Colin Trevorrow replaced with Abrams as 'Star Wars: Episode IX' Director

PSW: discuss Star Wars without "versus" arguments.

Moderator: Vympel

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 15416
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Colin Trevorrow Out as 'Star Wars: Episode IX' Director

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2017-09-13 01:54am

Again, I think Abrams is a decent director. His main fault is his tendency toward plot-holes, though I don't know how much that's him vs. the other writers he's worked with.

If he keeps the plot simple, or has someone else exercising some editorial oversight, though, he should be fine.

But let's be honest- there are always going to be a certain number of people who hate any new Star Wars film, for no other reason than that its a new Star Wars film. Because when you have a devoted, long-standing fan base, people have expectations of what the film should be, and when it inevitably isn't exactly what they'd prefer, they say its ruined. That's not the only reason people complain, but its a big damn part of it. That and people just jumping on the bandwagon.
Galvatron wrote:
2017-09-12 01:32pm
Star Wars Into Darkness.

"My name...is...Thrawn!"
Honestly, I'd be half-inclined to fire a twenty-turbolaser salute in his honour if he did that, even if I don't think Thrawn would fit the current ST timeline very well.
"Well, Grant, we've had the devil's own day, haven't we?"

"Yes. Lick 'em tomorrow though."

-Generals William T. Sherman and Ulysses S Grant, the Battle of Shiloh.


"You need to believe in things that aren't true. How else can they become?"-Terry Pratchett's DEATH.


I am a dual citizen of the United States and Canada.


Fuck Civility.

eMeM
Padawan Learner
Posts: 236
Joined: 2016-02-21 11:50am

Re: Colin Trevorrow Out as 'Star Wars: Episode IX' Director

Post by eMeM » 2017-09-13 05:02am

Q99 wrote:
2017-09-12 04:34pm
I do think it helps that the SW group will, if necessary, do re-writers/additional shoots to polish things off if his thing is *almost* there.
Considering that he brought Bad Robot for TFA to get more control, and that he gave zero fucks about the Story Group (for example they've learned that he has changed the opening crawl... when they saw it in the theatre)... yeah, I doubt it.

Which means that maybe there is still hope that he will be fired?

About Abrams and his "brilliant" set ups, the mystery box:

From what Rian Johnson said, Abrams' mystery box was empty. He never thought about Rey's parents, Snoke, and all the rest, just that it would be cool to make it a mystery and maybe the future writers will tie it up somehow. Great for the creative freedom of future writers and directors, absolutely terrible if you want to set up a coherent trillogy.

That's why you see RJ and Hidalgo going on and on on social media how it's not really that important to know Rey's parents and that there is nothing wrong with Snoke being a new character.

User avatar
ray245
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 6581
Joined: 2005-06-10 11:30pm

Re: Colin Trevorrow Out as 'Star Wars: Episode IX' Director

Post by ray245 » 2017-09-13 08:40am

eMeM wrote:
2017-09-13 05:02am
Q99 wrote:
2017-09-12 04:34pm
I do think it helps that the SW group will, if necessary, do re-writers/additional shoots to polish things off if his thing is *almost* there.
Considering that he brought Bad Robot for TFA to get more control, and that he gave zero fucks about the Story Group (for example they've learned that he has changed the opening crawl... when they saw it in the theatre)... yeah, I doubt it.

Which means that maybe there is still hope that he will be fired?

About Abrams and his "brilliant" set ups, the mystery box:

From what Rian Johnson said, Abrams' mystery box was empty. He never thought about Rey's parents, Snoke, and all the rest, just that it would be cool to make it a mystery and maybe the future writers will tie it up somehow. Great for the creative freedom of future writers and directors, absolutely terrible if you want to set up a coherent trillogy.

That's why you see RJ and Hidalgo going on and on on social media how it's not really that important to know Rey's parents and that there is nothing wrong with Snoke being a new character.
Abrams's mystery box is always empty. Which is why while he might be good at directing a pilot or setting up a new series, he's horrible at making it pay off.

Yes, Lucas made it up as he goes along as well, but he ensures that his ending at the least have decent payoffs. Both Ep 6 and 3 are considered a decent finale to the respective trilogy.
Humans are such funny creatures. We are selfish about selflessness, yet we can love something so much that we can hate something.

User avatar
Galvatron
Decepticon Leader
Posts: 6063
Joined: 2002-07-12 12:27am
Location: Kill! Smash! Destroy! Rend! Mangle! Distort!

