Rise of Skywalker news.

[Mange]

Maybe it's what's left of the Republic/Imperial Fleet that was mothballed and have been reactivated after the events of TFA.

There are rumors floating around, but are potential spoilers allowed?

Or they're just lazily reusing the 3D model from Rogue One.

My thought exactly!

[bilateralrope]

There are rumors floating around, but are potential spoilers allowed?

You can post them inside spoiler tags. Just remember to preview your post to make sure the spoiler tags are working as they are a bit buggy here.

[Mange]

Yes, bilateralrope, they haven't worked for years, IIRC.

Anyway: Spoiler

The rumors floating around are that Palpatine hid away a large Imperial force in the Unknown Regions as a precaution. The red Sith Troopers are Palpy's who also created the FIrst Order as a front with Snoke as his puppet.

Remember that this are rumors.

[bilateralrope]

Well, that would make sense.

Though only having the blueprints for them would make sense for the guy who can't make a stable lightsaber.

Spoiler tags do work
Spoiler

Unless you have quotes in the post.

[Mange]

Spoiler tags do work
Spoiler

Unless you have quotes in the post.

Yes, but only if you don't use quote tags in the same post, which is why I removed the quoted post and inserted the spoiler there instead.

[Elheru Aran]

You can also spoiler by sizing your text to 0 or small enough that it just looks like a little black line, easily visible by either quoting a post or copy/pasting to Notepad or whatever. This has the side benefit of not being affected by the broken spoiler-boxes.

Like so That's size 30, by the way; 50 was vaguely readable.

First thought: Holy WTF is up with Rey with a saber-staff at the end? Bad-dream-Force-vision would be my guess though.

The part where Kylo and her are starting to fight alongside turbolaser turrets poking out of the ocean; can almost guarantee that that's the Death Star wreckage on Endor.

Suspect we'll have a bunch of Force vision crap going on between Rey and Kylo, for all Snoke said he did that stuff in TLJ.

[bilateralrope]

You can also spoiler by sizing your text to 0 or small enough that it just looks like a little black line, easily visible by either quoting a post or copy/pasting to Notepad or whatever. This has the side benefit of not being affected by the broken spoiler-boxes.

Like so That's size 30, by the way; 50 was vaguely readable.

I find 30 readable with some effort. Worse still, size 30 looks the same as size 1.

Size 30Size 1
[size=0]And size 0 doesn't work[/size]

[Elheru Aran]

Well that's going to depend on your screen and settings and how good your eyes are, I guess. It works for me. The main thing I don't like about spoiler tags is if you come into a discussion somewhat late, and you see several spoilers being quoted... you can't read them, you have to go back to where they were originally posted. Somewhat of an annoyance.

[Gandalf]

Maybe it's what's left of the Republic/Imperial Fleet that was mothballed and have been reactivated after the events of TFA.

Indeed, or the military industrial complex can just roll them off the production line. They might be like T-55s.

[ray245]

I can't help but feel the sequel trilogy is narratively vacant because it's quite clear now that Disney and Kennedy has no bloody clue what kind of story they want to tell across the movies. They are stories that are well designed to evoke hype and generate excitement for a strong opening week. While many SW fans crave for that kind of hype, I can't help but feel the long term reception of the sequel movies will be quite negative as a result.

There's nothing bold about giving us updated X-Wings, B-Wings and A-Wings, or even giving us ISD-I.

I will feel a little happy if more critics turn against JJ Abrams after they realised he couldn't set up world-building and strong narrative for a whole trilogy.

[Solauren]

Problem is, JJ Abrams wasn't in charge of the Second movie. He can argue that someone else ignored what he was trying to set up, and this is his best attempt to salvage.

And he is probably correct.

[The Romulan Republic]

Problem is, JJ Abrams wasn't in charge of the Second movie. He can argue that someone else ignored what he was trying to set up, and this is his best attempt to salvage.

And he is probably correct.

