Star Wars editorializing 

@strypey
Ep. 5 & Rogue One had more emphasis on character & there was more of an emotional connection. It's hard for a novel or movie to get a reaction out of me, so I appreciate it when one does. They also had more thought-out plots, even if Rogue One was a bit rushed.

Ep. 3 was utter tripe. Anakin's conversion to the dark side was thin (& poorly acted). The whole plot was just a collection of loose ends that needed to be tied up in a haphazard way.

Star Wars editorializing 

@strypey
Regarding R1, names aren't important to me. I watched Molly's Game a couple of weeks ago & can only remember Molly & Player X (the latter one for obvious reasons). Yet I loved that movie. I can remember the names Finn, Rose, Rey, Phasma, Kylo, Maz, Poe, Haldo, BB8, from 7 & 8, yet I despise those movies. (That may be because there is a lot more discussion about the main series online than there is about R1, so I see those names mentioned more often.)

Star Wars editorializing 

@strypey
I agree about the opening of R1, though. It was horribly rushed. A good example of how not to do things. But, once it hit its stride, it seemed to carry its own (I've only seen it once when it was first released). I think we knew who everyone was, what they were doing, & why. It seemed to be good adventure story-telling from that point on. I don't think the characters are any worse than the original series or Solo. They were certainly better than the prequels.

Star Wars editorializing 

@strypey
I haven't watched the 2 YouTube videos you mentioned, and I probably won't. I'm just interested in this discussion with you.

I also am not interested in any fan edits, machete orders, or or even Lucas's own special editions. I just stick to the original versions in the order they were released.

Star Wars editorializing 

@strypey
I want to start with a post you made midway through this last discussion about Luke's arc.

I actually don't think Luke (or any Star Wars character, for that matter) is a well-developed character. They are adequate for the adventure genre, but not in any way well-developed. Some are poorly developed (Anakin, Finn, Kylo, Poe, Qi'ra<--although she's at least likable). Most characters, like Luke & Jyn, are serviceable.

Star Wars editorializing 

@strypey
Yes, I missed mentioning Luke coming to terms with his father who is on the dark side & his own possible flirtations with the dark side because I feel that was just window dressing. It wasn't delved into in any meaningful way. They could've done more with that, but didn't. I'd say glossing over that is par for the course for the original trilogy & the anthologies. Not a sin (like the prequels & sequels), because there is something there, just not well-developed.

Star Wars editorializing 

@strypey
I'm not trying to belittle Luke. He's my second-favorite character after Han. I'm fine with people resonating with Luke, Han, Jyn, Rey, Rose, Leia, or Obi-Wan because they are all serviceable & have something worthwhile about them. Actually, the sacrifice made by the entire R1 team probably elevates them to worthy status as well.

Star Wars editorializing 

@strypey
My view of character is slightly different. I get what you mean by "types" & am not disagreeing too much. I'm just saying that in order to be a "character" it has to be in a novel or movie that devotes a great deal of time to understanding that character--which is almost impossible in an adventure movie. Adventure movies have a lot of plot elements that need to happen, so they don't have time to develop their characters fully.

Star Wars editorializing 

@strypey
Let me use Han as an example because Harrison Ford has had a better career than Mark Hamill has.

I enjoy Han Solo the best of the Star Wars characters, and I'm a huge fan of Indiana Jones. Yet I'd say both are "types". Good types, but types. If I want to see a "character" from Harrison Ford, I'll look more to John Book from Witness or Rusty Sabich from Presumed Innocent.

Star Wars editorializing 

@strypey
Luke & Han are well written, but I don't view them as overly remarkable. They're "types" for me. They're serviceable. Same goes for Jyn & Cassian from R1. Luke, Han, Jyn, Cassian: they all serve their purpose.

Lucas attempted something more with Anakin in the prequels. He attempted to write something deeper. And he failed miserably because he only really can do "types". What Lucas had in mind for Anakin would've required a screen-writing master to pull off.

Star Wars editorializing 

@strypey
Again, I'm OK with Vader in R1. Fan service or not, the only problem I notice is his power is stronger at the end of R1 than what it is throughout the whole of the original trilogy. I think his role works within the frame of the story. It's internally consistent & logical with regards to that story.

Star Wars editorializing 

@strypey
I get what you mean about the the relationship of Han & Qi'ra in Solo, but it was just too spare. That kind of relationship needed more screen time. If she absolutely had to stay in there (& I'm still not convinced a totally different character couldn't work), then either reduce the time of the other plot elements or else add several more minutes to the movie's run time. However, as it sits, it's not convincing.

Star Wars editorializing 

@strypey
I agree a fair bit with what you say about Padme (but I'm not going to go too far down the rabbit hole of rewriting the entire trilogy). But, Leia isn't exactly a stellar character, either. I'd say George Lucas has a more traditional view of women.

Star Wars editorializing 

@strypey
I actually don't find Leia to be a stellar character. Perhaps the case could be made that she is marginally better than Padme, but I think it's just George Lucas who made them what they are. I also think Carrie Fisher's health played a part in her diminished role in 7 & 8. That, and Jar Jar Abrams inability to write adult characters very well.

Star Wars editorializing 

@strypey
I think Leia is OK, but not great. She's confident when talking with Vader, gets rescued, then has to show her rescuers how to escape. She's a commander-of-sorts on Hoth & then Han's love interest. She rescues Han, finds out she's Luke's sister, & helps bring down the shield generator. I'd argue we learn a lot more about Padme & her motivations--faults & all--than we do about Leia.

Star Wars editorializing 

@strypey
I think if you're going to be that generous with Leia, you're going to have to cut Padme more slack. The two are very similar, actually. The main difference is Lucas attempts more (& fails) with Padme. We see her at a younger age, go to war, & become a mother. She is presented as a tragic character in Ep 3, whereas Leia never was.

Star Wars editorializing 

@strypey
Padme's character gets points for trying & loses points for not being successful. Leia's character was kept simple, so there was less to go wrong. Lucas should've kept the characters in the prequels as straight forward as the ones in the original series. That would've solved a lot of problems.

Follow

Star Wars editorializing 

@strypey
I think I saw that video a couple weeks ago. It was interesting.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Mastodon

Server run by the main developers of the project 🐘 It is not focused on any particular niche interest - everyone is welcome as long as you follow our code of conduct!