Re: Colin Trevorrow Out as 'Star Wars: Episode IX' Director

Post by Galvatron » 2017-09-13 08:43am

I'm more concerned about him writing it. At least TFA had Kasdan. Where is he now?

User avatar
Thanas
Magister
Magister
Posts: 30768
Joined: 2004-06-26 07:49pm

Re: Colin Trevorrow Out as 'Star Wars: Episode IX' Director

Post by Thanas » 2017-09-13 09:07am

Changed title upon request.

The news fill me with dread, guess Ep IX will be as terrible and boring as every other Abrams shit so far.
Whoever says "education does not matter" can try ignorance
------------
A decision must be made in the life of every nation at the very moment when the grasp of the enemy is at its throat. Then, it seems that the only way to survive is to use the means of the enemy, to rest survival upon what is expedient, to look the other way. Well, the answer to that is 'survival as what'? A country isn't a rock. It's not an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for. It's what it stands for when standing for something is the most difficult! - Chief Judge Haywood
------------
My LPs

eMeM
Padawan Learner
Posts: 236
Joined: 2016-02-21 11:50am

Re: Colin Trevorrow Out as 'Star Wars: Episode IX' Director

Post by eMeM » 2017-09-13 10:29am

Galvatron wrote:
2017-09-13 08:43am
I'm more concerned about him writing it. At least TFA had Kasdan. Where is he now?
Kasdan? IIRC Han Solo was his pet project and he decided to retire after it's done.

User avatar
Rhadamantus
Padawan Learner
Posts: 373
Joined: 2016-03-30 02:59pm

Re: Colin Trevorrow replaced with Abrams as 'Star Wars: Episode IX' Director

Post by Rhadamantus » 2017-09-13 01:51pm

Great, Episode IX will be a pile of shit now.
"There is no justice in the laws of nature, no term for fairness in the equations of motion. The Universe is neither evil, nor good, it simply does not care. The stars don't care, or the Sun, or the sky.

But they don't have to! WE care! There IS light in the world, and it is US!"

"There is no destiny behind the ills of this world."

"Mortem Delenda Est."

"25,000km is not orbit"-texanmarauder

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 15416
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Colin Trevorrow replaced with Abrams as 'Star Wars: Episode IX' Director

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2017-09-13 02:06pm

Why do people suddenly hate TFA so much? Is it just because its expected in internet fandoms that all new Star Wars films will be bad? Is it about JJ Abrams specifically? It feels sometimes like "everything Abrams makes is horrible" has become a ubiquitous meme, not because his work is actually that bad, but because a few bitter Trekkies started whining and the meme took off, as memes do.

Does the plot of TFA have some ridiculous contrivances/implausibilities? Yeah. So does pretty much every Hollywood SF film I've seen in the last decade. I wish it weren't so, but it is. So what makes TFA stand out? Is it simply that its higher profile than most, and so a bigger target? Because Star Wars fans put Star Wars on a pedestal, and hold it to a higher standard than other films? I'm honestly wondering because, while I would not call TFA a great film, I would rate it as at least average by the standards of big budget Hollywood SF, probably higher. I found the new protagonists likeable, Kylo Ren an interesting deconstruction of Dark Side fanboyism, and Rey, Finn, and Kylo all show a certain inventiveness of characterization in different ways, even if more development is needed (particularly for Rey). The film also had several quite brilliant moments visually and thematically, even if some of them don't leap out at you at first glance. People whine about Starkiller Base, but its not much more ridiculous a concept than Hyperspace itself, when you get down to it. People say its a rehash of the OT... to an extent (though there's a lot of KotOR in their as well, in my opinion), but what did you expect? Much of the fan base spent two decades in hysterics because the Prequels weren't as good as the precious OT, and now the studio gives you what you want, and you cry about it? If you weren't one of the people constantly complaining about how the Prequels weren't like the OT, fine. But if you were, and now you're bitching about TFA being too much like the OT... cry me a fucking river. The studio gave you what you wanted. Its not their fault that you're not satisfied, and its certainly not Abrams'.

The only really big gripes I have about it are Phasma being under used (and that's more because she was advertised as a major character when she was actually a bit part), and Han's death precluding an on-screen reunion of the Big Three.
"Well, Grant, we've had the devil's own day, haven't we?"

"Yes. Lick 'em tomorrow though."

-Generals William T. Sherman and Ulysses S Grant, the Battle of Shiloh.


"You need to believe in things that aren't true. How else can they become?"-Terry Pratchett's DEATH.


I am a dual citizen of the United States and Canada.


