I felt a similar lack of compelling motivation for Snoke, but we've already discussed that in this thread. I just want to know if there are higher expectations for Snoke or if we're just supposed to accept him as "The Big Bad" the way we did the Emperor.
Star Wars Episode VIII: The Last Jedi - Page 23
Forum Index > Media & Entertainment |
Spoilers for the film are in this thread, read at your own peril if you have not seen the movie. No more spoiler tags from page 20 | ||
Excalibur_Z
United States12181 Posts
I felt a similar lack of compelling motivation for Snoke, but we've already discussed that in this thread. I just want to know if there are higher expectations for Snoke or if we're just supposed to accept him as "The Big Bad" the way we did the Emperor. | ||
levelping
Singapore759 Posts
On December 20 2017 11:33 Excalibur_Z wrote: While we're on the topic of the Emperor, what were his motivations for ruling the galaxy? Once he became Emperor, was he just permanently in a warlike frame of mind without care for governance? The rise to power is one thing -- anyone can be power-hungry -- but when he finally attained it, what were his plans? As far as I'm aware we never learned them, and the only glimpse into Empire-ruled life for the average person was Lando and Cloud City (which even then was "we're pretty sure you have Rebels here so we're gonna shake you down"). What was life intended to be like once all the Rebels were gone? I felt a similar lack of compelling motivation for Snoke, but we've already discussed that in this thread. I just want to know if there are higher expectations for Snoke or if we're just supposed to accept him as "The Big Bad" the way we did the Emperor. Yeah this is an interesting and good question. The extended universe/comics/prequels do explain that the Emperor wanted to achieve immortality in addition to wiping out the jedi order. So I guess that by coming into power he already achieved the wiping out jedi bit, and was going to focus on becoming an immortal Sith lord or something. Solely on the original trilogy movies though, as far as I can recall the Emperor basically was just the "bad guy", and everyone just rolled with it. I think one reason why people find Vader more appealing is that Vader has much more complex motivations than the Emperor. On one had Vader wants to replace the Emperor, but on the other he wants to convert his son, and finally he also has a redemption arc. In the same way, Kylo is much more interesting that Snoke, because Kylo wants to kill the Sith. | ||
LegalLord
United Kingdom13774 Posts
| ||
Sermokala
United States13543 Posts
On December 20 2017 11:57 LegalLord wrote: I’m ok with the emperor just being evil for the sake of being evil. Some characters just don’t need a complicated or fleshed out motivation. And this works in a world where the Emperor is just a big bad. In the original trilogy Vader is the one committing the genocides and even he is putting over the Emperor as the big bad. The Emperor is never involved in the main plot at any point as anything but a placeholder until the end when he is defeated. Snoke on the other hand is very much involved in the plot and plays critical roles in making the events happen as they do. Not to mention he doesn't even look that Human. While the Emperor looked like an evil old guy he was still a human evil old guy. Snoke is either an alien or a disfigured human thats also on the power level of making intersetllar force connections between people. | ||
levelping
Singapore759 Posts
On December 20 2017 12:56 Sermokala wrote: And this works in a world where the Emperor is just a big bad. In the original trilogy Vader is the one committing the genocides and even he is putting over the Emperor as the big bad. The Emperor is never involved in the main plot at any point as anything but a placeholder until the end when he is defeated. Snoke on the other hand is very much involved in the plot and plays critical roles in making the events happen as they do. Not to mention he doesn't even look that Human. While the Emperor looked like an evil old guy he was still a human evil old guy. Snoke is either an alien or a disfigured human thats also on the power level of making intersetllar force connections between people. Other than corrupt Ben Solo (which the Emperor does the same to Anakin Skywalker) what critical roles does Snoke play in TFA and TLJ? My recollection is that he is just there as the big bad guy who is in charge, with vague motivations about wanting to destroy the republic and the resistance. I.e. basically the Emperor. | ||
Sermokala
United States13543 Posts
On December 20 2017 13:08 levelping wrote: Other than corrupt Ben Solo (which the Emperor does the same to Anakin Skywalker) what critical roles does Snoke play in TFA and TLJ? My recollection is that he is just there as the big bad guy who is in charge, with vague motivations about wanting to destroy the republic and the resistance. I.e. basically the Emperor. Hes able to set up basically the first order or at least getting it running to a degree where he has his own special title. He corrupts Luke enough to cause him to cause ben solo to go to him to fall to the dark side. He then creates the force bridge between kylo and ray (enough apparently to transmit lightsaber fighting styles and jedi force knowledge). Hes the one giveing the orders at the start and during most of the chase in TLJ. | ||
