Star Wars - The Force Awakens (SPOILERS Thread)

[Canon Editor]

I think the Prequels are not extremely well-made films, but are nonetheless Star Wars, and as childlike as it may sound, Star Wars has come to be something which goes beyond pure cinema.  It is something more, and being Star Wars, created by George Lucas, the prequels, I loved as a kid and still do, I think of it of all on the same level, but I understand I am in a very high minority (no pun intended)

How old were you when they came out? I am curious if age distorts perspective.

Hahahaha, I was perhaps 3 years old when I first saw "Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace" on VHS hahaha

 

[Andreas]

Sometimes, when I'm bored, I edit trailers, tributes, mash-ups and retrospectives of beloved movie and/or television series and franchises.

I very newly created a Retrospective for The Force Awakens, which you can watch below.

I hope you enjoy!

@A retrospective, after YouTube trailer standards, is a short and exciting summary of the movie.

 

[TV's Frink]

Threads merged.

 

[dangermouse]

Great job with the retrospective! Thoroughly enjoyed it. Well done.

 

[Masirimso17]

Not only was Fan-Service Awakens not a good movie, a lazy copy everything from the OT, and had ruined old characters (except Chewbacca, he was good) and sh*t new characters (except Finn, I like Finn's story), but it added nothing at all to the mythos of Star Wars. Even the mediocre prequels had something to add.

Where's the dislike button?

Hahaha   Something like that could exist in this site, but I don't think it would be fair if the dislike would negatively affect my reputation points. Different opinions is the beauty of opinions after all. May I explain myself in its own thread?

Okay, so before I start critizising this movie I want to talk about the things I like about it. The direction, the performances, the top notch special effects and the epic Star Wars action is all fantastic, not to mention John Williams' fantastic score. However, as with all movies, those won't mean jack sh*t if you don't have a well-written, creative plot and likable characters.

First of all, the plot. Most people who criticise The Force Awakens point out that the plot is a complete, unoriginal and uncreative remake of A New Hope, with bits from Empire and Jedi added in.

Others argue that that's the point, it's not a rip off and it doesn't take only A New Hope as its plot:

Both arguments in these videos (which are pro-TFA regardless of the criticisms by the way) are true. But that's not the problem. Both times I watched The Force Awakens in theatres, I was bothered by the unoriginality of course, especially Starkiller Base, but I was entertained nonetheless. So that's not the problem. Actually, the problem with resetting the state of the galaxy to what it was back in the OT ruins the triumphant ending of Return of the Jedi. It just makes it all pointless. If Revenge of the Sith strengthens Return of the Jedi with its fantastic parallels, then The Force Awakens weakens it with its reset.

Another problem in the plot of The Force Awakens is that there is no political establishment. What state is the Republic at? How much control does the First Order have? Did they just end the New Republic with Starkiller Base? What will happen now? There has to be some political establishment so that I can care about what happens to the Republic. I don't know a thing about it. I'm not saying it should reach levels of politics in the PT, but give me something like this at least:

Yet another problem I have is that there are too many unanswered questions and conveniences. Who was Max von Sydow's character and how does he know and is related to Leia and the Resistance? How did the First Order know where to find Poe and Max von Sydow? Why did Kylo Ren kill Max von Sydow's character? What a coincidence is it that BB-8 found Rey so easily. What a coincidence is it that Finn and Poe crash landed so near to Rey and BB-8 or that Finn easily found them. What did Poe do after he woke up at night on Jakku? What a coincidence is it that Han and Chewie found the Millenium Falcon immediately after its first flight in a long time. Where did Maz Kanata get Luke's lightsaber? How does Rey miraculously know how exactly to use the Force? How convenient is it that the ground separates Rey and Kylo Ren during the destruction of Starkiller Base? How does the First Order have most of the map as Kylo Ren mentions it? [font=Roboto, RobotoDraft, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]How convenient is it that R2-D2 suddenly activates after a long shutdown?[/font]

So what is the real problem with the Force Awakens? Well, its characters. With the exceptions of an original, well written character Finn, the returning Chewbacca and the mysterious Maz Kanata, which I will not touch on any of in this post, the characters in this movie are either new characters that are badly-written or old characters that are completely ruined.