Fuck Civility.

eMeM
Padawan Learner
Posts: 236
Joined: 2016-02-21 11:50am

Re: Colin Trevorrow replaced with Abrams as 'Star Wars: Episode IX' Director

Post by eMeM » 2017-09-13 02:26pm

Suddenly?
People were calling it a derivative, uninspired, plothole driven mess since it hit the cinema. Obviously the more time passed and excitement settled down, more people realised that being the first SW movie in a decade might be the only positive thing about it.

It's not just that the new Star Wars has to be hated, from my observations a lot of people who didn't like TFA were pleased with Rogue One.

User avatar
Mange
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4093
Joined: 2004-03-26 01:31pm
Location: Somewhere in the GFFA

Re: Colin Trevorrow replaced with Abrams as 'Star Wars: Episode IX' Director

Post by Mange » 2017-09-13 02:35pm

The Romulan Republic wrote:
2017-09-13 02:06pm
Why do people suddenly hate TFA so much? Is it just because its expected in internet fandoms that all new Star Wars films will be bad? Is it about JJ Abrams specifically? It feels sometimes like "everything Abrams makes is horrible" has become a ubiquitous meme, not because his work is actually that bad, but because a few bitter Trekkies started whining and the meme took off, as memes do.
"Suddenly"? I don't hate TFA, but my thought when I walked out of the theater that cold December evening almost two years ago was that I simply didn't like it and I hoped I would with repeat viewings, but... I didn't have any expectations and I didn't have much of a problem with Abrams then. Though it was flawed, I thought that his first Star Trek movie was decent, but I thought Into Darkness was absolutely terrible (and with that eyesore inducing lens flare...) and far too derivative. I then watched Super 8...

As I wrote earlier, I think TFA is a boring soft remake of ANH with slightly different characters, the same locations and with sprinkles of TESB and ROTJ and I think it's far too derivative. Add to that Abrams inability when it comes to worldbuilding (when I watched the movie, I couldn't understand what planet that was destroyed by the Starkiller as it was only mentioned in passing. Heck, I first thought it was Coruscant and there was absolutely no punch to it and it didn't give the audience a sense of the stakes. This was also the seventh, not the first, Star Wars movie) and the giant plotholes. I've also never thought that Abrams is a good director and that he's an even worse storyteller (especially when it comes to visuals and scenes that needs an emotional punch) who never seems to know where to go with his "mystery box" (that seems to be quite empty), but I've already outlined why. And with the exception of TPM, I do like the prequels and I really, really like Rogue One (but that movie was pure nerd service).

User avatar
Thanas
Magister
Magister
Posts: 30768
Joined: 2004-06-26 07:49pm

Re: Colin Trevorrow replaced with Abrams as 'Star Wars: Episode IX' Director

Post by Thanas » 2017-09-13 03:10pm

The Romulan Republic wrote:
2017-09-13 02:06pm
Why do people suddenly hate TFA so much? Is it just because its expected in internet fandoms that all new Star Wars films will be bad? Is it about JJ Abrams specifically? It feels sometimes like "everything Abrams makes is horrible" has become a ubiquitous meme, not because his work is actually that bad, but because a few bitter Trekkies started whining and the meme took off, as memes do.
There is no logic to Abrams' films. He just creates a picture of OBVIOUSLY COOL SCENE followed by OBVIOUSLY COOL SCENE followed by HAVE YOU SEEN HOW COOL THIS SCENE IS YET. While totally skipping out on everything that makes a movie actually good, like direction and internal logic. He is little better than Michael Bay. Well actually he is worse as Transformers was actually watchable.

I can understand stories not making any sense and even like them if everything else is perfect. Like for example BSG's series finale made no sense but I still enjoyed it for being a character story and the music and the performances. But there is nothing outstanding in Abram's stuff to make up for the glaring deficiencies.
Whoever says "education does not matter" can try ignorance
------------
A decision must be made in the life of every nation at the very moment when the grasp of the enemy is at its throat. Then, it seems that the only way to survive is to use the means of the enemy, to rest survival upon what is expedient, to look the other way. Well, the answer to that is 'survival as what'? A country isn't a rock. It's not an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for. It's what it stands for when standing for something is the most difficult! - Chief Judge Haywood
------------
My LPs

Adam Reynolds
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2214
Joined: 2004-03-27 04:51am

Re: Colin Trevorrow replaced with Abrams as 'Star Wars: Episode IX' Director

Post by Adam Reynolds » 2017-09-13 03:29pm

I don't think most of the people who are complaining about The Force Awakens are the same one who previously complained about the prequels. In fact it is mostly the opposite. Most of those who complained strongly about one sort of like the other. Not everyone hates the prequels, and you'll likely find that the harshest critics of The Force Awakens at least sort of liked them.