Acrofales
Spain17190 Posts
On December 20 2017 07:43 Vindicare605 wrote: The original trilogy had a lot more, and even if it didn't that's not an equivalent statement. It would be like saying "Once upon a time there was a land far far away" is the same kind of story as "And now 30 years later we find our heroes here!" When you reuse old characters in a familiar setting you set yourself up for needing to explain the time skip. When you have a time skip of 30 years in a sequel, you owe it to your reader/audience to explain at least some of how you got to where you are since the story already has continuity to it. If Disney wanted to avoid having that storytelling obligation they could have made it an even further time skip and used 100% original characters (ala Star Trek the Next Generation), but they wanted to make sure the original cast was involved, so now we need an explanation for how everyone got to where they are. So far, they've just scoffed at that obligation in the movies and what bugs me is that they're scoffing at it while simultaenously just retelling the original trilogy's story. It's such weak writing. They're not fulfilling basic storytelling needs while at the same time they're just rehashing old content. It's lame, and no amount of special effects or one liner jokes can make that NOT lame. No. That's just a sw theme. Usually you get 2 lines in the opening scrawl that is supposed to explain it. That was inadequate in TFA, but let's face it: the opening scrawl of ep. 2 posits Dooku as an established character: leader of the Separatists and a Sith. It comes out of nowhere, because in episode 1, Nite Gunray is the leader (under Palp) and Maul was the sith apprentice. How, when and why did Dooku appear? Who cares, just enjoy this movie! Also mysterious clone army lying around for you to war with! And for that matter, the emperor was introduced in a similar way in Empire. In fact, the first time I saw the OT (as a kid), I was really confused, because I thought Vader was the emperor. Backstory for the ultimate (but disposable) bad guys is simply not something star wars movies have care about... ever. I find Snoke a lot less jarring than Dooku. Mainly because unlike the prequels, it turns out he was just a chump who took power in the vacuum, but is unimportant otherwise. While Dooku is the main antagonist for 2 whole movies (and CW animated series, which does expand the backstory for him and Maul a bit to make more sense). | ||
Malinor
Germany4703 Posts
I saw it yesterday and coming from this perspective I rate it a 3/10, maybe 4/10. The movie was just horrific in my view. The last 45 minutes were incredibly boring, the comic relief was all over the place and... honestly, this would become a very long post. During the break I tried to keep my disappointment to myself, to not ruin the movie for anyone else. But my colleagues, all avid Star Wars fans, by this point were totally spent. They all hated it. It was really an increadibly bad experience for me . | ||
levelping
Singapore759 Posts
On December 20 2017 16:26 Malinor wrote: When it comes to Star Wars, I do not have a horse in the race. I am not emotionally attached to the franchise. I have enjoyed some moves of the franchise quite a bit. I saw it yesterday and coming from this perspective I rate it a 3/10, maybe 4/10. The movie was just horrific in my view. The last 45 minutes were incredibly boring, the comic relief was all over the place and... honestly, this would become a very long post. During the break I tried to keep my disappointment to myself, to not ruin the movie for anyone else. But my colleagues, all avid Star Wars fans, by this point were totally spent. They all hated it. It was really an increadibly bad experience for me . I'm curious - your movie screening had a break? That's kinda cool | ||
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51335 Posts
Echoing what some others have said, the Snoke backstory is one of the main flaws to TFA for sure, but that still isn't the deal breaker for me. Bad acting on Rey's part due to script or writing direction was a major problem, her story as a whole also was a problem for me. She starts the movie begging for help and training, she has power when pushed to the limit like a young gohan, yet she ends the movie in the exact same way....all we learnt is that "most likely" (not even definite) she has no parents of note, she is just someone who is very strong with the force, which seems to be the key point the director wants us to understand. The director is taking the film away from jedi (good) vs sith (evil) and making it more about person vs person and the jedi / sith debacle is now meaningless. This would have been fine...IF