4 minutes ago, DarthDude said:

And this strategy makes you somewhat of a disingenuous person.

And thus...

22 minutes ago, Daeglan said:

No but I expect changes counter to what has been established to happen on screen.

So...they should have been stagnant for the 30 years between stories.

Either that, or Lucasfilm should have gotten hold of a TARDIS to bring younger Hamill, Ford, and Fisher to the present to film 30 years’ worth of stories before TFA.

25 minutes ago, Daeglan said:

In many ways this set of movies started in the wrong place. like the point where Ben Solo fell to the dark side is likely a better place to have started these movies.

The same way the original movie started with the villain’s fall to the dark side in 1977? Would The Phantom Menace (or even Revenge of the Sith) really have worked better as the initial entry in the overall story? Setting aside all of Lucas’ retcons about how much was “really” in his initial draft, he knew that the best place for the first (and possibly only) story to start was with all of the proverbial pieces on the board and ready to go into play. It was more immediate and gave a sense that things had happened to these people and this setting before we came in, and was born directly of the Flash Gordon serials that inspired him.

And, sure...there’s an aspect of Star Wars having become a multimedia franchise in the meantime. TFA’s starting point is a fine jumping off point for the larger story of the sequel movies, while allowing room for other media under the Star Wars umbrella to fill the intervening time.

9 minutes ago, Nytwyng said:

I’d say that, given how the story played out, the intent was precisely to create friction, and for the audience to have a certain amount of, “Who does she think she is?” from that initial interaction with Poe.

Part of the issue is something that I’ll call McFly Syndrome. Bear with me as I explain it. Back to the Future was intended as a stand-alone movie. For that structure, Marty had a full arc. But when it became a trilogy, he needed a flaw to overcome to carry him through Parts II and III. Suddenly, he has a Pavlovian response to someone calling him “chicken,” and feels compelled to prove his courage every time, until he learns his lesson at the end of III, backs down from a senseless challenge, and alters his future, cementing the idea that his destiny is his own.

With Poe, he was supposed to be killed in the first act of TFA. But, Abrams (and, presumably Kasdan) elected to keep him around. TFA didn’t call for him to be anything other than a hotshot pilot. But now, positioned as part of the Sequel Big Three, he needed an arc for VIII and IX, which became the transition from brash pilot to leader. It’s one thing for him to clash with Leia (“I did a Big Thing!” “Yeah, but it got people killed!”), but it’s easier for Poe to be our POV character for his arc in TLJ if his friction is with someone that the audience isn’t inclined to defer to, themselves. Enter Holdo.

Poe establishes her reputation, but when slapped down, both he and - because he’s one of Our Heroes - the audience respond with, “Well, she’s not so great after all.” We are led to side with Poe because he’s the known quantity and she’s the unknown, and it allows the tension of not knowing what’s going on to ramp up. I think it’s safe to say that this is by design. Whether or not the way it plays out works for a particular viewer is a purely individual, subjective thing. But, it’s internally consistent to the setting and the characters.

I might even go so far as to say that rather than being an example of “bad writing,” that the fierce defense of Poe and condemnation of Holdo that we see from some is indicative of good writing, as Johnson got a segment of the audience to so identify with Poe’s situation that they can’t or won’t consider any other perspective on the matter.

I can understand why it might not have worked for some, but that doesn’t make it “bad” or “lazy” writing.” I’m not a fan of the whole “Rey Palpatine” swerve. But I see it for what it is: a creative decision that didn’t land for me. It’s not “lazy,” (although if I were inclined, I could probably make a case for that) it’s just something I didn’t like in a movie.

The Problem is that sure they got the friction that they wanted but that friction does not make sense for a character in her position to generate in the wing leader of one of her squadrons. And it is not relevant that they had no fighters to use at the moment. You don't generate bad will in one of your leaders just because they currently don't have the tools they need. That is counter productive. And treating him like she doesn't trust him is also a bad idea. And is not the kind of behavior that an admiral would have.