Personally I would say they are bad in almost exactly opposite ways. The prequels are bad in the sense that they have less effective known characters and were hampered by being prequels. The Force Awakens is bad in the sense that it had extremely lousy worldbuilding and much less depth. The thing that makes a lot of people like the sequels better is the characters, which are what people get subjectively attached to in stories and cause them to overlook just about any other flaws. Good characters in Star Wars and most people are sold without anything else. TFA also had enough momentum that you could easily overlook the flaws if you aren't paying enough attention to such things, which is why casual audiences mostly liked it.

The problem with Starkiller Base is a storytelling one. The plot of ANH is about the Death Star, with R2 getting the plans and with them mentioned in the opening crawl. By contrast the thing mentioned in TFA was the map to Luke in the same context as the Death Star plans. Starkiller Base just appeared suddenly, and also served to undercut the main drama of finding the map to Luke. The Luke plot was solved by a literal dues ex machina, while the Starkiller Base plot was solved by utterly no planning whatsoever. Blowing up both Death Stars required the Rebel Alliance undergo costly covert operations to discover their presence and their weaknesses. Starkiller Base on the other hand was destroyed by an entirely improvised plan by Han and Finn.

I don't see why the final battle couldn't just have been a jailbreak for Rey in which the heroes steal the First Order half of the map, keeping all of the other plot points. It really would have lifted the movie for me.

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 15416
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Colin Trevorrow replaced with Abrams as 'Star Wars: Episode IX' Director

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2017-09-13 04:32pm

Mange wrote:
2017-09-13 02:35pm
The Romulan Republic wrote:
2017-09-13 02:06pm
Why do people suddenly hate TFA so much? Is it just because its expected in internet fandoms that all new Star Wars films will be bad? Is it about JJ Abrams specifically? It feels sometimes like "everything Abrams makes is horrible" has become a ubiquitous meme, not because his work is actually that bad, but because a few bitter Trekkies started whining and the meme took off, as memes do.
"Suddenly"? I don't hate TFA, but my thought when I walked out of the theater that cold December evening almost two years ago was that I simply didn't like it and I hoped I would with repeat viewings, but... I didn't have any expectations and I didn't have much of a problem with Abrams then. Though it was flawed, I thought that his first Star Trek movie was decent, but I thought Into Darkness was absolutely terrible (and with that eyesore inducing lens flare...) and far too derivative. I then watched Super 8...
So Abrams has made some good films, and some bad films.

I do think expectations probably have a lot to do with it though, at least for some people.

I say "suddenly", though, because when TFA came out, the fan response seemed to be a pretty even mix of "good", "okay", and "shit" (I expect most of the general public enjoyed it, but didn't and don't feel very strongly about it). Yet now, it seems that the consensus is largely settling on "shit". And I'm wondering why.
As I wrote earlier, I think TFA is a boring soft remake of ANH with slightly different characters, the same locations and with sprinkles of TESB and ROTJ and I think it's far too derivative.
Somewhat derivative plot-wise, but I actually think that its got some rather original characterization. And I'm not just talking about the increased demographic diversity, though that's certainly welcome.

Finn is something completely new in a Star Wars film, a stormtrooper/ex-stormtrooper protagonist, and I find his journey from a frightened, horrified man running from danger to one who is willing to take a stand and even go on the offensive out of loyalty to the only friends he's ever had to be a very compelling one, or at least it would be if it was more fleshed-out or less buried amid other material of more dubious quality. Its also very different from Luke's or Anakin's characterization, and quite different from Han's or Obi-wan's as well (their are some superficial parallels to Han, but they have rather different personalities). Finn has no real counterpart in any previous Star Wars film.

Kylo Ren, meanwhile, is an interesting deconstruction of Dark Side fanboyism and the "bad ass" Darksider, and has some interesting implications to contemporary politics when viewed in a certain light, which I'll get to shortly.

Even Rey, who has the flattest characterization of the three main new characters, is quite distinct from Luke in that while Luke jumped at the chance for adventure, Rey is more reluctant, wanting to remain on Jakku to wait for her missing family. She also has a number of subtle and not-so-subtle parallels to Anakin, though she's a much nicer person than Anakin was at her age. You could draw a comparison to Anakin as a child, almost, aside from the fact that Rey has a less annoying and less, well, childish personality.