I want to get the obvious out of the way first: MaRey Sue. I have nothing more to add than what this video says.

I already said I won't criticise Finn because he is one of the only characters I like in this movie.

I don't like Poe Dameron, while he's a charming character with potential, a simple plot-hole makes him an ignorant jerk: His unexplained disappearance and sudden reappearance in the Resistance Base was because he was supposed to die, but they thought he was too cool to kill off so they brought him back later. The plot hole is that if his whole mission was to bring the map and BB-8 to the Resistance, why does he abandon Finn and BB-8 to Jakku? I know he says "I woke up at night, no you, no ship, nothing" but first, how did he get back? And second, even if he did find the means to get away, wouldn't he look for Finn and BB-8 before returning?

Captain Phasma? Huge wasted potential, I almost forgot about her while writing.

Kylo Ren was very intimidating and interesting... at the beginning. Though even then his actions are questionable. Why does he kill Max von Sydow's character, for example? He could know more about the map than the others, heck he could have memorized it, I don't know. We don't know who he was. So many unanswered questions. Anyway, regardless of that, at least he was a threatening figure. That is until he throws a temper tantrum just because he didn't get what he wanted. When that happened everyone in the theater laughed, at least in my theater. That's not a good sign. Until he takes off his helmet, he's okay, but not nearly as intimidating as the beginning of the movie. But his intimidating nature is all thrown away when he takes his mask off in front of Rey. After that, it's all emo Vader wannabe. At least, that's how it feels like. At most he should have taken off his helmet at the end, and he should have looked more intimidating than a teenager. Maybe with Adam Driver's awesome goatee (at least I think it's a goatee).

You know, it's not a good sign if your main villain doesn't become a threatening villain in people's eyes, but an internet meme.

http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/emo-kylo-ren

Now... The old characters. Let's start with Luke. We saw at the end of Return of the Jedi the redemption of Darth Vader and the defeat of the Galactic Empire. It was promised to us that Luke would create a new, better Jedi Order, one that would learn from the mistakes of the previous one and continue to protect the galaxy from evil. It's subtle, but it's there. However, not only did Luke fail to make a supposedly better Jedi Order that stood for less than 30 years (compared to thousands of years of the old corrupt Jedi Order), but he abandoned the galaxy when it most needed him. What happened to Luke's determination in Return of the Jedi? The new hope has failed, and he's got some explaining to do in Episode VIII.

Next, we have Han Solo. Han Solo as we all know was a ruthless (HAN SHOT FIRST), care-free smuggler that developed into a loving, respected, good man throughout the OT. That was his story. After he was done with smuggling, learned to care and love as we saw in Return of the Jedi, one would think he would continue as a General in the Rebel Alliance (along with Lando, who's oddly absent from TFA). However we see that he failed to be a good father for Ben, broke up with Leia and became a smuggler again. What happened to his accomplishments, his character development? I know he's not proud of this situation, but seeing Han in such a terrible state then killed without any glory just makes all that development pointless. You don't develop a character, then reset his state and kill him off like that.

Finally, Leia. After we learn that she is another Skywalker, strong in the Force and the last hope for the galaxy if Luke fails, we are promised that she would learn the ways of the Force and become a Jedi. Making her a general after so much set-up and promise, then throwing her to the sidelines just makes all that pointless. There is absolutely no reason for her not to be a Jedi in this movie.

Other than the characters, the other big problem I have with this movie is that it doesn't add anything to the mythos. It's all same old, same old. Been there, done that. Except Finn's story, I like his story.

 

[DominicCobb]

Ugh.

 

[Masirimso17]

I feel the frustration. I don't mind. Let's just agree to disagree.

P.S. I previously wrote an insensitive comment to this post. I edited the post to remove it. I apologize, I didn't mean anything disrespectful by it.

