was to turn everything upside down and have Rey go "Dark Side" and Ren flipping and becoming her opponent.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

Instead, The Rise of Skywalker seems as though Abrams and Terrio scoured the internet in an attempt to check off things that entitled fans want from a movie.

This is the biggest problem with the movie for me; it both feels overstuffed and feels (at times) like fan fiction. I wish the movie had done less, but better.

You want Rey to be somebody? Fine, she's a Palpatine.

In fairness, this was one area where I felt like Johnson really didn't pick up the baton and follow it through. The Force Awakens clearly implied that Rey had an important and mysterious past. And the way Abrams and Terrio handled it played fair with what Johnson had delivered. It seems like Palpatine's son and daughter-in-law were nobodies, with none of his ambition or impact. That, of course, made them far better people than Palpatine.

You're upset that Luke threw away his lightsaber? He'll literally tell Rey she shouldn't do that.

I see where you're coming from with this, but I actually loved that moment. It was self-deprecating on Luke's part, and unlike other areas of the movie, it honored the journey he went on in The Last Jedi.

You don't like the idea of the Force being democratized? Fine, it's all about bloodlines again, even though Lucas wrote that the Jedi aren't allowed to have familial attachments, so really, more Jedi should come from nowhere.

There are two problems I had with using Rey to democratize the Force in The Last Jedi:

1. The Force Awakens made her too powerful, too quickly. Anybody can be born Force-sensitive, but she was a once- or twice-in-a-generation prodigy. As a viewer, I wanted an explanation for that. The stable boy using the Force to grab the broom at the end of The Last Jedi played better for me as an example of the Force being democratized.
   
   
2. The Skywalker Saga has always been all about bloodlines; it's three generations of one family, and the impact (good and bad) that they've had on the galaxy. I like the idea of democratizing the Force, but I don't think the Saga films were the best vessel for that.

Chewie never got a medal? He'll be given one at random now for no apparent reason just so we can say he got one.

Now this was blatant fan service.

The Last Jedi was too unconventional? We'll make the climax of the movie about blowing up Death Star duplicates again, while the protagonist fights the Emperor, who was for all intents and purposes already dead until we decided we need him.

The most infuriating part of the movie for me. The Last Jedi ended with Kylo Ren as the Supreme Leader and Rey as the last Jedi. It would have been perfectly legitimate on this one to either redeem Ben Solo (as the film did) or embrace Kylo Ren as the Big Bad of the trilogy.

But either way, the return of the Emperor both cheapens Anakin's sacrifice at the end of Return of the Jedi and feels like a distraction from the central dynamic of Kylo Ren and Rey.

What does it look like for Rey to try to piece together a dead religion from a handful of dusty old tomes? How does the First Order change with Kylo Ren truly, fully in charge? The answers to those questions, if explored honestly, would have been a lot more interesting to me than just "Palpatine".

Also, no more planet-destroying weapons, please!

 

[Josh Steinberg]

Sigh... the Force has never been solely about bloodlines. Never. It is not contradictory for people in the same family to have the Force, and for people not part of the same family to also have the Force. There is no need to make it into an either/or when none of the films ever have.

 

[TravisR]

If the journey of the first six movies was for Anakin to bring balance to the Force by destroying the Emperor, then what did he really do now? Because Palpatine is not dead, we now have six movies about a guy who almost killed Palpatine, instead of six movies about someone who killed Palpatine as a redemptive act. Making Kylo the big bad of Episode IX would have maintained the integrity of Return of the Jedi's ending. Instead, Abrams went the other way.

In the real world, the answer is that they needed a villain and given Palpatine's talk about cheating death in ROTS, it does make sense to have him return. Within the world of the movies, I would argue that all the pieces mattered to Rey finally defeating Palpatine once and for all. Without Anakin's sacrifice in ROTJ, the Emperor would have maintained control of the galaxy for decades and Rey, if she even existed, would have never been in a position to defeat him. All the characters from Luke Skywalker to Jar Jar Binks to Jyn Erso all played some part in eventually bringing balance to the Force.

 

[Edwin-S]

It would have been an interesting new dynamic to watch Kylo Ren in a genuine leadership position.

Did anyone seriously see Kylo Ren having the ability to become Ruler of a new Empire? Because I sure didn't. I'm sorry but Adam Driver's Ren character couldn't even come close to matching Vader in being a bad ass, let alone control an Empire. And, in reality, even if he had become a worthwhile villain it wouldn't have made the story any more original. it just would have been Rey the Last Jedi and the Resistance trying to bring down Kylo Ren the Emperor.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I love the symmetry of it. Palpatine, through Snoke, steals away an apprentice of the light. The force then literally awakens and embolden’s Palpatine’s heir as an agent of the light. And, in her journey, we see a gracefulness that eluded Anakin generations earlier, bringing full circle to that storyline. Even the way Rey defeats Palpatine has symmetry; she succeeds using the move that backfires on Mace Windu, with Palpatine being the loser this time.

Star Wars movies have always carried a sense of symmetry and George has said they’re meant to rhyme; I think this film in respect to Rey and Palpatine accomplishes that.

 

[Edwin-S]

In the real world, the answer is that they needed a villain and given Palpatine's talk about cheating death in ROTS, it does make sense to have him return. Within the world of the movies, I would argue that all the pieces mattered to Rey finally defeating Palpatine once and for all. Without Anakin's sacrifice in ROTJ, the Emperor would have maintained control of the galaxy for decades and Rey, if she even existed, would have never been in a position to defeat him. All the characters from Luke Skywalker to Jar Jar Binks to Jyn Erso all played some part in eventually bringing balance to the Force.

Also, was it ever said in the original trilogy that Luke Skywalker would be the one to bring balance to the Force? Wasn't that a concept that only showed up in the prequel trilogy when Qui-Gon Jinn started referring in that manner to Anakin Skywalker? I cannot remember anyone ever saying that Luke would bring balance. I could be wrong though. The only STAR WARS movie that I watched more than once up until Disney+ was Episode IV and even that one I can not remember every bit of dialogue.

 

[WillG]

Anyone worried about retconning (and I don't think anything in this movie actually meets the definition) in these new Star Wars movies needs to be as critical of the original trilogy because George Lucas was already retconning the first movie in the second movie.

"I've got a great idea- Darth Vader is Luke's father."
"We can't do that, Obi-Wan says Vader killed Luke's father in part one"
"Ummm, Obi-Wan lied?"
"Sure, that works."

Mentors lying to their protege is TIGHT!