And of course, you have the Abrams approach (which he used in Trek too) of having duel protagonists, with more development being given to the ostensibly secondary protagonist. Which may or may not be a good thing, but is at least distinctive from prior Star Wars films.

Of course there are a lot of similarities to the OT, but Star Wars has always been built on familiar archetypes and such. At its best, Star Wars tells a fairly idealistic story of good vs. evil, using classic archetypes and tropes but giving them a new spin. The best example of this, to me, being the Vader redemption plot from the OT. In four simple words-"I am your father"-the story was transformed from a traditional, simple (though quite serviceable) Hollywood action story of good vs. evil, hero fights villain, hero eventually slays villain; to a story about saving the villain, which gives us, in my opinion, one of the most powerful and original of cinematic resolutions.

TFA lays the ground work to do the same (if not as well)- to take classic tropes and take them in a new direction. It just needs more fleshing out.

Incidentally, and since it relates to and illustrates a lot of the above, I absolutely love the moment during the final duel when Rey pulls Anakin's lightsaber to her, and away from Kylo Ren. Granted, I don't know how much of this was intentional, but in just a few seconds of footage, it conveys a great deal about the characters and concepts very effectively, at least to me. Let's see:

-Its a satisfying moment of heroism when we see Rey come to Finn's rescue.

-It establishes her and Finn more as equals, with him rescuing her, and then her returning the favour, as opposed to either a) making Rey the damsel in distress who must be rescued at the end, or b) simply having her save herself, and thus render the other characters' efforts somewhat redundant.

-It establishes, again, that Rey is stronger than Kylo Ren, and, since ability to use the Force is so heavily-tied to one's mental/emotional state, it establishes her as a stronger person.

-It shows that Rey, not Kylo, is the one worthy of being the heir to Anakin/Vader's legacy. I've previously made comparisons to Arthur pulling the sword from the stone, and I think its quite apt- Rey pulls the saber from the snow, and reveals herself as the one true Jedi. And it does this without beating you over the head with the symbolism, which is always appreciated. :wink:

It'll also be an effective piece of foreshadowing if Rey does indeed turn out to be a descendent of Anakin, and a quite brilliant one if the "Rey is a reincarnation of Anakin/the Chosen One" theories turn out to be true.

-In doing so, Rey symbolically defeats Kylo Ren utterly, thus completing the deconstruction of the "bad ass" Darksider that Ren aspires to be. His whole life was about trying to live up to the idealized shadow of his infamous grandfather. To this end, he sacrificed his home, his family, his human decency, his freedom... even murdered his father. And it was all for nothing, because in that moment, Rey proves that she is more deserving of being Anakin's successor. And Kylo Ren knows it. The actors play that moment very well. The confusion from Ren when he can't pull the saber to him, the shock and wonder on Rey's face as she realizes her potential as a Jedi, and the mix of disbelief, resignation, exhaustion, and fear in Kylo Ren's face and posture when she does.

Granted, plot-wise, it feels like a resolution that maybe ought to have happened later in the story, but if it spurs Kylo Ren to become more of a threat, or go in a different direction, that might not be a big issue.

-If you want to be juvenile about it, you can view the lightsaber as a phallic symbol, in which case Rey's taking it represents her symbolically taking Kylo Ren's manhood. Alternatively, it could symbolize her proving herself, as a female protagonist, the equal of the male characters who preceded her. Now, both of these have a lot of potential for "unfortunate implications", (the equation of sex with power and dominance, as well as that strong women are somehow disempowering to me; or that a woman must be like a man, or have power over a man, in order to be their equal). But it could also fit with the interpretation I've seen (I can't recall where) that Kylo Ren represents basically an angry privileged young white man, since such people are generally threatened (however unjustifiably) by empowered women. That certainly fits with him being basically a space Neo-Nazi terrorist, as well.

Basically, Kylo Ren the Alt. Rightist.

And all of those different layers of possible meaning and interpretation are elegantly conveyed in maybe five-ten seconds of film, without a word of dialogue spoken. Masterful.

Now, again, I don't know how much of this was deliberate and how much of it is me reading my own interpretations, or others', into it. But in either case, it works.

The rest of the film may be only on the high end of mediocre, perhaps, but for this alone, I will forever defend JJ Abrams as a director (he also earned my respect by being one of the few directors in Hollywood who still uses actual film, and is keeping the use of film, as opposed to just using video, alive).