 

[DigModiFicaTion]

I totally feel like this stormtrooper walking into this thread. 

 

[TV's Frink]

If Revenge of the Sith strengthens Return of the Jedi with its fantastic parallels

I literally stopped reading right there.

 

[Gaith]

I want to get the obvious out of the way first: MaRey Sue. I have nothing more to add than what this video says.

Against my better judgment, I watched that video... and found it admirably even-handed and fair. The whole armed wolf avatar was lame, but the arguments were solid and comprehensive.

 

[Masirimso17]

Against my better judgment, I watched that video... and found it admirably even-handed and fair. The whole armed wolf avatar was lame, but the arguments were solid and comprehensive.

Actually it's supposed to be a cat , but yeah, I agree it's a well made video.

 

[TV's Frink]

Oh fuck the misogynistic trash term Mary Sue.

 

[thecuddlyninja]

Oh fuck the misogynistic trash term Mary Sue.

But why? We've been calling all the strong, fast-learning male characters throughout the history of cinema Gary Stu (Pauline Kael was huge on this) so it's totally not sexist at all that a term was invented just for women.

Plus today you totally see the term Gary Stu applied to men all the time. It's very common outside of Mary Sue arguments. Like, super common.

 

[Masirimso17]

Oh fuck the misogynistic trash term Mary Sue.

But why? We've been calling all the strong, fast-learning male characters throughout the history of cinema Gary Stu (Pauline Kael was huge on this) so it's totally not sexist at all that a term was invented just for women.

Plus today you totally see the term Gary Stu applied to men all the time. It's very common outside of Mary Sue arguments. Like, super common.

Exactly. Mary Sue (or Gary Stu if it's a male) is a term used to criticise too perfect characters who are inexplicably better than everyone else with no backstory to explain, excuse and support his/her perfection. It's not misogynistic, if Rey had a backstory or good enough excuse that explained all her skills and feats, then she wouldn't be a Mary Sue.

 

[thecuddlyninja]

Oh fuck the misogynistic trash term Mary Sue.

But why? We've been calling all the strong, fast-learning male characters throughout the history of cinema Gary Stu (Pauline Kael was huge on this) so it's totally not sexist at all that a term was invented just for women.

Plus today you totally see the term Gary Stu applied to men all the time. It's very common outside of Mary Sue arguments. Like, super common.

Exactly. Mary Sue (or Gary Stu if it's a male) is a term used to criticise too perfect characters who are inexplicably better than everyone else with no backstory to explain, excuse and support his/her perfection. It's not misogynistic, if Rey had a backstory or good enough excuse that explained all her skills and feats, then she wouldn't be a Mary Sue.

My entire post was extremely sarcastic. I have literally never heard anybody use the term Gary Stu outside of an argument over whether Mary Sue is sexist. So yeah, a term was invented to describe women doing what male characters have been doing for decades. It's not the "get in the kitchen, woman" sexism, just the latent "apply different standards" kind.

For me, almost every character learns stuff too quickly in movies and I am cool with it because I don't want four hour movies filled with realistic minutae. I'm going to wait and see Rey's lineage, and then maybe judge how logical her progression was. Actually, I probably won't think about that at all, because I don't mind cinematic hand-waving. If I enjoy the story and the characters, I'm good.

 

[Masirimso17]

My entire post was extremely sarcastic. I have literally never heard anybody use the term Gary Stu outside of an argument over whether Mary Sue is sexist. So yeah, a term was invented to describe women doing what male characters have been doing for decades. It's not the "get in the kitchen, woman" sexism, just the latent "apply different standards" kind.

For me, almost every character learns stuff too quickly in movies and I am cool with it because I don't want four hour movies filled with realistic minutae. I'm going to wait and see Rey's lineage, and then maybe judge how logical her progression was. Actually, I probably won't think about that at all, because I don't mind cinematic hand-waving. If I enjoy the story and the characters, I'm good.

It is difficult to read sarcasm on text, so forgive me on that. But it's not about learning everything so fast. The problem is there isn't enough good explanations or a backstory that excuses these skills. Did you watch the video I linked about it? It explains it all very well.

