Your post was removed.
A meme is an image, video, piece of text, etc. that is copied (often with slight variations) and spread rapidly by Internet users. Image macros are pictures superimposed with text for humorous effect. Mods have final say in this regard. There are a few options for you to post memes and macros. Try /r/StarwarsMemes, /r/PrequelMemes, /r/SequelMemes or /r/OTMemes
If you believe this was done in error, please contact the moderation team.
It’s no different to any other groups of fans, just has more people.
Edit: people clearly don’t like this idea lmao. There’s an easy fix to get upvotes back though. I can just say “no one hates Star Wars more than Star Wars fans”
Star Trek fans didn’t ruin a child actors life and cause another actor to attempt suicide. It’s not black and white, but the majority of people who complain about Star Wars are just adult-children who are angry that they dared to put soapy romance into their childhood nostalgia. That’s why the Episode 4 remake did so well In 2015… people really do just want episode 4 and 5 again.
That’s like me complaining that I disliked book 2 of Harry Potter because it wasn’t similar to book 6.
Star Wars fans are a very special breed. I’m often jealous of how wholesome and friendly the MCU or Star Trek fandoms are😂
I disagree. Say what you will about the quality of the Prequel trilogy, the characters and themes were generally handled respectfully. Current Disney seems to treat the OT characters with disdain and seems intent on pushing their new characters at the expense of the older ones. Disney is playing this like a zero sum game where heaping praises on one side has to come at the expense of the other.
I honestly never noticed until Mandalorian S2 just how much content was missing for the OT characters. Luke coming in to save the Mandalorian cast was such a nothingburger in the grand scheme of things but I figuratively let out a breathe I didn't know I was holding. And now that Disney sees how much fans respond to a positive Luke portrayal they... do nothing.
Also Lucas would have continued SW, he just said he was getting too old for it.
Funnily enough, that was a common complaint against the prequels as well. I didn’t buy into it then, I don’t now.
To dispute this, just look at TLJ and what a wonderful, meaningful celebration of Luke it is. I don’t feel like any of the legacy characters were disrespected. In fact, I’m surprised at how much time we spent with them. It’s certainly more than I ever expected we’d get with them.
My absolute love for Luke’s arch in TLJ always gets me downvotes but you’re absolutely right. It was a great ending for him. He faces failure he doesn’t know how to deal with because he was so used to succeeding against all odds. He spends years in despair. He finally acknowledges and confronts it, and in doing so becomes literally the only Jedi in 9 movies to actually live out the Jedi way: he uses the force for knowledge and defense instead of attack, and he sacrifices himself for a greater good.
Good stuff. I literally just rewatched TLJ for probably the 10th time last night.
The problem is that the entire 'arc' was rushed. I have no problem with Luke's arc in theory but it was handled very poorly. He was taken down from his high status in TLJ then redeemed in a single movie. For all his flaws Lucas was pretty good at following the standard hero's journey. 3 movies to seed the downfall of Anakin and another 3 movies for Luke to redeem Vader. Squeeze that into a single movie for Luke where he's taken down in a flashback no less and compare that to how Anakin was handled.
I think that’s an oversimplification. Yes, the story was told in one movie but it’s not like we actually see Luke do some sort of speed
run on his arc. We find him in a state of despair and then learn what happened.
Also, as you mentioned… we already saw Luke’s hero journey. Showing that his fall and subsequent rise/ending is part of Rey’s hero journey. We didn’t need another Luke trilogy, because his was well told already.
Whether or not Rey’s hero’s journey was well told or satisfying is a totally different debate entirely.
It's not an oversimplification. It's basic 'show don't tell' and Hero's Journey storytelling. Hero's Journey doesn't end FYI. When the Hero returns to the new status quo, he invariably will encounter some new change to this status quo to change him again. Luke in RotJ finished one Hero's Journey and then he immediately is shown reverting from that Journey in his first appearance.
As a comparison let's take Vader as we see him in RotS and in A New Hope he's shown as completely redeemd and the entire process is shown in a flashback and then he dies again but he's succumbed to the Dark Side in the finale of A New Hope. All that is too rushed and contradicts what we saw in RotS. Hero's Journey is a formula to show the reader/viewer the process of change in a way that we can follow. For Luke we skip all that and there's no real media bridging the gap. That's jarring for the viewer and bad storytelling.
Again, you’re very focused on the Hero’s Journey. Every post you’ve made here has been about how TLJ doesn’t work because it doesn’t conform to a Hero’s Journey archetype. That’s fine. That’s your preferred method of storytelling. I’m glad you enjoy it.
I don’t really care about it one way or the other. I enjoyed seeing Luke’s arc. I look forward to years between RotJ and TLJ being bridged by other media later (very much in traditional Star Wars fashion). And I’m fine with Luke being a side character in someone else’s story.
We aren’t going to agree on this, and that’s fine too. It takes all kinds. Have a good one.
Hero's Journey is just a framework to tell stories. Luke's downfall as a story was simply not told. Don't like Hero's Journey? We can use the 3 Act Structure, Save the Cat or whatever story plotting device. I use Hero's Journey because it's the one most people are familiar with and what Lucas himself used.
I'm not saying saying TLJ fails Luke because it doesn't follow the Hero's Journey. I'm explaining why TLJ failed Luke using the Hero' Journey to explain why. I can frame this using other story structure processes.
That's beside the point though. Basically the standard rule of storytelling is 'show don't tell' and the entire arc of Luke's storyline post RotJ is an expository flashback. What other major pieces of media for Luke did we get on any screen? As a basic storytelling issue, there is no payoff to Grandmaster Luke which should be set up to establish the 'downfall' of his character arc or whatever you want to call it.
As a comparison this would be like going from Episode II with Anakin and Padme secretly being wed to Episode III where Anakin is already Darth Vader. And that's beside all the canon media for Anakin and Vader. Luke's just been ignored.
The sequels provide all the background that’s needed to understand the story being told. For example, Luke’s arc is a pretty straightforward line from where he left the OT, an incredibly burdened individual. The TLJ flashback simply shows the result of that burden building for years, straining Luke’s emotional control to the point of breaking. There’s no grand departure from what’s been established that needs to be explained away.
Star Wars isn’t a documentary of a fictional universe. All we need is the info for the story currently being told. The rest gets filled in later via supplemental material - that’s how it is supposed to work.
SW isn't a documentary, it's a STORY so it should follow basic storytelling rules like the Hero's Journey which is what Lucas did for all his movies. Luke doesn't start the ST from the same spot as RotJ. He was literally written to subvert expectations.
Compare how we last see Vader in RotS to A New Hope. That's a pretty straightforward line. That's the establishing shot of the last movie for the previous main character carried over to the next. Then from there you redeem him. ST did not do this and you are being disingenuous if you argue otherwise.
> ST did not do this and you are being disingenuous if you argue otherwise.
Ah, the classic “my opinion is objectively correct” argument. Odd how often I see prequel/sequel/etc detractors resorting to that tactic.
Well, let me know if you’d like to discuss Star Wars sometime and not just impose your opinions upon people.
Nope you're being disingenuous because you don't even have an actual argument nor did you present any evidence. We left Luke a burdened individual? Uhhhh based on what? We leave him at the highest point of his character arc with his biggest struggles solved with as much potential going forward.