Say what you will about TFA as a whole, I consider that moment one of the best in the franchise, every bit the equal of Vader storming the ship in Rogue One, "I am your father" in Empire Strikes Back, and Luke refusing to turn/Vader's redemption in Return of the Jedi.
Add to that Abrams inability when it comes to worldbuilding (when I watched the movie, I couldn't understand what planet that was destroyed by the Starkiller as it was only mentioned in passing. Heck, I first thought it was Coruscant and there was absolutely no punch to it and it didn't give the audience a sense of the stakes. This was also the seventh, not the first, Star Wars movie) and the giant plotholes. I've also never thought that Abrams is a good director and that he's an even worse storyteller (especially when it comes to visuals and scenes that needs an emotional punch) who never seems to know where to go with his "mystery box" (that seems to be quite empty), but I've already outlined why. And with the exception of TPM, I do like the prequels and I really, really like Rogue One (but that movie was pure nerd service).
Fair enough. I don't entirely agree, but you are entitled to your opinion.

Apparently, though, their was some more material filmed on Hosnia (which Starkiller Base destroyed), which was cut, likely at least in part because of fan whining about the political scenes in the PT. Which just proves that one of the worst mistakes one can make is to listen overmuch to the fan base. Its the ultimate example of "written by committee", with a committee that will never, ever, be fully satisfied.

And yeah, I made the Coruscant mistake too, as I recall. :wink:
Thanas wrote:
2017-09-13 03:10pm
The Romulan Republic wrote:
2017-09-13 02:06pm
Why do people suddenly hate TFA so much? Is it just because its expected in internet fandoms that all new Star Wars films will be bad? Is it about JJ Abrams specifically? It feels sometimes like "everything Abrams makes is horrible" has become a ubiquitous meme, not because his work is actually that bad, but because a few bitter Trekkies started whining and the meme took off, as memes do.
There is no logic to Abrams' films. He just creates a picture of OBVIOUSLY COOL SCENE followed by OBVIOUSLY COOL SCENE followed by HAVE YOU SEEN HOW COOL THIS SCENE IS YET. While totally skipping out on everything that makes a movie actually good, like direction and internal logic. He is little better than Michael Bay. Well actually he is worse as Transformers was actually watchable.

I can understand stories not making any sense and even like them if everything else is perfect. Like for example BSG's series finale made no sense but I still enjoyed it for being a character story and the music and the performances. But there is nothing outstanding in Abram's stuff to make up for the glaring deficiencies.
I personally think that's an overstatement, but there is some truth to it, certainly. I remember my brother saying much the same thing after seeing the film.

I just find enough merit in other aspects of the film that I'm willing to overlook/put in the effort to justify the plot holes. I admit that I'm in a rather odd position here, because I'm usually the guy emphasizing the importance of the script and continuity, but film is also a visual medium, and part of the script is also the characterization, and I think TFA scores considerably higher by both those standards, as discussed above.
Adam Reynolds wrote:
2017-09-13 03:29pm
I don't think most of the people who are complaining about The Force Awakens are the same one who previously complained about the prequels. In fact it is mostly the opposite. Most of those who complained strongly about one sort of like the other. Not everyone hates the prequels, and you'll likely find that the harshest critics of The Force Awakens at least sort of liked them.
Interesting. I suppose that makes some sense.
Personally I would say they are bad in almost exactly opposite ways. The prequels are bad in the sense that they have less effective known characters and were hampered by being prequels. The Force Awakens is bad in the sense that it had extremely lousy worldbuilding and much less depth. The thing that makes a lot of people like the sequels better is the characters, which are what people get subjectively attached to in stories and cause them to overlook just about any other flaws. Good characters in Star Wars and most people are sold without anything else. TFA also had enough momentum that you could easily overlook the flaws if you aren't paying enough attention to such things, which is why casual audiences mostly liked it.
That sounds about right, albeit only part of the picture. Though I personally enjoy both the PT and TFA, even though I would not consider either to be truly brilliant films on the level of the OT.
The problem with Starkiller Base is a storytelling one. The plot of ANH is about the Death Star, with R2 getting the plans and with them mentioned in the opening crawl. By contrast the thing mentioned in TFA was the map to Luke in the same context as the Death Star plans. Starkiller Base just appeared suddenly, and also served to undercut the main drama of finding the map to Luke. The Luke plot was solved by a literal dues ex machina, while the Starkiller Base plot was solved by utterly no planning whatsoever. Blowing up both Death Stars required the Rebel Alliance undergo costly covert operations to discover their presence and their weaknesses. Starkiller Base on the other hand was destroyed by an entirely improvised plan by Han and Finn.
I don't mind how Starkiller Base was destroyed, particularly. We do see the Resistance (I actually typed "Rebels" before correcting myself :) ) discussing it, and there's a mention of them sending a scout out to it I believe (which is probably where they get the map/image of it from). So they're aware of it and its location, and already taking steps against it. Having Finn devise the plan itself based on inside knowledge is fine. It gives another way to tie Finn's backstory into the plot and make it useful, and it continues Finn's transition from a man running away from the First Order to one willing to take a proactive role to challenge it out of devotion to Rey. And it moves the overall plot towards the final confrontation along.