Say what you will about Rian Johnson, at least he tried to innovate. I respect a risk-taker in Hollywood. There aren't nearly enough of them.

And its not like Abrams is some great script-writing genius who's flawless masterpiece Johnson tarnished. Abrams is in my opinion a reasonably competent director, and casts good actors, but nothing I've seen of his work has convinced me that he is capable of putting together a consistent plot of any length without gaping holes and/or massive contrivances in it.

[Galvatron]

Correct me if I missed something, but there appeared to be no sign of Rose Tico yet again.

[FaxModem1]

So, Rey has sword chucks, interesting.

Anybody else creeped out by C-3P0 having red eyes? It's just kind of unsettling.

[tezunegari]

Say what you will about Rian Johnson, at least he tried to innovate.

What exactly was innovative about TLJ?

The lack of followup on plot hooks that TFA offered?
The killing of the Big Bad?
The deconstruction of the Hero's Journey?
The "failure is the only option" in the writing of the current hero's actions?

In my opinion, it's a bad decision to deconstruct a theme or trope within the same franchise - that will just alienate the fan base.
I watch Superman because I want to see Superman do good things.
If I want a deconstruction of Superman, I watch Brightburn, Watchmen or The Boys.

[Gandalf]

Problem is, JJ Abrams wasn't in charge of the Second movie. He can argue that someone else ignored what he was trying to set up, and this is his best attempt to salvage.

And he is probably correct.

Say what you will about Rian Johnson, at least he tried to innovate. I respect a risk-taker in Hollywood. There aren't nearly enough of them.

Indeed. I liked that he had the gall to point out that the Jedi were pretty terrible at being Jedi, but the idea of the Jedi was what was powerful.

[tezunegari]

Problem is, JJ Abrams wasn't in charge of the Second movie. He can argue that someone else ignored what he was trying to set up, and this is his best attempt to salvage.

And he is probably correct.

Say what you will about Rian Johnson, at least he tried to innovate. I respect a risk-taker in Hollywood. There aren't nearly enough of them.

Indeed. I liked that he had the gall to point out that the Jedi were pretty terrible at being Jedi, but the idea of the Jedi was what was powerful.

Wasn't that the whole point of the Prequels?

[ray245]

Say what you will about Rian Johnson, at least he tried to innovate. I respect a risk-taker in Hollywood. There aren't nearly enough of them.

Indeed. I liked that he had the gall to point out that the Jedi were pretty terrible at being Jedi, but the idea of the Jedi was what was powerful.

Wasn't that the whole point of the Prequels?

People are bad at reading sub-text.

[Vympel]

Say what you will about Rian Johnson, at least he tried to innovate.

What exactly was innovative about TLJ?

The lack of followup on plot hooks that TFA offered?
The killing of the Big Bad?
The deconstruction of the Hero's Journey?
The "failure is the only option" in the writing of the current hero's actions?

In my opinion, it's a bad decision to deconstruct a theme or trope within the same franchise - that will just alienate the fan base.
I watch Superman because I want to see Superman do good things.
If I want a deconstruction of Superman, I watch Brightburn, Watchmen or The Boys.

Luke Skywalker isn't Superman, and more importantly - he never, ever was.

As for the notion of 'lack of follow up', it's really not Johnson's fault that segments of the fanbase constructed a fantasy narrative of TFA that blew things that were never promised or teased out of all proportion (Snoke's backstory) and completely ignored what the movie was actually explicitly saying (Luke abandoned his calling and doesn't want to be found) in favour of a bizarre Carmen Sandiego Luke who is fond of pointlessly obfuscatory map puzzle shenanigans that get shitloads of people killed for no reason - all because they simply wouldn't take Han Solo at his word or think about the situation the film presents seriously for more than two seconds. Every single whine about Luke in TLJ is already right there in TFA. Why? Refer back to 'Superman'.

[tezunegari]

Say what you will about Rian Johnson, at least he tried to innovate.

What exactly was innovative about TLJ?