4 minutes ago, Daeglan said:

The Problem is that sure they got the friction that they wanted but that friction does not make sense for a character in her position to generate in the wing leader of one of her squadrons. And it is not relevant that they had no fighters to use at the moment. You don't generate bad will in one of your leaders just because they currently don't have the tools they need. That is counter productive. And treating him like she doesn't trust him is also a bad idea. And is not the kind of behavior that an admiral would have.

And do you generate good or bad will with your new commanding officer by misrepresenting yourself and demanding information that you’re not entitled to?

31 minutes ago, whafrog said:

Wow, I left this thread only a couple hours ago, and I come back to see a bunch of dianogas writhing around in the sewer. 🤢

The only question is: do I rip off my clothes and dive in?

Please don't rip your evening clothes. Those are expensive.

Just now, Nytwyng said:

So...they should have been stagnant for the 30 years between stories.

The same way the original movie started with the villain’s fall to the dark side in 1977?

I didnt say they should be static. I said major changes should not happen off screen. You don't start a new story in an established universe by undoing all the progress the previous characters had made. They turned Han into just another smuggler again. The turned Leia back into being just the leader of a rebellion again. They turned Luke from an optimistic Jedi into a old curmogeon. All off screen.
What would have been better is to have the old characters end up being mentors to the new generation. Which they didnt really do.

1 minute ago, Nytwyng said:

And do you generate good or bad will with your new commanding officer by misrepresenting yourself and demanding information that you’re not entitled to?

except he is entitled to it. just because he got demoted 1 level does not mean he is no longer part of the command staff. He is still a wing leader. He still needs enough information to appropriately lead those under him in the right direction. He ended up leading in the wrong direction as a direct result of being kept in the dark. Which by the way lead to the deaths of everyone not on the Falcon at the end. Holdo got the entire fleet killed. and if not for Rey the entire resistance would have died. That is horrendously bad leadership.

I am glad we got what we did and not what you would have liked. It seems boring and uninteresting to me.

2 minutes ago, Daeglan said:

I didnt say they should be static. I said major changes should not happen off screen. You don't start a new story in an established universe by undoing all the progress the previous characters had made. They turned Han into just another smuggler again. The turned Leia back into being just the leader of a rebellion again. They turned Luke from an optimistic Jedi into a old curmogeon. All off screen.
What would have been better is to have the old characters end up being mentors to the new generation. Which they didnt really do.

Nothing was “undone.” What they’d accomplished still happened to them. All three of them are where they are for what they see as their individual failures of Ben. But that’s a history that we get the pieces we need for the larger story at hand as it unfolds, just as we did in the original trilogy.

Just now, DanteRotterdam said:

I am glad we got what we did and not what you would have liked. It seems boring and uninteresting to me.

We could have gotten a much better story had they had an actual coherent plan. Instead we have a story that starts going one direction to have the next director take the story into a different direction that didnt follow what was established in the previous movie only to have the next director have to force it back in the original direction. It is clear they didnt have a plan.

8 minutes ago, Daeglan said:

What would have been better is to have the old characters end up being mentors to the new generation. Which they didnt really do.

And which was the Lucas plan for the sequels. He said in an interview shortly before he sold the film rights to Disney that he imagined that the prequels happened 20 years before original films and that the sequels would happen about 20 years after with the original heroes bringing up their successors. He also said that the core of Star Wars has always been about family and relationships. Now, a lot of his other ideas for how it would have gone don't necessarily sit all that well with me, but that time-frame would have been a lot more workable on a story level. However, they waited to long to do it and the original actors were too old for that kind of timeline. The fans would have whinged us into the apocalypse if they had recast those characters with somewhat younger actors, so we got an even bigger time gap.