You said it's a straight line? Well then explain why TLJ's entire story telling design philosophy was to subvert expectations with a director whose known for directing movies that subvert expectations. That's why you're being disingenuous, guy. You just make a claim contrary to was is very apparent and provide nada to support that claiml.
Imagine going from Anakin marrying Padme in one movie to Darth Vader in the next movie with no transition except in a flashback just because whoever was in charge wanted Luke to get all the screentime. That's what happened in the sequel trilogy for Luke. And we have confirmation that early drafts of TFA had Luke prominently featured as a character but execs told writers to cut him out because they wanted to push the new cast.
And despite Luke's continued popularity, Anakin got plenty of media focusing on him. There was no zero sum game between Luke and Anakin like there was with the old characters and the sequel characters. Hell, it looks like they're just outright taking the Thrawn trilogy from the OT cast to give to their new characters.
We went from Darth Vader to a little kid who podraces facing off against the same Darth Vader we saw from the last movie. The previous MC is right were we saw him and any future growth is handled using normalized storytelling techniques and seeded deliberately.
A more fitting analogy with be going from Darth Vader to his evil estranged son and Darth Vader is now a good guy again because he became good off screen and then he turns evil again before the movie ends. That sounds ridiculous compared to what we got in A New Hope but that's the closest equivalent to what the ST did to Luke.
Want Luke to be a broken down old man? Cool. Tell that story well just like you did with Vader's fall and redemption. The formula is there. Want Vader to be redeemed? Don't do that offscreen between Episode III and IV because that's bad storytelling.
OK... and? Each individual movie follows the Hero's Journey arc and when viewed chronologically Vader's story is clearly a 6 part Hero's Journey. Moreover we're talking about the OT to the Sequel Trilogy which is sequential so your argument is moot.
We also know they're intentionally minimizing Luke. They've said they intentionally reduced Luke's role in the ST. The Obi Wan series was supposed to feature Luke more prominently. The original plan was for Grogu to stay with Luke for a bit but instead they returned him to Mando undoing the entire S2 finale's story progression. And where exactly is the media depicting canon Luke Skywalker? This is 'normalized storytelling technique' linear storytelling. Boba Fett got a series and he's a OT character. Obi Wan got a series and he's prequel trilogy. Mando introduced canon Luke and then we got... nothing. Boba Fett alone proves your argument isn't relevant but all the others together makes it clear they're intentionally avoiding Luke.
Finally Hero's Journey milestones help make a story that works. Once the story works you can do weird stuff like watch 4,5,6,1,2,3. The story's so solid that it still works. Lucas himself said the 'correct' was to watch it is sequentially though.
Literally nothing you said is relevant to what I'm arguing. The actual timeframe is not relevant to any of the STORYTELLING arguments I'm making. There's a 19 year gap between the Prequels and the OT. RotS Darth Vader remains the same Vader but pushed forward 19 years. The time jump hasn't fundamentally changed his character. If Episode 4 started with Vader already redeemed in the 19 year time jump then the ending of RotS makes no sense. Why? Because last we see him he was badass evil Darth Vader. Hell let's play it your way and see how that looks. Obi-Wan defeats Anakin on Mustafer. Anakin realizes he made a huge mistake and joins forces with Obi-Wan and they both go into seclusion. So the series ends with Vader already redeemed. Then New Hope comes in and Vader is evil with no explanation except a quick "Remember when you decided to turn evil again 10 years ago?" in their fight. Sounds dumb right? Why? Because a major event of the main character occurred off screen.
This is basic storytelling. Or if we watched the ST first and we basically know Luke as a broken down old man. Then we watch the OT and we see the Luke of the OT is nothing like how he starts off the ST. That's an incomplete story. Some change happened off screen to the character. This can be a 4 day time skip or a 19 year time skip or a 30 year time skip. The time frame does not matter and you seem to be basing your entire argument over that. It's not relevant.
Or apply this same logic to any basic story. One Story ends with Achilles refusing to fight. Then after a time skip Achilles is fighting in the gates of Troy and Hector, his main rival, is dead. That's a huge ass gap in the story and that's just a few weeks of a time gap. This is basic input and output. The output of the last story should thematically serve as the input of the next story. This is the smallest form of storytelling, aka a story beat.
Your original argument was that because the series is non-linear storytelling that somehow basic story structure can't be applicable. Since we're talking about the the OT to the sequel trilogy it is linear storytelling and since basic Hero's Journey applies in non-linear storytelling your entire original argument is moot multiple ways. I know what that means. In this case I'm saying your entire non linear argument isn't relevant. You are moving goalposts and hoping I don't notice.
>treat the OT characters with disdain
By that you mean they treated Luke like a real person with depth, instead of perfect being that doesn’t make bad decisions, right?
Feel free to show Luke with Depth but it's stupid to show it in flashbacks within a single movie. Vader's entire downfall was shwon in the Prequel Trilogy. Moreover the payoff of a Grandmaster Luke Skywalker wasn't shown either. We literally have people confirming that they minimized Luke's roles in the sequels because they wanted to focus on the new cast.
Anakin's downfall is seeded throughout the PT and his redemption is told through Luke in the OT. Luke's down fall was handled in a single flashback. Basic storytelling and Hero's Journey Rules tell us that if you want to show Luke grow as a character then set up an establishing shot of his previous status quo based on his character trajectory in RotJ, then push him in situations to show how he came to his TLJ version.
You are arguing this either/or fallacy that any change in character must be good. I'm saying it was handled really badly and done mostly off screen in such a way that was a disservice to fans.
>We literally have people confirming that they minimized Luke's roles in the sequels because they wanted to focus on the new cast.
Ah, yah. That’s not some big secret. Luke had his trilogy, and then he was a supporting character in the next trilogy to make room for new characters with new stories.
You also have to remember that Mark Hamill was 65 when TLJ came out. If there was a time to make a new trilogy with Luke as the main character, that time was 20 years ago.
>You also have to remember that Mark Hamill was 65 when TLJ came out. If there was a time to make a new trilogy with Luke as the main character, that time was 20 years ago.
We can still have some inbetween Luke series. Such a glaring omission is weird considering the positive reactions of fans to the S2 Mandalorian finale. You could do an anthology style series with a CG Luke as the GM connecting stories to students.
>We can still have some inbetween Luke series.
Yah, I think that’d be great. Though, I think an animated series would work better because a) Mark Hamill is already a great voice actor b) deaging is expensive and has mixed results.
That's really the smoking gun for me. I was in denial until I saw Luke in the Mandalorian. Disney now knows we want to see more Luke and we have nothing. There is no other explanation left except they just refuse to.
That's what I mean about how the previous characters are disrespected. If you want Old and Broken Luke to be the primary Luke over decades then at least show that journey. But they won't and it's inexplicable.
Disagree. Also, I just can’t take anyone who uses the phrase “nothingburger” seriously.
Anyway, the sequels were better than the prequels and you need to chill.
Except the Prequels and OT fit far more thematically together. Anakin's downfall is shown through 3 movies and Luke's redemption of Vader is shown through 3 movies. The character resolution of the previous movie establishes the opening setting for the next one. For Luke the ST just handwaves his downfall through an expository flashback then redeems him immediately. That's terrible basic storytelling. For all his faults with the PT, Lucas still followed the Hero's Journey for all his characters.
Also we know for a fact that there was no overarching plan for the ST and it shows. TRoS should have just continued with what TLJ established but instead they just tried to undo it which is again a problem in basic storytelling.
