Star wars the last jedi spoilers ahead.

Talk about music, movies, television, books, and other media. No religious or political discussion allowed.
ESauce
Posts: 368
Joined: April 8th, 2015, 12:20 pm

Re: Star wars the last jedi spoilers ahead.

Postby ESauce » January 16th, 2018, 2:11 am

Stalvern wrote:
The Last Jedi is a movie that wears both liberalism and ambition on its sleeve, along with being easily the most visually striking film in the series. It makes big, obvious passes at critics' first impressions, and they go along with it enthusiastically. Never mind that all of these things actually end up getting in the film's way at various points. The first two come to a head in the worthless detour of the casino sequence, which contributes nothing to the story (though much to the running time) but takes the brave stance that rich people are bad and poor people and animals are good, the kind of insightful social commentary you might expect from a high school creative writing assignment (and especially rich coming from this franchise and this studio).


Okay but that’s 100% not the commentary it’s making. It’s what the character says, and then it’s revealed that the so called evil people funding the enemy ships are actually funding both sides of the war. The entire point is that things aren’t black and white, which is the movie presenting that not insightful bad guys vs good guys high school creative writing assignment commentary from the original trilogy and turning it on it’s head.

It seems like some people got upset when they thought they saw liberal politics and then that irritation clouded them from seeing the actual message presented by the movie

User avatar
Stalvern
Posts: 536
Joined: June 18th, 2016, 7:15 pm

Re: Star wars the last jedi spoilers ahead.

Postby Stalvern » January 16th, 2018, 3:17 am

ESauce wrote:Okay but that’s 100% not the commentary it’s making. It’s what the character says, and then it’s revealed that the so called evil people funding the enemy ships are actually funding both sides of the war. The entire point is that things aren’t black and white, which is the movie presenting that not insightful bad guys vs good guys high school creative writing assignment commentary from the original trilogy and turning it on it’s head.

Having bad guys and good guys in the original trilogy wasn't social commentary; making bad-guy/good-guy distinctions about class is.

I almost laughed out loud in the theater because that little X-wing hologram was such a stupid "gotcha" moment. As if selling to the good guys changes any of the points about exploitation and profiteering that the movie just spent an entire subplot hammering home? It doesn't make the unscrupulous capitalists better; it makes the Resistance morally compromised.
Last edited by Stalvern on January 16th, 2018, 11:16 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Stalvern
Posts: 536
Joined: June 18th, 2016, 7:15 pm

Re: Star wars the last jedi spoilers ahead.

Postby Stalvern » January 16th, 2018, 3:27 am

And I do think that this moral compromise would have been a good thrust to the scene and might have even made me appreciate the stuff leading up to it more, but the way the whole thing is played is just bad. DJ couldn't be more wrong about what that X-wing means, but Rose's response seems to mean I'm supposed to take what he's saying at face value, or at least go, "Maybe he has a point..." That's certainly how you reacted to it.

On the other hand, there is a chance that I could end up reading that scene more charitably in a rewatch.

ESauce
Posts: 368
Joined: April 8th, 2015, 12:20 pm

Re: Star wars the last jedi spoilers ahead.

Postby ESauce » January 16th, 2018, 9:55 am

Stalvern wrote:And I do think that this moral compromise would have been a good thrust to the scene and might have even made me appreciate the stuff leading up to it more, but the way the whole thing is played is just bad. DJ couldn't be more wrong about what that X-wing means, but Rose's response seems to mean I'm supposed to take what he's saying at face value, or at least go, "Maybe he has a point..." That's certainly how you reacted to it.

On the other hand, there is a chance that I could end up reading that scene more charitably in a rewatch.


Well I took that scene in the context of the entire movie. A movie that had goodie two shoes Luke Skywalker turn out to be fallible. A movie that showed a scene play out a different way in two people’s eyes (Ren didn’t lie about what happened between him and Luke, that’s how he remembers it). Taken alone, the scene showing he arms dealer deals to both sides says “capitalism is bad and makes people evil”. In the context of the rest of the movie it is saying that everything has a gray area.

User avatar
scotland
Posts: 2063
Joined: April 7th, 2015, 7:33 pm

Re: Star wars the last jedi spoilers ahead.

Postby scotland » January 16th, 2018, 9:58 am

ptdebate wrote: Luke being a broken, regretful individual makes good narrative sense, and imbues his character with a level of humanity that the series has never shown.


I appreciate your insights.