The plan also gives Han a last chance to show off his flying skills in a new and interesting way, so that's good. :)

The resolution of the star map plot, however, was very clumsily-done, yes. I'd consider that probably the worst plot issue in the film (their are three big ones for me: the map resolution, the clumsy Force vision-induced exposition and development in Maz's castle, and the fact that we will now presumably never get a Han/Leia/Luke reunion, though that last is less a hole and more just something that irks me as a fan).
I don't see why the final battle couldn't just have been a jailbreak for Rey in which the heroes steal the First Order half of the map, keeping all of the other plot points. It really would have lifted the movie for me.
It could have been, but let's be honest: this is a big Hollywood action film, and a Star Wars film at that. Of course there was going to be a star fighter battle. At the very least, you'd have had to have Poe and company providing cover/a distraction for the rescue mission, and without giving them a bigger military target than rescuing one woman, it might be hard to justify the Resistance going for that.

But yeah, having the final piece of the star map be recovered aboard Starkiller Base would have been a good call.
"Well, Grant, we've had the devil's own day, haven't we?"

"Yes. Lick 'em tomorrow though."

-Generals William T. Sherman and Ulysses S Grant, the Battle of Shiloh.


"You need to believe in things that aren't true. How else can they become?"-Terry Pratchett's DEATH.


I am a dual citizen of the United States and Canada.


Fuck Civility.

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 15416
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Colin Trevorrow Out as 'Star Wars: Episode IX' Director

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2017-09-13 04:53pm

eMeM wrote:
2017-09-13 05:02am
Q99 wrote:
2017-09-12 04:34pm
I do think it helps that the SW group will, if necessary, do re-writers/additional shoots to polish things off if his thing is *almost* there.
Considering that he brought Bad Robot for TFA to get more control, and that he gave zero fucks about the Story Group (for example they've learned that he has changed the opening crawl... when they saw it in the theatre)... yeah, I doubt it.

Which means that maybe there is still hope that he will be fired?

About Abrams and his "brilliant" set ups, the mystery box:

From what Rian Johnson said, Abrams' mystery box was empty. He never thought about Rey's parents, Snoke, and all the rest, just that it would be cool to make it a mystery and maybe the future writers will tie it up somehow. Great for the creative freedom of future writers and directors, absolutely terrible if you want to set up a coherent trillogy.

That's why you see RJ and Hidalgo going on and on on social media how it's not really that important to know Rey's parents and that there is nothing wrong with Snoke being a new character.
There IS nothing wrong with Snoke being a new character. In fact, I'd say that I'd likely be pissed off is Snoke was an old character. There's no reason for him to be, no indication that he is, and as far as I can tell, the "Snoke is Plagieus" crap and so forth is just the usual fan insistence on trying to tie everything together, make everything reference everything, because God forbid they ever do anything original. Its the worst kind of fanfic-ism (well, the worst kind that doesn't involve creepy shipping of fetishes).
"Well, Grant, we've had the devil's own day, haven't we?"

"Yes. Lick 'em tomorrow though."

-Generals William T. Sherman and Ulysses S Grant, the Battle of Shiloh.


"You need to believe in things that aren't true. How else can they become?"-Terry Pratchett's DEATH.


I am a dual citizen of the United States and Canada.


Fuck Civility.

User avatar
Crazedwraith
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 10527
Joined: 2003-04-10 03:45pm
Location: Cheshire, England

Re: Colin Trevorrow Out as 'Star Wars: Episode IX' Director

Post by Crazedwraith » 2017-09-13 05:01pm

The Romulan Republic wrote:
2017-09-13 04:53pm
eMeM wrote:
2017-09-13 05:02am
Q99 wrote:
2017-09-12 04:34pm
I do think it helps that the SW group will, if necessary, do re-writers/additional shoots to polish things off if his thing is *almost* there.
Considering that he brought Bad Robot for TFA to get more control, and that he gave zero fucks about the Story Group (for example they've learned that he has changed the opening crawl... when they saw it in the theatre)... yeah, I doubt it.