The lack of followup on plot hooks that TFA offered?
The killing of the Big Bad?
The deconstruction of the Hero's Journey?
The "failure is the only option" in the writing of the current hero's actions?

In my opinion, it's a bad decision to deconstruct a theme or trope within the same franchise - that will just alienate the fan base.
I watch Superman because I want to see Superman do good things.
If I want a deconstruction of Superman, I watch Brightburn, Watchmen or The Boys.

Luke Skywalker isn't Superman, and more importantly - he never, ever was.

As for the notion of 'lack of follow up', it's really not Johnson's fault that segments of the fanbase constructed a fantasy narrative of TFA that blew things that were never promised or teased out of all proportion (Snoke's backstory) and completely ignored what the movie was actually explicitly saying (Luke abandoned his calling and doesn't want to be found) in favour of a bizarre Carmen Sandiego Luke who is fond of pointlessly obfuscatory map puzzle shenanigans that get shitloads of people killed for no reason - all because they simply wouldn't take Han Solo at his word or think about the situation the film presents seriously for more than two seconds. Every single whine about Luke in TLJ is already right there in TFA. Why? Refer back to 'Superman'.

Where did I claim Luke was Superman?

[ray245]

Luke Skywalker isn't Superman, and more importantly - he never, ever was.

As for the notion of 'lack of follow up', it's really not Johnson's fault that segments of the fanbase constructed a fantasy narrative of TFA that blew things that were never promised or teased out of all proportion (Snoke's backstory) and completely ignored what the movie was actually explicitly saying (Luke abandoned his calling and doesn't want to be found) in favour of a bizarre Carmen Sandiego Luke who is fond of pointlessly obfuscatory map puzzle shenanigans that get shitloads of people killed for no reason - all because they simply wouldn't take Han Solo at his word or think about the situation the film presents seriously for more than two seconds. Every single whine about Luke in TLJ is already right there in TFA. Why? Refer back to 'Superman'.

You can explain all you want but you cannot explain away why the feeling of annoyance that many fans do have. I think at times you go too far in trying to defend the official narrative from criticism, and failed to understand why people felt annoyed with the depiction or writing in films and shows.

If the films are as well constructed as you think it is, they won't be facing so many criticism and feeling of annoyance from a large portion of fans.

[Gandalf]

Indeed. I liked that he had the gall to point out that the Jedi were pretty terrible at being Jedi, but the idea of the Jedi was what was powerful.

Wasn't that the whole point of the Prequels?

People are bad at reading sub-text.

The prequels showed a well meaning Jedi being outmatched by... one guy apparently. The sequels showed that the Jedi were fucked from the start.

[ray245]

Wasn't that the whole point of the Prequels?

People are bad at reading sub-text.

The prequels showed a well meaning Jedi being outmatched by... one guy apparently. The sequels showed that the Jedi were fucked from the start.

If the Jedi Order is so vulnerable that one guy is enough to tear down the system, doesn't it imply that things are already quite screwed up?

[Ziggy Stardust]

Indeed. I liked that he had the gall to point out that the Jedi were pretty terrible at being Jedi, but the idea of the Jedi was what was powerful.

Wasn't that the whole point of the Prequels?
[/quote]

I don't think either characterization of either the prequels or the sequels is quite accurate, here. At least the way I interpreted it.

While it's true that the Jedi in the prequels were generally pretty terrible at being Jedi, it was portrayed as being caused by the complacency of the Jedi Order as a quasi-political organization, not necessarily at any inherent flaw with the philosophical ideal of the Jedi. They put their guard down, arrogant in their own success, which allowed Sidious to manipulate and eventually destroy them as an Order. It's about the idea of individuals failing to live up to their own lofty ideals, and the way such ideals can be corrupted in the right circumstances.

The original trilogy then shows that the philosophical ideals of the Jedi can endure, despite the failures of the Order. It's about the idea that hate does not have to be confronted with hate, and that it is possible to achieve victory without sacrificing your ideals when it might seem easier to do so. That's why it is the RETURN of the Jedi. If the Order can fail in part because it was not willing or able to adhere to its own ideals, so too can the Order succeed by sticking to those ideals.