With Obi Wan, we saw another older recluse. Obi Wan had retreated from the affairs of the Universe, but not from the Force. When R2 comes to him with Leia's message, he's all in, and sees this as the event he has been looking for - to bring the New Hope (Luke) and pass the torch (or lightsaber). Obi Wan leaves Tatooine, and dies in a sort of fake duel with Vader, having been a successful mentor, and even lingers enough to help Luke in his climatic battle with the Death Star to bring a happy ending.

With Yoda. we get another recluse. He is a far more reluctant mentor, and it takes Obi Wan pleading from the Beyond. He calls Luke a failure, and does leave Dagobah. Yoda is just spent (and after the prequels, we can see why). He fades away. While Yoda the puppet is a great character, Yoda as a mentor leaves a lot to be desired.

Now we get Luke. I think expectations were far more along Obi Wan's lines. That Luke would accept the light saber at the end of TFA, and die more like Obi Wan. Yet we get a Luke far more like Yoda.

We also see older Han who ran away, but ran away into adventure. Leia, who ran away, but ran away into responsibility. Chewbacca, who seems to not have any agency at all (if Chewbacca were a female character, what would we say?), R2 that ran away into shutting himself off, but oddly C3PO - the one we think would run away, who never seems to have run away at all. Life is a funny funny riddle.

I am reminded of Western movies. They changed over time, becoming more progressive in their politics, and having a lot more grey-on-grey morality. By the end other 1970s, the genre was more or less spent. Over the years, there has been a few good progressive Westerns like Dances with Wolves, and a few good more conservative black-white Westerns like Silverado, but the genre is just not very popular anymore. So, this is the risk - that fans no longer see the franchise (or entire genre) as doing what made them popular to begin with, and after a time, its lost its spark.

At its heart, what is Star Wars? Heroic action. Flash Gordon. Space Opera. A way to sell toys to kids and t-shirts to adults. To the extent Star Wars pushing boundaries outside those expectations, it risks becoming Dances With Wolves - a really fine movie, that no one buys toys or t-shirts about.

User avatar
Stalvern
Posts: 536
Joined: June 18th, 2016, 7:15 pm

Re: Star wars the last jedi spoilers ahead.

Postby Stalvern » January 16th, 2018, 1:54 pm

ESauce wrote:Well I took that scene in the context of the entire movie. A movie that had goodie two shoes Luke Skywalker turn out to be fallible. A movie that showed a scene play out a different way in two people’s eyes (Ren didn’t lie about what happened between him and Luke, that’s how he remembers it). Taken alone, the scene showing he arms dealer deals to both sides says “capitalism is bad and makes people evil”. In the context of the rest of the movie it is saying that everything has a gray area.

You're missing my point. It's bad because it's a pulled punch. Dealing to both sides is irrelevant because it has nothing to do with the casino sequence's actual complaints about capitalism. The people in that casino could have been exclusive contractors to the Resistance and would still be bad because of how they do it. The gray area that actually exists here is with the Resistance, because even though they're fighting against oppression, they're still supported by it and tacit supporters of it; this is what I meant by "moral compromise". But the movie wants to have it both ways: it wants to condemn greed and exploitation without presenting their beneficiaries - the Resistance - in a bad light, so it tries to act like those evils are redeemed by their connection to good. It is actually good that is tainted, but the movie doesn't want to admit that. This idea of a "gray area" is a worthy one if it's used to show that good doesn't have to be perfect to be good. It is cowardice if it's used to make excuses for how evil really isn't that bad.

ESauce
Posts: 368
Joined: April 8th, 2015, 12:20 pm

Re: Star wars the last jedi spoilers ahead.

Postby ESauce » January 16th, 2018, 2:19 pm

Stalvern wrote:The gray area that actually exists here is with the Resistance, because even though they're fighting against oppression, they're still supported by it and tacit supporters of it; this is what I meant by "moral compromise". But the movie wants to have it both ways: it wants to condemn greed and exploitation without presenting their beneficiaries - the Resistance - in a bad light, so it tries to act like those evils are redeemed by their connection to good. It is actually good that is tainted, but the movie doesn't want to admit that. This idea of a "gray area" is a worthy one if it's used to show that good doesn't have to be perfect to be good. It is cowardice if it's used to make excuses for how evil really isn't that bad.


I see what you’re saying now. I saw it as good is compromised, not that evils are redeemed by good, so I guess we just had different interpretations of it.


Return to “Other Media”