it was the first movie in the trilogy! You can't make a second movie, of a trilogy completely different to the first lore wise because you want too... That is why this film comes across even worst than it should, if this was the first movie and Rey halfway through it meets Luke and then the same ending happened you would have gone, wow that was bold wonder what happens in the next two films now that the Jedi is gone and what not. But to do that in episode 2 of 3 after 1 had told the exact same story as the previous 6 films is a bit stupid to say the least. Hell if that was episode 3 that would make more sense right, what a good ending to the "next trilogy" if luke and the jedi order are gone for good, the Sith is no more it is just person vs person who discover the force and "self" teach themselves for an old fashioned good vs evil movie and you don't need to be a skywalker to be powerful and don't need some master to show you the ways. | ||
levelping
Singapore759 Posts
On December 20 2017 18:35 Pandemona wrote: Germany efficiency! Echoing what some others have said, the Snoke backstory is one of the main flaws to TFA for sure, but that still isn't the deal breaker for me. Bad acting on Rey's part due to script or writing direction was a major problem, her story as a whole also was a problem for me. She starts the movie begging for help and training, she has power when pushed to the limit like a young gohan, yet she ends the movie in the exact same way....all we learnt is that "most likely" (not even definite) she has no parents of note, she is just someone who is very strong with the force, which seems to be the key point the director wants us to understand. The director is taking the film away from jedi (good) vs sith (evil) and making it more about person vs person and the jedi / sith debacle is now meaningless. This would have been fine...IF it was the first movie in the trilogy! You can't make a second movie, of a trilogy completely different to the first lore wise because you want too... That is why this film comes across even worst than it should, if this was the first movie and Rey halfway through it meets Luke and then the same ending happened you would have gone, wow that was bold wonder what happens in the next two films now that the Jedi is gone and what not. But to do that in episode 2 of 3 after 1 had told the exact same story as the previous 6 films is a bit stupid to say the least. Hell if that was episode 3 that would make more sense right, what a good ending to the "next trilogy" if luke and the jedi order are gone for good, the Sith is no more it is just person vs person who discover the force and "self" teach themselves for an old fashioned good vs evil movie and you don't need to be a skywalker to be powerful and don't need some master to show you the ways. Well there were obvious limitations to this being done. TFA had to be safe, because it had so many expectations to fill - get back old fans, introduce new fans, and make everyone for get the prequels. TLJ, being the second movie, had more space to do its own thing. Anyway, Empire had the most epic major lore change - Vader becomes Luke's father and a fallen Jedi, rather than a bad guy. Second movies don't have to follow the first at all. Not to mention in the third movie, ROTJ, Leia is revealed to be Luke's sister, which is pretty mind blowing too seeing as Leia was making out with her brother one movie ago (despite saying in ROTJ that "she always knew). | ||
[sc1f]eonzerg
Belgium6325 Posts
On December 20 2017 17:00 levelping wrote: I'm curious - your movie screening had a break? That's kinda cool Mine too,they do this in order to people have the time to go w.c etc,real reason is to sell more pop corn drinks etc. | ||
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51335 Posts
On December 20 2017 19:10 levelping wrote: Well there were obvious limitations to this being done. TFA had to be safe, because it had so many expectations to fill - get back old fans, introduce new fans, and make everyone for get the prequels. TLJ, being the second movie, had more space to do its own thing. Anyway, Empire had the most epic major lore change - Vader becomes Luke's father and a fallen Jedi, rather than a bad guy. Second movies don't have to follow the first at all. Not to mention in the third movie, ROTJ, Leia is revealed to be Luke's sister, which is pretty mind blowing too seeing as Leia was making out with her brother one movie ago (despite saying in ROTJ that "she always knew). Yeah but you can understand the view point of doing that in movie two, making it huge changes like this is the worst place to put it. Making it happening in movie 1 or movie 3 makes sense. I mean it sets up the next trilogy he does very well if there is no more Jedi / Sith, just "normal" people who randomly discover they have the force in them and become greedy with it or use it to help people etc. Old trilogy didn't change lore though, didn't change the fundamentals of the film. Who is this Vadar guy, he so evil. Oh wow he is Luke's dad wow that is crazy. That isn't changing how the movie is, Vadar is still a bad guy, he just knows Luke is his son and vice versa, Luke also takes most of episode 6 coming to terms with that no? Also again the Leia thing doesn't change the story though does it, just opens up the Han and Leia romance that was clearly always going to be won by Han xD | ||