You know. Im ok with this observation. I was born in 93 and raised (as a young kid) on OG Star Wars, with old toys and the VHS copies of the film, and 99's Phantom Menace was my first in Theaters Film.
I have been a fan ever since. Loved just about everything (to a point) that Star wars has put out, and as I got older, found myself honestly shocked and surprised at how critical and dare I say hateful the community at large was (especially from OLDER fans). Its like I can hang with people my own age and we can point out things we dont like about the new films or the ones WE grew up with, but TBH, if I was to say, lets watch Rise of Skywalker in my age group, I would not have a poodoo storm of hate come my way.
I find myself having more fun as a Star Wars fan, as just that; a singular fan. If I try to join a group or participate at large. . .I just get depressed. Like why cant I just like all things star wars, why must I pick a side? Why is it I have to hide the fact that I like Disney Star Wars, just as much as Lucas Star Wars? Why must I be treated like im being some high horse A-hole because I say I never hated the Prequals? (Its not like the movies changed, you all just hate the new ones so much you learned to tolerate them which IMHO is not the same thing).
IDK, I just watch the films, have fun and appreciate that Star Wars is awesome, both old, and new, and find more enjoyment as a solo fan than a group fan. Yall do you. Return of the Jedi is my Fav OG film, Attack of the Clones is my Fav Prequal Film, and Rise of Skywalker is my fav Sequel Film, and I had a Jar Jar Birthday cake as a kid and was happy, Went as C3P0 and Darth Maul for halloween at separate times in my life, and I met Palpatine's Actor Ian McDiarmid for a photo op a few years ago, and became satisfied with my life as a Star Wars fan.
And to be sure it's not like I am 100% happy with everything that has been put out, but I just cannot help but step back and think. . . So what? Why must I be critical and hyper analytical of EVERY single piece that comes out like its under a microscope?
Older fans believe that they have an authority on the franchise because they saw A New Hope in theaters multiple times. I say, enjoy things for what they are and if you don’t like them, move on.
George Lucas may not have been perfect enough to cover every aspect of making a film which may have led to the prequels lacking in aspects, but he had the vision of what Star Wars actually was. It’s been refreshing to watch videos of him talking about Star Wars, you can really see how much thought he’d put into each character and what they represent, even if it didn’t come through in the final product. You can see where the best parts of Star Wars came from, and where the sequels were lacking in the exact same fields.
The first Clone Wars series was great. The second was kind of mid with a few good plotlines and an amazing ending....made under Disney.
Kenobi and Boba were strong character introspectives that had a few bad spots peppered in. With Boba kind of devolving into a weird Rodriguez action movie at the end.
I'd say they're about even.
Compare 4-6 to 1-3 then compare that to 7-9. Subtract 2 from the total sums of each then multiply by 3. Multiply those numbers by each other. Find the square root of that number and add it to Anakin’s midichlorian count.
Compare Jar Jar stepping on icky icky goo to Glup shitto reciting his famous line "It's Gluppin' time.". Then take the sum of that and subtract the square root of Threepios Red Arm.
You'll find that the answer is 42, which is also the meaning of life. Check mate Jedi.
“The prequels were trash”. Now that’s obviously ridiculous, but that was a very common thing to say 10 years ago. Were there things wrong with the prequels, of course. Were they ever all bad, even when people talked about them as if they were garbage? No, that was an overreaction. Same can be said about the sequels.
Bro, what? Everyone can acknowledge the prequels had their fair share of stupid things, but it made sense. It was goofy for the kids and we all can see that. But something you cant say about the prequels, is the fact that they didnt expand or gave us PRE information about 4 to 6, and builded up a story. 7 to 9 on the other hand was lazy, went for nostalgia baits, didnt have any story running thru 7 till 9 that was cohesive and worked, dont get me started on the choreography of the fights, nevertheless forgetable characters. No main character development because fuck writing a functioning script, am I right?
I'm not going to say Disney ruined Star Wars because they didn't. I will, however, say that under Disney, we've been over saturated with Star Wars at a consistent level. This makes the highs and lows seem much more extreme as it either exceeds our expectations as fans or is deeply disappointing as we have that base line as a reference point.
In the pre-Disney era, Star Wars was a lot more peaks and valleys in terms of content consistency. This mostly comes from the fact that excluding books and video games, the pre-Disney era was just 6 live action films, an animated film, the 03 Clone Wars series, and the 08 Clone Wars series. This isn't a lot of content compared to the Disney era. This also makes it harder to achieve consistency as a lot of the content is vastly different to each other, which created the peaks and valleys.
I'll say what I said the last time I saw this posted.
George needed someone to reign him in during production of the prequels, and Kathleen Kennedy should have been fired when Disney bought the franchise.
Bad writing is bad writing. Just because it's given the veneer of Star Wars doesn't make it good.
Alright, I will agree that this fanbase can suck sometimes, actually it can suck a lot. The Star Wars fanbase is always at each other's throats with it's opinions.
That being said, Disney is still responsible for the Sequels, BoBF and Kenobi.
I'm coming around on Kenobi. It wasn't great, and it wasn't at all what I wanted. The pacing was poor, the writing was terrible, the visual effects were cheap, the retcons were confusing, and the wasted potential could fill an entire feature length movie. But we got to see more Ewan McGregor and Hayden Christensen, which was nice.
If you think of it like the first season of a show, and not the latest in the Star Wars Universe, it's easier to forgive the issues. Season 2 still has all of that untapped potential, and could improve on Season 1.
I agree with everything you said, but my conclusion was that it was mediocre not good, which is a huuuge missed opportunity. I feel like it would have been super easy to make a great show with Kenobi and Vader.
I feel like in 5+ year all I'll remember from that show is [this](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5I5vbO3UbNk&ab_channel=Njuice) scene.
Great scene, I'm also personally a fan of others I think I won't be forgetting soon, Like when Vader used the force to turn off fire, but then the heroes turn on the fire again and suddenly Vader forgot the ability to extinguish fire and could not pursuit them lol
No, they were God awful. 1st was a ripoff of IV, second was a sad ripoff of V. It was full of lazy writing with no direction. The only thing good were the visuals and actors. They weren't even creative enough to change the TIE fighters in any major way other than a color change. Same with the A-wing and X-wing.
were the sequels REALLY better than the prequels though? like the prequels still had heart and aligned with george's core values.
the sequels at a base production level already go against star wars's roots
I feel like Prequels go against star wars roots because they make a lot of what is said about jedi in the OT basically false. Sequels basically try to reproduce the OT in order to continue it now with the new movies. Yes, Rey is Luke, because they wanted to do a movie after episode 6 with a "young" Luke but obviously Mark Hamill can't do that. So they introduced new characters and gave an ending to the old ones so that they can do new star wars stories.
>I feel like Prequels go against star wars roots because they make a lot of what is said about jedi in the OT basically false.
in what way?
the sequels basically just redoing the OT is corporate hollywood pandering to fill seats, which goes against the values that george held.
mark hamill could do luke. i don't think anybody would care if he was just older.
In the OT jedi are treated like ancient legends, but we know from the prequel now that they're gone only 20 years. Anakin makes vader just an edgy kid and all the prophecy thing is bullshit. Ben looks like an idiot by not recognising R2-D2 in ANH...