In the sequels, it's more about the idea that the entire philosophical ideal of the Jedi is flawed in and of itself, and we don't need to stick to those ideals to succeed. It's about being able to take the lessons of the past and move forward without returning to the past.

For all the flaws of the sequels, I do think it is at least a thematically coherent arc (it's really in the details where things get messy and/or silly).

[The Romulan Republic]

Say what you will about Rian Johnson, at least he tried to innovate.

What exactly was innovative about TLJ?

Deconstructing, with Holdo and Poe, the "Authority figures are always corrupt and/or incompetent, so the Lone Vigilante Action Hero has to go rogue to save the day" plot which is used in practically every action film ever.

Making one of the main characters an ordinary Resistance grunt, and showing a bit of her perspective of the universe.

Having Luke win through misdirection rather than through direct combat (although this is utterly in keeping with his character from RotJ, where he vanquishes Vader and Palpatine through psychology and pacifism, not through dueling prowess).

Making Kylo into the main villain.

Shutting down the idea of the woman redeeming the bad boy through the Power of Love. This could be seen as contradicting the OT's idea of redemption, but just because Luke redeemed Vader doesn't mean Rey can redeem Kylo. The relationships are different. And "Women should keep giving abusive bad boys another chance, because I can change him" is a sexist trope that has lead to a tremendous amount of avoidable human misery, and should be stomped on as often and hard as possible.

Also, I loved the film's shot at the "Both Sides" narrative in the form of DJ.

The lack of followup on plot hooks that TFA offered?
The killing of the Big Bad?

TFA didn't have a lot of plot hooks beyond "Let's remake A New Hope with different faces and more plot holes." I liked TFA overall, but again, let's not pretend that Abrams wrote some great masterpiece that Johnson defiled.

And while I'd have liked to see Snoke developed more, at the end of the day he was just an off-brand Palpatine, and getting rid of him so that we could focus more on Kylo, who is an actually interesting and original character, is a fine move in my book, even if it isn't rigidly following the plot outline from the Sacred OT. Plus it means that we actually got to see a successful Rule of Two-style apprentice betrayal on-screen.

I'll also note that the show which introduced the term "Big Bad" to the world had a habit of killing theirs' off, or subordinating them to a new villain, mid-season.

The deconstruction of the Hero's Journey?

Yes, because every story ever written must follow the same plot line and character arc as laid out by High Priest of Writing and noted anti-Semite Joseph Campbell.

The "failure is the only option" in the writing of the current hero's actions?

This is a misinterpretation of the film.

Yes, the OT heroes did not achieve a permanent victory that ended all evil in the galaxy forever. Which was always going to be a case, if there were going to be more films, and not TLJ's fault (in this case, it actually was simply working with the set-up Abrams created, with a First Order, a wrecked New Republic, and a Luke in exile who's students fell or were killed- all of that was from TFA).

However, the point of the film was about the importance of maintaining hope and continuing to try again even in the face of failure and defeat- which I think is a message people need to hear, especially now, in the age of Trump and climate change. This was part of the point of Poe's mutiny, of Leia's message, of Rose and her interactions with Finn, and ultimate Luke's redemption and death, and his passing the torch to the next generation, which is the moment the whole film was building towards.

In my opinion, it's a bad decision to deconstruct a theme or trope within the same franchise - that will just alienate the fan base.
I watch Superman because I want to see Superman do good things.
If I want a deconstruction of Superman, I watch Brightburn, Watchmen or The Boys.

If all you want is to watch the OT again, watch the OT again. If they're going to make new films at all, then they have to do something new, not just dish out the same old thing with a new coat of paint. Otherwise, there's no fucking point.

A franchise which doesn't grow and innovates stagnates. Johnson took risks, and its true that they didn't all pay off. That's why they're called risks. But I respect a creative risk-taker more than someone who always stays inside the box.