hexhaven
Finland855 Posts
On December 20 2017 19:11 [sc1f]eonzerg wrote: Mine too,they do this in order to people have the time to go w.c etc,real reason is to sell more pop corn drinks etc. Intermissions are old school enough to be cool again. | ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41116 Posts
| ||
Sermokala
United States13543 Posts
On December 20 2017 22:33 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L9hwGZFPSmw I posted this a few pages ago already. | ||
The_Red_Viper
19533 Posts
The acting is actually horrible, the "i am your father moment" doesn't work because of it. Han and Leia's romance is annoying for the most part, Luke first surviving in the cold like that and then the jump on cloud city is kinda ridiculous. The b plotline with han and co trying to get away from the empire is resolved well with the trap, but the part on the asteroid with the worm is completely pointless. Vader's plan to catch luke is also totally garbage and only "works" because of plot convenience, Han's plan to escape the star destroyer is equally stupid. It also has pacing issues i think, showing sameish establishing scenes over and over again without real purpose (for example one vader one where it's only done so we see his damaged body, could have ben fused with a similar scene easily, also on the ice planet to show rebels communicating with each other, etc) Before the rewatch i would have said it's clearly the best, but it's really not that good. The whole plot is basically: Fake drama about luke into rebels escaping into luke training / han escaping into han trap into luke trap. People say it builds a lot better into ROTJ than TLJ does for the next one, but that's hardly true. It's actually so untrue that ROTJ uses another death star because they had no idea what to do else. Overall ESB isn't really the golden standard for star wars, it has some strong points (Yoda, atmosphere, twist) but also a lot of flaws. "nooooo, that's impossible" : Hamill really learned a lot since then, he's actually quite good in TLJ, thankfully. | ||
LennX
4495 Posts
| ||
TheTenthDoc
United States9561 Posts
Kylo and Rey join together and try to create a new order, no rebels no empire no evil space wizards no good space wizards? That would have broken the narrative. Instead Johnson kind of pushes the envelope then just says "whoopsy doopsy, that leaves even less space for a 'normal' 3rd installment, Disney won't like that." | ||
karazax
United States3737 Posts
I had problems with TFA over recycling the original trilogy story line, but Han's death did have some impact for me. Most of the new characters I don't care about at all. When this version of Luke died, I was glad to not have to listen to him whine any more. The guy who redeemed Vader was broken to the point of considering killing his nephew in his bed for having darkness in him... I needed a lot more character development to go into the fall of Skywalker for his character to change as much as it did. Snoke was a potentially interesting character, but they killed him off as if he was a random lackey. I kept waiting to see that this was his clone or something because surely the guy who can mentally link two people across the galaxy, turned Ben Solo while he was being trained by Luke, and over threw the Republic doesn't just get offed by an apprentice who is so underwhelming. Kylo killing Snoke came across more as Snoke being much weaker than expected, rather than Kylo being much stronger. Rey already defeated Kylo with no training, so making Kylo the ultimate villain is underwhelming. The Rebellion was outnumbered in the original Trilogy, but you still got the impression it was thousands of rebels vs millions of Empire. The new trilogy has millions of New Order vs a few hundred resistance. Despite the extended effort with Finn and Rose's story to show that sometimes plans by the good guys fail, the New Order hasn't won any decisive victories considering their massive advantages though. As much trouble as they are having with the ~400 or so rebels left, I can't understand how these losers over threw the Republic in the first place. The new trilogy basically makes the defeat of the empire in the original trilogy meaningless with minimal explanation of how we got to a place worse off than they were at the start of A New Hope. The Last Jedi over writes many of the potential questions posed in The Force Awakens as meaningless in the same fashion. It's hard to care where the story is going next because whatever development they tried to set up to this point is just as likely to not matter at all in the next movie. Just doing something unexpected for the sake of doing something unexpected doesn't make for a good story for me. | ||
| ||