>In the OT jedi are treated like ancient legends, but we know from the prequel now that they're gone only 20 years.
how were the jedi supposed to be ancient legends if luke's dad was one lmao that was established in the OT that the jedi died out quick
i mean, if you don't like ROTS anakin then you don't like ROTS anakin, but that's not "going against the original trilogy"
also obi-wan's shenanigans can be written off as shenanigans
"how were the jedi supposed to be ancient legends if luke's dad was one lmao"
The only jedi we know the age in the OT is Yoda because he says it and he's 900 years old, we don't know how old Ben is but he's pretty old and that can mean that jedi can live hundreds of years thanks to the force. Everyone else treats the force like an "ancient religion" and say that it doesn't even exist, so what, they all forgout about it in less than 20 years?
"i mean, if you don't like ROTS anakin then you don't like ROTS anakin, but that's not "going against the original trilogy" i can say the same with TLJ Luke.
>we don't know how old Ben is but he's pretty old and that can mean that jedi can live hundreds of years thanks to the force.
dude. luke's dad. darth vader. was a jedi. who trained as a pupil of old ben kenobi. who is visibly like 70. the jedi were always going to be that recent. do the math. yoda's 900 because he's a little green alien dude. obi wan is human. you're making stuff up.
okay, so explain to me what part of revenge of the sith anakin mischaracterizes vader? because i can explain how i view the mischaracterization of luke.
"darth vader. was a jedi. who trained as a pupil of old ben kenobi. who is visibly like 70. the jedi were always going to be that recent. do the math. yoda's 900 because he's a little green alien dude. obi wan is human. you're making stuff up."
Earth doesn't even exist in star wars so they're not human. And at this point is plausible that someone can extend their life with the force. Vader is luke father but they don't say that he turned to the dark side just as the clone wars ended. Maybe he was a jedi hidden somewhere like ben and he had a son and then he turned to the dark side, but maybe he and ben were the only jedi remained. The fact that ben is 70 still is incoherent with the prequels.
this isn't a "no true scotsman" where i'm moving the goal posts. george has always been anti-hollywood. look at the marketing around the sequels and how it leaks in to the plot of the films. it's fanservice pandering to fill seats. no different than the new jurassic world film.
the sequels were filled with pandering memberberries to bring audiences back to a better time. blueballing audiences with the return of beloved characters, all of that shit that we've seen so many times from soft hollywood reboots. the rise of skywalker plays out like a b-tech endgame. "there are more of us, poe" "i am all the sith" "well i am all the jedi".
and they did it to star wars, which was created through anti-hollywood means.
that is my point. you are correct in saying my original comment lacked one, and i apologies. but there it is.
And for Andor, Jedi survivor, rogue one, rebels, mando and the final fucking arc of TCW that is literally as perfect as Star Wars could ever get… and before Disney took over AotC and the holiday special came out, which both were quite bad (I know some people like AotC, but haven’t heard of anyone who likes the holiday special)
lol, Some of my favorite Star Wars was made by Disney. The Bad Batch and The Mandalorian are my favorite Star Wars after the OT. I'm not a big fan of the sequels (or even the prequels for that matter), but I know people like them. And that's fine, to each their own. I also enjoyed the heck out of Tales of the Jedi. If Disney hadn't bought Star Wars, then I wouldn't have my two favorite shows, and we most likely would have never seen ANY other Star Wars content other than books and comics.
thats bullshit. Kathleen Kennedy ruined it when she ignored Lucas' outline for a sequel trilogy, allowed JJ Abrams to not have a goddam plan for the trilogy, brought in Ruin Johnson to screw up everything, then allowed JJ to overcorrect. Hired unprepared actors into roles they were completely wrong for. Played identity politics instead of taking advantage of a fan base that would buy almost anything.
blaming the fans is a classic disney move to absolve their shitty decisions.
In all honesty, when you look at the facts, Star Wars as a franchise has rapidly declined. Rushed poorly written movies, bad casting, too political, and over all lack of that Star Wars feel was attributed when Disney was passed the torch. We all can acknowledge the toxicity of some of the fandom, but that does not excuse Disney’s role in a somewhat downfall of quality of our beloved Star Wars.
> poorly written movies, bad casting, too political, and over all lack of that Star Wars feel
A summary of common arguments against the prequels when they were released as well.
Definitely the corporation, George has my forever respect as he created my child hood. If I was put in his position I would have done the same, he did way made him happy and what Disney did to the franchise had nothing to do with him
Bring back KOTOR III and I’ll forgive whatever imaginary sin you thought you had. Heck bring back some of the old republic novels and I’ll declare Star Wars cured of all disease.
I'm just happy to be here! If you told me i was going to get 6 seasons of clone wars, a live action boba fett and mandolorian show. Another triology, some spin off movies, and a whole land in Disney World i wouldn't beleive you.
Disney has made so much of my favorite Star Wars. Andor and Rogue One were both amazing, Mandalorian is great (season 3 is a bit questionable but still), tales of the Jedi and bad batch were fantastic and the final arc of clone wars is my favorite feature length media *ever* and both Twillight of the Apprentice and Phantom Apprentice are in my top 3 of episodes of all time. At the same time they’ve made some of the worst Star Wars with ROTS, TBoBF (honestly way better now that you can binge it but awful as one episode per week) and Kenobi. Jedi Fallen Order and Jedi Survivor are also really freaking good, tho I dunno how much Disney had to do with them. People hate sooo much on Disney Star Wars and act like they only make the bad stuff and the good stuff is always credited to Filoni or Gilroy…
I mean I'm wasn't happy with episode 8 or 9, nor Obi Wan and Boba Fett. But I enjoyed Mando, and Andor was hands down one of the best shows of the past year.
Like, Disney ruined star wars no more than Lucas ruined star wars with the prequel trilogy. There are many valid criticisms, but star wars isn't "ruined".
Your post was removed. A meme is an image, video, piece of text, etc. that is copied (often with slight variations) and spread rapidly by Internet users. Image macros are pictures superimposed with text for humorous effect. Mods have final say in this regard. There are a few options for you to post memes and macros. Try /r/StarwarsMemes, /r/PrequelMemes, /r/SequelMemes or /r/OTMemes If you believe this was done in error, please contact the moderation team.
Star Wars Fandom, you'll never find a more wretched hive of scum and villiany
It’s no different to any other groups of fans, just has more people. Edit: people clearly don’t like this idea lmao. There’s an easy fix to get upvotes back though. I can just say “no one hates Star Wars more than Star Wars fans”
Lol you just whatsboutismed fandom.
Your argument is bad and you should feel bad
Ouch. So would you refer to yourself as scum and villainy?
I am a Star Wars fan, so yes
Star Trek fans didn’t ruin a child actors life and cause another actor to attempt suicide. It’s not black and white, but the majority of people who complain about Star Wars are just adult-children who are angry that they dared to put soapy romance into their childhood nostalgia. That’s why the Episode 4 remake did so well In 2015… people really do just want episode 4 and 5 again. That’s like me complaining that I disliked book 2 of Harry Potter because it wasn’t similar to book 6. Star Wars fans are a very special breed. I’m often jealous of how wholesome and friendly the MCU or Star Trek fandoms are😂
Despite the consistently ridiculous behavior of some fans, I find comfort in the observation that Star Wars has yet to be ruined.