EDIT: It's not a term invented for misogyny.

 

[thecuddlyninja]

My entire post was extremely sarcastic. I have literally never heard anybody use the term Gary Stu outside of an argument over whether Mary Sue is sexist. So yeah, a term was invented to describe women doing what male characters have been doing for decades. It's not the "get in the kitchen, woman" sexism, just the latent "apply different standards" kind.

For me, almost every character learns stuff too quickly in movies and I am cool with it because I don't want four hour movies filled with realistic minutae. I'm going to wait and see Rey's lineage, and then maybe judge how logical her progression was. Actually, I probably won't think about that at all, because I don't mind cinematic hand-waving. If I enjoy the story and the characters, I'm good.

It is difficult to read sarcasm on text, so forgive me on that. But it's not about learning everything so fast. The problem is there isn't enough good explanations or a backstory that excuses these skills. Did you watch the video I linked about it? It explains it all very well.

True. I thought the Pauline Kael thing would be a dead giveaway. I didn't watch the video because I strongly disagree with the premise. I think she's Luke's daughter and I think the movie and music strongly suggest that. So her skills and abilities make perfect sense to me.

Also, Gary Stu is absolutely not a term that people use outside of these arguments. So it only gets applied to female characters in earnest, which is why it's a garbage term. Literally invented to knock female characters and then a rhyming guy version nobody actually uses was made. I guess if you can't see the issue with that, we are at an impasse. To me, being of Jedi lineage is a far better explanation for innate ability than John McClane being a cop explaining how he's a superhero. That's just an example. But nobody actually complains about male characters doing this. Show me one video dedicated to a male character being a Gary Stu and I'll show you a hundred about strong female characters, even though 99% of action leads are male.

 

[Masirimso17]

I didn't watch the video because I strongly disagree with the premise. I think she's Luke's daughter and I think the movie and music strongly suggest that. So her skills and abilities make perfect sense to me.

Also, Gary Stu is absolutely not a term that people use outside of these arguments. So it only gets applied to female characters in earnest, which is why it's a garbage term. Literally invented to knock female characters and then a rhyming guy version nobody actually uses was made. I guess if you can't see the issue with that, we are at an impasse. To me, being of Jedi lineage is a far better explanation for innate ability than John McClane being a cop explaining how he's a superhero. That's just an example. But nobody actually complains about male characters doing this. Show me one video dedicated to a male character being a Gary Stu and I'll show you a hundred about strong female characters, even though 99% of action leads are male.

I saw Gary Sue being used, but you're right that it isn't used as much as Mary Sue. But I still stand by my point.

Rey being Luke's daughter isn't even confirmed, but even then how does that explain her being better than, for example, Han Solo in the Milleum Falcon?

 

[thecuddlyninja]

Well, Luke flew with his eyes closed so the Force really helps with flying. The movie also threw in showing her obsession with piloting old stuff. And the fact that she's able to pull off a mind trick means that she is from a strong Force lineage in my opinion. The film has purposely set up a mystery of which lineage but I think it is very clear that's her background.

Should she be flipping the Falcon around with ease? Logically no, but it makes for a good scene by stretching the ability of the characters a bit.

I'm not disputing that, I'm saying that's how action in movies generally works and has worked for years, yet a term was invented to criticize women characters for doing it.

 

[Masirimso17]

Well, Luke flew with his eyes closed so the Force really helps with flying. The movie also threw in showing her obsession with piloting old stuff.

Should she be flipping it around with ease? Logically no, but it makes for a good scene by stretching the ability of the characters.

I'm not disputing that, I'm saying that's how action in movies generally works and has worked for years, yet a term was invented to criticize women characters for doing it.

I wasn't talking about the flying, I can buy that as well (except the flipping) but for example jumping to hyperspace with ease which she's never done before or completing Han's sentences or bypassing the compressor when Han can't do it or understanding BB-8 and Chewie with no explanation etc. etc.

I understand what you mean, though I don't fully agree with you.