8 minutes ago, Daeglan said:

I didnt say they should be static. I said major changes should not happen off screen. You don't start a new story in an established universe by undoing all the progress the previous characters had made. They turned Han into just another smuggler again. The turned Leia back into being just the leader of a rebellion again. They turned Luke from an optimistic Jedi into a old curmogeon. All off screen.

. And all valid, relatable stories that would have provided original plots and content for actual sequels as opposed to an Abram's plot reboot in disguise!

2 minutes ago, Daeglan said:

We could have gotten a much better story had they had an actual coherent plan. Instead we have a story that starts going one direction to have the next director take the story into a different direction that didnt follow what was established in the previous movie only to have the next director have to force it back in the original direction. It is clear they didnt have a plan.

Unfortunately that happens way too much on movie series that don't have a locked in Director. X-Men is a prime example (the first trilogy). Unless you have directors that are known for working together or you pull in someone who can lock in a contract for one director across multiple movies there will be some issues.

2 minutes ago, Nytwyng said:

Nothing was “undone.” What they’d accomplished still happened to them. All three of them are where they are for what they see as their individual failures of Ben. But that’s a history that we get the pieces we need for the larger story at hand as it unfolds, just as we did in the original trilogy.

So at the start of the movie is Han a part of the New Republic? No he was a smuggler smuggling rathtars being hunted by people he screwed over. which is strangely basically the state we first met Hann in. So yeah they did undo the progress he made in the OT.

Leia is a leader of a rebel force again. Which is basically undoing all the growth she made in the OT.

So yeah they did basically undo the progress those characters had made.

6 minutes ago, Daeglan said:

So yeah they did basically undo the progress those characters had made.

It’s almost like they are people...

3 minutes ago, Daeglan said:

except he is entitled to it. just because he got demoted 1 level does not mean he is no longer part of the command staff. He is still a wing leader. He still needs enough information to appropriately lead those under him in the right direction. He ended up leading in the wrong direction as a direct result of being kept in the dark. Which by the way lead to the deaths of everyone not on the Falcon at the end. Holdo got the entire fleet killed. and if not for Rey the entire resistance would have died. That is horrendously bad leadership.

Last I looked, one’s superior decided who is or isn’t entitled to information. Poe, at that point, was an insubordinate, recently demoted pilot who, at best, was still ostensibly in charge of a handful of fighter pilots with no fighters to pilot. He had been - depending on one’s Certain Point of View - explicitly or effectively benched. If you are in a leadership position of a sub-group that is not part of implementation of a particular strategy, your position does not automatically entitle you to information about that strategy.

It seems you’re still absolving Poe of the responsibility of his own choices and actions, insisting that it’s all Holdo’s fault for not capitulating to him.

I’ll ask again: do you generate good will or bad will in your new superior by misrepresenting yourself and demanding information you’re not entitled to?

Just now, DanteRotterdam said:

It’s almost like they are people...

Sure. but such changes should not happen off screen.

1 minute ago, Daeglan said:

Sure. but such changes should not happen off screen.

It has been 30 years.
And as much as I like Noah Baumbach I am not interested in seeing Han and Leia A Marriage Story.

2 minutes ago, Daeglan said:

should

Pffftttt

4 minutes ago, DanteRotterdam said:

It has been 30 years.
And as much as I like Noah Baumbach I am not interested in seeing Han and Leia A Marriage Story.

Who said we needed to see their marriage story? I said their devolution shouldn't happen off screen. The Story should have started with where Snoke is influencing Ben. Or it could start at Luke's Academy. It should not start years after the inciting incident.

8 minutes ago, Daeglan said:

shouldn't

8 minutes ago, Daeglan said:

should

8 minutes ago, Daeglan said:

should

10 minutes ago, Daeglan said:

So at the start of the movie is Han a part of the New Republic? No he was a smuggler smuggling rathtars being hunted by people he screwed over. which is strangely basically the state we first met Hann in. So yeah they did undo the progress he made in the OT.