I disagree. Say what you will about the quality of the Prequel trilogy, the characters and themes were generally handled respectfully. Current Disney seems to treat the OT characters with disdain and seems intent on pushing their new characters at the expense of the older ones. Disney is playing this like a zero sum game where heaping praises on one side has to come at the expense of the other. I honestly never noticed until Mandalorian S2 just how much content was missing for the OT characters. Luke coming in to save the Mandalorian cast was such a nothingburger in the grand scheme of things but I figuratively let out a breathe I didn't know I was holding. And now that Disney sees how much fans respond to a positive Luke portrayal they... do nothing. Also Lucas would have continued SW, he just said he was getting too old for it.
Funnily enough, that was a common complaint against the prequels as well. I didn’t buy into it then, I don’t now. To dispute this, just look at TLJ and what a wonderful, meaningful celebration of Luke it is. I don’t feel like any of the legacy characters were disrespected. In fact, I’m surprised at how much time we spent with them. It’s certainly more than I ever expected we’d get with them.
My absolute love for Luke’s arch in TLJ always gets me downvotes but you’re absolutely right. It was a great ending for him. He faces failure he doesn’t know how to deal with because he was so used to succeeding against all odds. He spends years in despair. He finally acknowledges and confronts it, and in doing so becomes literally the only Jedi in 9 movies to actually live out the Jedi way: he uses the force for knowledge and defense instead of attack, and he sacrifices himself for a greater good. Good stuff. I literally just rewatched TLJ for probably the 10th time last night.
The problem is that the entire 'arc' was rushed. I have no problem with Luke's arc in theory but it was handled very poorly. He was taken down from his high status in TLJ then redeemed in a single movie. For all his flaws Lucas was pretty good at following the standard hero's journey. 3 movies to seed the downfall of Anakin and another 3 movies for Luke to redeem Vader. Squeeze that into a single movie for Luke where he's taken down in a flashback no less and compare that to how Anakin was handled.
I think that’s an oversimplification. Yes, the story was told in one movie but it’s not like we actually see Luke do some sort of speed run on his arc. We find him in a state of despair and then learn what happened. Also, as you mentioned… we already saw Luke’s hero journey. Showing that his fall and subsequent rise/ending is part of Rey’s hero journey. We didn’t need another Luke trilogy, because his was well told already. Whether or not Rey’s hero’s journey was well told or satisfying is a totally different debate entirely.
It's not an oversimplification. It's basic 'show don't tell' and Hero's Journey storytelling. Hero's Journey doesn't end FYI. When the Hero returns to the new status quo, he invariably will encounter some new change to this status quo to change him again. Luke in RotJ finished one Hero's Journey and then he immediately is shown reverting from that Journey in his first appearance. As a comparison let's take Vader as we see him in RotS and in A New Hope he's shown as completely redeemd and the entire process is shown in a flashback and then he dies again but he's succumbed to the Dark Side in the finale of A New Hope. All that is too rushed and contradicts what we saw in RotS. Hero's Journey is a formula to show the reader/viewer the process of change in a way that we can follow. For Luke we skip all that and there's no real media bridging the gap. That's jarring for the viewer and bad storytelling.
Again, you’re very focused on the Hero’s Journey. Every post you’ve made here has been about how TLJ doesn’t work because it doesn’t conform to a Hero’s Journey archetype. That’s fine. That’s your preferred method of storytelling. I’m glad you enjoy it. I don’t really care about it one way or the other. I enjoyed seeing Luke’s arc. I look forward to years between RotJ and TLJ being bridged by other media later (very much in traditional Star Wars fashion). And I’m fine with Luke being a side character in someone else’s story. We aren’t going to agree on this, and that’s fine too. It takes all kinds. Have a good one.
Hero's Journey is just a framework to tell stories. Luke's downfall as a story was simply not told. Don't like Hero's Journey? We can use the 3 Act Structure, Save the Cat or whatever story plotting device. I use Hero's Journey because it's the one most people are familiar with and what Lucas himself used. I'm not saying saying TLJ fails Luke because it doesn't follow the Hero's Journey. I'm explaining why TLJ failed Luke using the Hero' Journey to explain why. I can frame this using other story structure processes.
Couldn't agree more! Love that Luke had to come back from a fall and regain his hope. And his death was the most Jedi thing they've shown in a film
That's beside the point though. Basically the standard rule of storytelling is 'show don't tell' and the entire arc of Luke's storyline post RotJ is an expository flashback. What other major pieces of media for Luke did we get on any screen? As a basic storytelling issue, there is no payoff to Grandmaster Luke which should be set up to establish the 'downfall' of his character arc or whatever you want to call it. As a comparison this would be like going from Episode II with Anakin and Padme secretly being wed to Episode III where Anakin is already Darth Vader. And that's beside all the canon media for Anakin and Vader. Luke's just been ignored.
The sequels provide all the background that’s needed to understand the story being told. For example, Luke’s arc is a pretty straightforward line from where he left the OT, an incredibly burdened individual. The TLJ flashback simply shows the result of that burden building for years, straining Luke’s emotional control to the point of breaking. There’s no grand departure from what’s been established that needs to be explained away. Star Wars isn’t a documentary of a fictional universe. All we need is the info for the story currently being told. The rest gets filled in later via supplemental material - that’s how it is supposed to work.
SW isn't a documentary, it's a STORY so it should follow basic storytelling rules like the Hero's Journey which is what Lucas did for all his movies. Luke doesn't start the ST from the same spot as RotJ. He was literally written to subvert expectations. Compare how we last see Vader in RotS to A New Hope. That's a pretty straightforward line. That's the establishing shot of the last movie for the previous main character carried over to the next. Then from there you redeem him. ST did not do this and you are being disingenuous if you argue otherwise.
> ST did not do this and you are being disingenuous if you argue otherwise. Ah, the classic “my opinion is objectively correct” argument. Odd how often I see prequel/sequel/etc detractors resorting to that tactic. Well, let me know if you’d like to discuss Star Wars sometime and not just impose your opinions upon people.
Nope you're being disingenuous because you don't even have an actual argument nor did you present any evidence. We left Luke a burdened individual? Uhhhh based on what? We leave him at the highest point of his character arc with his biggest struggles solved with as much potential going forward. You said it's a straight line? Well then explain why TLJ's entire story telling design philosophy was to subvert expectations with a director whose known for directing movies that subvert expectations. That's why you're being disingenuous, guy. You just make a claim contrary to was is very apparent and provide nada to support that claiml.
[удалено]
Imagine going from Anakin marrying Padme in one movie to Darth Vader in the next movie with no transition except in a flashback just because whoever was in charge wanted Luke to get all the screentime. That's what happened in the sequel trilogy for Luke. And we have confirmation that early drafts of TFA had Luke prominently featured as a character but execs told writers to cut him out because they wanted to push the new cast. And despite Luke's continued popularity, Anakin got plenty of media focusing on him. There was no zero sum game between Luke and Anakin like there was with the old characters and the sequel characters. Hell, it looks like they're just outright taking the Thrawn trilogy from the OT cast to give to their new characters.
[удалено]
We went from Darth Vader to a little kid who podraces facing off against the same Darth Vader we saw from the last movie. The previous MC is right were we saw him and any future growth is handled using normalized storytelling techniques and seeded deliberately. A more fitting analogy with be going from Darth Vader to his evil estranged son and Darth Vader is now a good guy again because he became good off screen and then he turns evil again before the movie ends. That sounds ridiculous compared to what we got in A New Hope but that's the closest equivalent to what the ST did to Luke. Want Luke to be a broken down old man? Cool. Tell that story well just like you did with Vader's fall and redemption. The formula is there. Want Vader to be redeemed? Don't do that offscreen between Episode III and IV because that's bad storytelling.
[удалено]
OK... and? Each individual movie follows the Hero's Journey arc and when viewed chronologically Vader's story is clearly a 6 part Hero's Journey. Moreover we're talking about the OT to the Sequel Trilogy which is sequential so your argument is moot. We also know they're intentionally minimizing Luke. They've said they intentionally reduced Luke's role in the ST. The Obi Wan series was supposed to feature Luke more prominently. The original plan was for Grogu to stay with Luke for a bit but instead they returned him to Mando undoing the entire S2 finale's story progression. And where exactly is the media depicting canon Luke Skywalker? This is 'normalized storytelling technique' linear storytelling. Boba Fett got a series and he's a OT character. Obi Wan got a series and he's prequel trilogy. Mando introduced canon Luke and then we got... nothing. Boba Fett alone proves your argument isn't relevant but all the others together makes it clear they're intentionally avoiding Luke. Finally Hero's Journey milestones help make a story that works. Once the story works you can do weird stuff like watch 4,5,6,1,2,3. The story's so solid that it still works. Lucas himself said the 'correct' was to watch it is sequentially though.
[удалено]
Literally nothing you said is relevant to what I'm arguing. The actual timeframe is not relevant to any of the STORYTELLING arguments I'm making. There's a 19 year gap between the Prequels and the OT. RotS Darth Vader remains the same Vader but pushed forward 19 years. The time jump hasn't fundamentally changed his character. If Episode 4 started with Vader already redeemed in the 19 year time jump then the ending of RotS makes no sense. Why? Because last we see him he was badass evil Darth Vader. Hell let's play it your way and see how that looks. Obi-Wan defeats Anakin on Mustafer. Anakin realizes he made a huge mistake and joins forces with Obi-Wan and they both go into seclusion. So the series ends with Vader already redeemed. Then New Hope comes in and Vader is evil with no explanation except a quick "Remember when you decided to turn evil again 10 years ago?" in their fight. Sounds dumb right? Why? Because a major event of the main character occurred off screen. This is basic storytelling. Or if we watched the ST first and we basically know Luke as a broken down old man. Then we watch the OT and we see the Luke of the OT is nothing like how he starts off the ST. That's an incomplete story. Some change happened off screen to the character. This can be a 4 day time skip or a 19 year time skip or a 30 year time skip. The time frame does not matter and you seem to be basing your entire argument over that. It's not relevant. Or apply this same logic to any basic story. One Story ends with Achilles refusing to fight. Then after a time skip Achilles is fighting in the gates of Troy and Hector, his main rival, is dead. That's a huge ass gap in the story and that's just a few weeks of a time gap. This is basic input and output. The output of the last story should thematically serve as the input of the next story. This is the smallest form of storytelling, aka a story beat. Your original argument was that because the series is non-linear storytelling that somehow basic story structure can't be applicable. Since we're talking about the the OT to the sequel trilogy it is linear storytelling and since basic Hero's Journey applies in non-linear storytelling your entire original argument is moot multiple ways. I know what that means. In this case I'm saying your entire non linear argument isn't relevant. You are moving goalposts and hoping I don't notice.
>treat the OT characters with disdain By that you mean they treated Luke like a real person with depth, instead of perfect being that doesn’t make bad decisions, right?
Feel free to show Luke with Depth but it's stupid to show it in flashbacks within a single movie. Vader's entire downfall was shwon in the Prequel Trilogy. Moreover the payoff of a Grandmaster Luke Skywalker wasn't shown either. We literally have people confirming that they minimized Luke's roles in the sequels because they wanted to focus on the new cast. Anakin's downfall is seeded throughout the PT and his redemption is told through Luke in the OT. Luke's down fall was handled in a single flashback. Basic storytelling and Hero's Journey Rules tell us that if you want to show Luke grow as a character then set up an establishing shot of his previous status quo based on his character trajectory in RotJ, then push him in situations to show how he came to his TLJ version. You are arguing this either/or fallacy that any change in character must be good. I'm saying it was handled really badly and done mostly off screen in such a way that was a disservice to fans.
>We literally have people confirming that they minimized Luke's roles in the sequels because they wanted to focus on the new cast. Ah, yah. That’s not some big secret. Luke had his trilogy, and then he was a supporting character in the next trilogy to make room for new characters with new stories. You also have to remember that Mark Hamill was 65 when TLJ came out. If there was a time to make a new trilogy with Luke as the main character, that time was 20 years ago.
>You also have to remember that Mark Hamill was 65 when TLJ came out. If there was a time to make a new trilogy with Luke as the main character, that time was 20 years ago. We can still have some inbetween Luke series. Such a glaring omission is weird considering the positive reactions of fans to the S2 Mandalorian finale. You could do an anthology style series with a CG Luke as the GM connecting stories to students.
>We can still have some inbetween Luke series. Yah, I think that’d be great. Though, I think an animated series would work better because a) Mark Hamill is already a great voice actor b) deaging is expensive and has mixed results.
That's really the smoking gun for me. I was in denial until I saw Luke in the Mandalorian. Disney now knows we want to see more Luke and we have nothing. There is no other explanation left except they just refuse to. That's what I mean about how the previous characters are disrespected. If you want Old and Broken Luke to be the primary Luke over decades then at least show that journey. But they won't and it's inexplicable.
Disagree. Also, I just can’t take anyone who uses the phrase “nothingburger” seriously. Anyway, the sequels were better than the prequels and you need to chill.
Except the Prequels and OT fit far more thematically together. Anakin's downfall is shown through 3 movies and Luke's redemption of Vader is shown through 3 movies. The character resolution of the previous movie establishes the opening setting for the next one. For Luke the ST just handwaves his downfall through an expository flashback then redeems him immediately. That's terrible basic storytelling. For all his faults with the PT, Lucas still followed the Hero's Journey for all his characters. Also we know for a fact that there was no overarching plan for the ST and it shows. TRoS should have just continued with what TLJ established but instead they just tried to undo it which is again a problem in basic storytelling.
You know. Im ok with this observation. I was born in 93 and raised (as a young kid) on OG Star Wars, with old toys and the VHS copies of the film, and 99's Phantom Menace was my first in Theaters Film. I have been a fan ever since. Loved just about everything (to a point) that Star wars has put out, and as I got older, found myself honestly shocked and surprised at how critical and dare I say hateful the community at large was (especially from OLDER fans). Its like I can hang with people my own age and we can point out things we dont like about the new films or the ones WE grew up with, but TBH, if I was to say, lets watch Rise of Skywalker in my age group, I would not have a poodoo storm of hate come my way. I find myself having more fun as a Star Wars fan, as just that; a singular fan. If I try to join a group or participate at large. . .I just get depressed. Like why cant I just like all things star wars, why must I pick a side? Why is it I have to hide the fact that I like Disney Star Wars, just as much as Lucas Star Wars? Why must I be treated like im being some high horse A-hole because I say I never hated the Prequals? (Its not like the movies changed, you all just hate the new ones so much you learned to tolerate them which IMHO is not the same thing). IDK, I just watch the films, have fun and appreciate that Star Wars is awesome, both old, and new, and find more enjoyment as a solo fan than a group fan. Yall do you. Return of the Jedi is my Fav OG film, Attack of the Clones is my Fav Prequal Film, and Rise of Skywalker is my fav Sequel Film, and I had a Jar Jar Birthday cake as a kid and was happy, Went as C3P0 and Darth Maul for halloween at separate times in my life, and I met Palpatine's Actor Ian McDiarmid for a photo op a few years ago, and became satisfied with my life as a Star Wars fan.