When was he ever “part of the New Republic” in the original trilogy? When did it indicate he was remotely interested in helping form a new government or lead a formal military once the Empire was overthrown?

12 minutes ago, Daeglan said:

Leia is a leader of a rebel force again. Which is basically undoing all the growth she made in the OT.

Well, she went from a senator to a military leader, which is where we find her when TFA picks up. It tracks linearly with the growth you vote from the OT.

13 minutes ago, Daeglan said:

So yeah they did basically undo the progress those characters had made.

Or, they had 30 years’ worth of events happen to them. Those events (as explicitly stated on screen) sent Han back to what he thought he did best...he got the happy ending, but blamed himself when tragedy struck, and so buried himself in his old life.

Leia devoted herself to fighting the First Order that had stolen her son.

Luke, as he was prone to do, went full drama king and followed the example of both of his mentors, exiling himself after the moment of weakness that gave Snoke/Palpatine the opening he wanted.

But sure, I suppose it would have been better to have them all exactly as they were 30 years prior, and VII be two hours of them sitting around performing a Chris Farley sketch (“Remember when you did X 15 years ago? That was awesome.”) before finally getting to the story in VIII. /shrug

Just now, Nytwyng said:

When was he ever “part of the New Republic” in the original trilogy? When did it indicate he was remotely interested in helping form a new government or lead a formal military once the Empire was overthrown?

Well, she went from a senator to a military leader, which is where we find her when TFA picks up. It tracks linearly with the growth you vote from the OT.

Or, they had 30 years’ worth of events happen to them. Those events (as explicitly stated on screen) sent Han back to what he thought he did best...he got the happy ending, but blamed himself when tragedy struck, and so buried himself in his old life.

Leia devoted herself to fighting the First Order that had stolen her son.

Luke, as he was prone to do, went full drama king and followed the example of both of his mentors, exiling himself after the moment of weakness that gave Snoke/Palpatine the opening he wanted.

But sure, I suppose it would have been better to have them all exactly as they were 30 years prior, and VII be two hours of them sitting around performing a Chris Farley sketch (“Remember when you did X 15 years ago? That was awesome.”) before finally getting to the story in VIII. /shrug

the problem is when you have events happen off screen they have a tendency to get rejected by the fandom. Which is basically what has happened with the sequels. A very large part of the Fandom has rejected them as evidenced by the drop in ticket sales for star wars movies.

Instead of rebooting the films. Can we reboot the fandom? Can we contract the MIB to neuralize the entire fanbase and reset their expectations? Imagine how less toxic and divisive the community would be.

Three movies that make a billion dollars is... a mass - or very large - rejection by the fanbase?

I mean, alright. RotJ also saw a massive drop... almost as if trilogies have that happen, where the third one doesn’t gross as high as either one or both of the others.

(Unless you’re Marvel, but they are the exception that proves the rule.)

3 minutes ago, Daeglan said:

the problem is when you have events happen off screen they have a tendency to get rejected by the fandom.

Not really. A lot happens off screen between movies in a series (or between episodes/seasons of a tv series) all the time, especially when dealing with revivals that have a long break in between installments.

When Roseanne relaunched several years ago, a lot happened to the characters in between, and it was one of the highest rated series of the season, with many worried the following season wouldn’t work without the title star/character following her firing. If they’d followed your apparent philosophy of off-screen changes, Dan would still be dead, Becky would be married to a husband we could never see (due to actor Glenn Quinn’s death in the late 90s), she and Darlene would be 40-something college students with DJ a late-30s high schooler, and so on.

9 minutes ago, Daeglan said:

Which is basically what has happened with the sequels. A very large part of the Fandom has rejected them as evidenced by the drop in ticket sales for star wars movies.

By this logic, “a very large part of the fandom” rejected The Empire Strikes Back (worldwide gross dropping to $547m vs Star Wars’ $775m) and Return of the Jedi (drop to worldwide gross of $475m).