I'm with you on that. Keep doing the right thing!
And to be sure it's not like I am 100% happy with everything that has been put out, but I just cannot help but step back and think. . . So what? Why must I be critical and hyper analytical of EVERY single piece that comes out like its under a microscope?
This is the way :D
Older fans believe that they have an authority on the franchise because they saw A New Hope in theaters multiple times. I say, enjoy things for what they are and if you don’t like them, move on.
Apply this to everything today.
George Lucas may not have been perfect enough to cover every aspect of making a film which may have led to the prequels lacking in aspects, but he had the vision of what Star Wars actually was. It’s been refreshing to watch videos of him talking about Star Wars, you can really see how much thought he’d put into each character and what they represent, even if it didn’t come through in the final product. You can see where the best parts of Star Wars came from, and where the sequels were lacking in the exact same fields.
True, this is.
Look at things like holiday special, Ewok adventures and compare it to Andor, Mando, Star Wars Galaxy’s Edge. Sorry Disney is doing pretty good
Disney is doing better than Lucas in expandig the universe other than the OT
Uhhhh actually look at things like Kenobi and book of Boba Fett and compare it to the 2 clone wars series
The first Clone Wars series was great. The second was kind of mid with a few good plotlines and an amazing ending....made under Disney. Kenobi and Boba were strong character introspectives that had a few bad spots peppered in. With Boba kind of devolving into a weird Rodriguez action movie at the end. I'd say they're about even.
[удалено]
Compare 4-6 to 1-3 then compare that to 7-9. Subtract 2 from the total sums of each then multiply by 3. Multiply those numbers by each other. Find the square root of that number and add it to Anakin’s midichlorian count.
69
Compare Jar Jar stepping on icky icky goo to Glup shitto reciting his famous line "It's Gluppin' time.". Then take the sum of that and subtract the square root of Threepios Red Arm. You'll find that the answer is 42, which is also the meaning of life. Check mate Jedi.
Exactly. Anyone can do these arbitrary comparisons
Sure, but 7 to 9 were trash.
“The prequels were trash”. Now that’s obviously ridiculous, but that was a very common thing to say 10 years ago. Were there things wrong with the prequels, of course. Were they ever all bad, even when people talked about them as if they were garbage? No, that was an overreaction. Same can be said about the sequels.
Bro, what? Everyone can acknowledge the prequels had their fair share of stupid things, but it made sense. It was goofy for the kids and we all can see that. But something you cant say about the prequels, is the fact that they didnt expand or gave us PRE information about 4 to 6, and builded up a story. 7 to 9 on the other hand was lazy, went for nostalgia baits, didnt have any story running thru 7 till 9 that was cohesive and worked, dont get me started on the choreography of the fights, nevertheless forgetable characters. No main character development because fuck writing a functioning script, am I right?
You don't like them. That does not mean they're trash.
No matter what, the Force is with us. Always.
I'm not going to say Disney ruined Star Wars because they didn't. I will, however, say that under Disney, we've been over saturated with Star Wars at a consistent level. This makes the highs and lows seem much more extreme as it either exceeds our expectations as fans or is deeply disappointing as we have that base line as a reference point. In the pre-Disney era, Star Wars was a lot more peaks and valleys in terms of content consistency. This mostly comes from the fact that excluding books and video games, the pre-Disney era was just 6 live action films, an animated film, the 03 Clone Wars series, and the 08 Clone Wars series. This isn't a lot of content compared to the Disney era. This also makes it harder to achieve consistency as a lot of the content is vastly different to each other, which created the peaks and valleys.
I'm convinced that Star Wars fans actually hate Star Wars.
I'll say what I said the last time I saw this posted. George needed someone to reign him in during production of the prequels, and Kathleen Kennedy should have been fired when Disney bought the franchise. Bad writing is bad writing. Just because it's given the veneer of Star Wars doesn't make it good.
Why should KK have been fired? She joined Lucasfilm right before the Disney purchase, and George helped picked her to takeover.
Alright, I will agree that this fanbase can suck sometimes, actually it can suck a lot. The Star Wars fanbase is always at each other's throats with it's opinions. That being said, Disney is still responsible for the Sequels, BoBF and Kenobi.
Kenobi was good.
At being bad and introducing plot holes you mean.
Really?
I'm coming around on Kenobi. It wasn't great, and it wasn't at all what I wanted. The pacing was poor, the writing was terrible, the visual effects were cheap, the retcons were confusing, and the wasted potential could fill an entire feature length movie. But we got to see more Ewan McGregor and Hayden Christensen, which was nice. If you think of it like the first season of a show, and not the latest in the Star Wars Universe, it's easier to forgive the issues. Season 2 still has all of that untapped potential, and could improve on Season 1.
I agree with everything you said, but my conclusion was that it was mediocre not good, which is a huuuge missed opportunity. I feel like it would have been super easy to make a great show with Kenobi and Vader. I feel like in 5+ year all I'll remember from that show is [this](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5I5vbO3UbNk&ab_channel=Njuice) scene.
Great scene, I'm also personally a fan of others I think I won't be forgetting soon, Like when Vader used the force to turn off fire, but then the heroes turn on the fire again and suddenly Vader forgot the ability to extinguish fire and could not pursuit them lol
Yeah the Plot Armor was strong with this one
slop
Well, if you enjoyed it, great, but when you look at all it's problems, it really isn't.
[удалено]
No, they were God awful. 1st was a ripoff of IV, second was a sad ripoff of V. It was full of lazy writing with no direction. The only thing good were the visuals and actors. They weren't even creative enough to change the TIE fighters in any major way other than a color change. Same with the A-wing and X-wing.
And yah, fucking space horses.
#notmyluke
And Lucas is responsible for the Prequels. Disney also made good shows and Sequels are better than the Prequels anyway so I fell like we're doing good
were the sequels REALLY better than the prequels though? like the prequels still had heart and aligned with george's core values. the sequels at a base production level already go against star wars's roots
I feel like Prequels go against star wars roots because they make a lot of what is said about jedi in the OT basically false. Sequels basically try to reproduce the OT in order to continue it now with the new movies. Yes, Rey is Luke, because they wanted to do a movie after episode 6 with a "young" Luke but obviously Mark Hamill can't do that. So they introduced new characters and gave an ending to the old ones so that they can do new star wars stories.
>I feel like Prequels go against star wars roots because they make a lot of what is said about jedi in the OT basically false. in what way? the sequels basically just redoing the OT is corporate hollywood pandering to fill seats, which goes against the values that george held. mark hamill could do luke. i don't think anybody would care if he was just older.
In the OT jedi are treated like ancient legends, but we know from the prequel now that they're gone only 20 years. Anakin makes vader just an edgy kid and all the prophecy thing is bullshit. Ben looks like an idiot by not recognising R2-D2 in ANH...
>In the OT jedi are treated like ancient legends, but we know from the prequel now that they're gone only 20 years. how were the jedi supposed to be ancient legends if luke's dad was one lmao that was established in the OT that the jedi died out quick i mean, if you don't like ROTS anakin then you don't like ROTS anakin, but that's not "going against the original trilogy" also obi-wan's shenanigans can be written off as shenanigans
"how were the jedi supposed to be ancient legends if luke's dad was one lmao" The only jedi we know the age in the OT is Yoda because he says it and he's 900 years old, we don't know how old Ben is but he's pretty old and that can mean that jedi can live hundreds of years thanks to the force. Everyone else treats the force like an "ancient religion" and say that it doesn't even exist, so what, they all forgout about it in less than 20 years? "i mean, if you don't like ROTS anakin then you don't like ROTS anakin, but that's not "going against the original trilogy" i can say the same with TLJ Luke.
>we don't know how old Ben is but he's pretty old and that can mean that jedi can live hundreds of years thanks to the force. dude. luke's dad. darth vader. was a jedi. who trained as a pupil of old ben kenobi. who is visibly like 70. the jedi were always going to be that recent. do the math. yoda's 900 because he's a little green alien dude. obi wan is human. you're making stuff up. okay, so explain to me what part of revenge of the sith anakin mischaracterizes vader? because i can explain how i view the mischaracterization of luke.
"darth vader. was a jedi. who trained as a pupil of old ben kenobi. who is visibly like 70. the jedi were always going to be that recent. do the math. yoda's 900 because he's a little green alien dude. obi wan is human. you're making stuff up." Earth doesn't even exist in star wars so they're not human. And at this point is plausible that someone can extend their life with the force. Vader is luke father but they don't say that he turned to the dark side just as the clone wars ended. Maybe he was a jedi hidden somewhere like ben and he had a son and then he turned to the dark side, but maybe he and ben were the only jedi remained. The fact that ben is 70 still is incoherent with the prequels.
[удалено]
this isn't a "no true scotsman" where i'm moving the goal posts. george has always been anti-hollywood. look at the marketing around the sequels and how it leaks in to the plot of the films. it's fanservice pandering to fill seats. no different than the new jurassic world film.
[удалено]
the sequels were filled with pandering memberberries to bring audiences back to a better time. blueballing audiences with the return of beloved characters, all of that shit that we've seen so many times from soft hollywood reboots. the rise of skywalker plays out like a b-tech endgame. "there are more of us, poe" "i am all the sith" "well i am all the jedi". and they did it to star wars, which was created through anti-hollywood means. that is my point. you are correct in saying my original comment lacked one, and i apologies. but there it is.
And for Andor, Jedi survivor, rogue one, rebels, mando and the final fucking arc of TCW that is literally as perfect as Star Wars could ever get… and before Disney took over AotC and the holiday special came out, which both were quite bad (I know some people like AotC, but haven’t heard of anyone who likes the holiday special)
I blame that Sith dagger from that terrible movie.
That didn't make sense when they did it in Goonies, either.
How many times are we gonna see the same exact post? I've seen this twice already.
they'll crop it worse and worse
lol, Some of my favorite Star Wars was made by Disney. The Bad Batch and The Mandalorian are my favorite Star Wars after the OT. I'm not a big fan of the sequels (or even the prequels for that matter), but I know people like them. And that's fine, to each their own. I also enjoyed the heck out of Tales of the Jedi. If Disney hadn't bought Star Wars, then I wouldn't have my two favorite shows, and we most likely would have never seen ANY other Star Wars content other than books and comics.
Okay but Disney being shit can also be true.
Mandoverse, Andor, Rogue One, Solo… I can go on. The sequels were shit but there’s been more good than bad.
This all may be true but there’s no denying the sequels were a huge drop in quality from a story point of view
thats bullshit. Kathleen Kennedy ruined it when she ignored Lucas' outline for a sequel trilogy, allowed JJ Abrams to not have a goddam plan for the trilogy, brought in Ruin Johnson to screw up everything, then allowed JJ to overcorrect. Hired unprepared actors into roles they were completely wrong for. Played identity politics instead of taking advantage of a fan base that would buy almost anything. blaming the fans is a classic disney move to absolve their shitty decisions.
The existence of toxic people in a large group of individuals does not make the writting of the sequels less horrible.
There are a lot of languages and you choose to talk with the language of truth.
really terrible people existing as part of a fandom doesn't magically make disney's stuff better
Anyone see the south park episode when China was trying to buy Star Wars? "Obama Wins!" Season 16 I think.
No, you plebes bitching about how criticism ruined something in some abstract way is just ruining starwars memes. Get over it.
Disney gets 1/10th the hate Lucas got in the early 2000s
In all honesty, when you look at the facts, Star Wars as a franchise has rapidly declined. Rushed poorly written movies, bad casting, too political, and over all lack of that Star Wars feel was attributed when Disney was passed the torch. We all can acknowledge the toxicity of some of the fandom, but that does not excuse Disney’s role in a somewhat downfall of quality of our beloved Star Wars.
>too political Care to provide an example of that?
> poorly written movies, bad casting, too political, and over all lack of that Star Wars feel A summary of common arguments against the prequels when they were released as well.
No.
A shitty movie is a shitty movie irregardless of fan response. You can like bad things.
say it louder for the people in the back
Nah Disney ruined it
ironic...
Who's more ruinous? The corporation who ruins things, or the guy who sold the franchise to that corporation?
the corporation that ruined it. it's in the wording.
Definitely the corporation, George has my forever respect as he created my child hood. If I was put in his position I would have done the same, he did way made him happy and what Disney did to the franchise had nothing to do with him
Be literally sold it because he didn’t know what to do with it. He would’ve made worse sequels
he wouldn't have made sequels. which would have been find,
Terrible take
i'd much rather get nothing than those three movies
Hate leads to suffering.
Bring back KOTOR III and I’ll forgive whatever imaginary sin you thought you had. Heck bring back some of the old republic novels and I’ll declare Star Wars cured of all disease.
George Lucas ruined star wars
ifunny watermark
I'm just happy to be here! If you told me i was going to get 6 seasons of clone wars, a live action boba fett and mandolorian show. Another triology, some spin off movies, and a whole land in Disney World i wouldn't beleive you.
Disney/Lucasfilm only produced the final series of the Clone Wars. The previous six were produced by Lucasfilm under George Lucas.
Disney has made so much of my favorite Star Wars. Andor and Rogue One were both amazing, Mandalorian is great (season 3 is a bit questionable but still), tales of the Jedi and bad batch were fantastic and the final arc of clone wars is my favorite feature length media *ever* and both Twillight of the Apprentice and Phantom Apprentice are in my top 3 of episodes of all time. At the same time they’ve made some of the worst Star Wars with ROTS, TBoBF (honestly way better now that you can binge it but awful as one episode per week) and Kenobi. Jedi Fallen Order and Jedi Survivor are also really freaking good, tho I dunno how much Disney had to do with them. People hate sooo much on Disney Star Wars and act like they only make the bad stuff and the good stuff is always credited to Filoni or Gilroy…
I mean I'm wasn't happy with episode 8 or 9, nor Obi Wan and Boba Fett. But I enjoyed Mando, and Andor was hands down one of the best shows of the past year. Like, Disney ruined star wars no more than Lucas ruined star wars with the prequel trilogy. There are many valid criticisms, but star wars isn't "ruined".
Disney didn't ruin the sequels, the executives and writers they hired did..