Which means that maybe there is still hope that he will be fired?

About Abrams and his "brilliant" set ups, the mystery box:

From what Rian Johnson said, Abrams' mystery box was empty. He never thought about Rey's parents, Snoke, and all the rest, just that it would be cool to make it a mystery and maybe the future writers will tie it up somehow. Great for the creative freedom of future writers and directors, absolutely terrible if you want to set up a coherent trillogy.

That's why you see RJ and Hidalgo going on and on on social media how it's not really that important to know Rey's parents and that there is nothing wrong with Snoke being a new character.
There IS nothing wrong with Snoke being a new character. In fact, I'd say that I'd likely be pissed off is Snoke was an old character. There's no reason for him to be, no indication that he is, and as far as I can tell, the "Snoke is Plagieus" crap and so forth is just the usual fan insistence on trying to tie everything together, make everything reference everything, because God forbid they ever do anything original. Its the worst kind of fanfic-ism (well, the worst kind that doesn't involve creepy shipping of fetishes).
Let's not kink shame now. :lol:

I agree to a certain extent. It doesn't matter how Snoke is so long as his backstory makes sense for his position. (That he could plausible rise to the head of the First Order) I don't recall TFA hinting at a secret identity or a mystery there.

Rey's parents is more iffy. Because while I've also hoped that her parents are no-one in particular. At the very least what happened to them that led them to abandon her on Jakku and what happened to them afterward is a big deal in TFA and part of her character. If Abrams set that up and had no resolution in mind to at least suggest to his successors, well that's what in bird culture is called a 'dick move'.
To the brave passengers and crew of the Kobayashi Maru... sucks to be you - Peter David

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 15416
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Colin Trevorrow replaced with Abrams as 'Star Wars: Episode IX' Director

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2017-09-13 05:05pm

I still maintain that Rey being Luke's daughter is the most obvious move, and heavily implied (weather or not Abrams intended it). They'd have to work hard, I suspect, to make me buy anything else.

I have grown increasingly fond of the "Rey is a successor to/reincarnation of Anakin" theory, but that doesn't necessarily say anything about her parentage.
"Well, Grant, we've had the devil's own day, haven't we?"

"Yes. Lick 'em tomorrow though."

-Generals William T. Sherman and Ulysses S Grant, the Battle of Shiloh.


"You need to believe in things that aren't true. How else can they become?"-Terry Pratchett's DEATH.


I am a dual citizen of the United States and Canada.


Fuck Civility.

User avatar
Crazedwraith
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 10527
Joined: 2003-04-10 03:45pm
Location: Cheshire, England

Re: Colin Trevorrow replaced with Abrams as 'Star Wars: Episode IX' Director

Post by Crazedwraith » 2017-09-13 05:17pm

The Romulan Republic wrote:
2017-09-13 05:05pm
I still maintain that Rey being Luke's daughter is the most obvious move, and heavily implied (weather or not Abrams intended it). They'd have to work hard, I suspect, to make me buy anything else.
It is an obvious move. Which is why I hope they don't do it. It's obvious and a crappy re-hash of the other suddenly revealed family connection moments.

Plus makes Luke look like dick.
To the brave passengers and crew of the Kobayashi Maru... sucks to be you - Peter David

User avatar
Galvatron
Decepticon Leader
Posts: 6063
Joined: 2002-07-12 12:27am
Location: Kill! Smash! Destroy! Rend! Mangle! Distort!

Re: Colin Trevorrow replaced with Abrams as 'Star Wars: Episode IX' Director

Post by Galvatron » 2017-09-13 05:59pm

Crazedwraith wrote:
2017-09-13 05:17pm
Plus makes Luke look like dick.
I speculated on this before...
Galvatron wrote:
2016-03-17 04:04pm
What if Kylo was ordered by Snoke to kill all of the Jedi, even the younglings, but he couldn't bring himself to murder his own little cousin?

He may have surmised that his only choice was to maroon her on some backwater and lie to Snoke. Little Rey, as a trusting young child and unaware of his fall to the dark side, may have even gone with her big cousin willingly and believed him when he said he would come back for her one day. He may have even used the Jedi mind trick to influence her against ever leaving Jakku.

Everyone else would believe she was dead so her entire family may have mourned her for years, but they accepted that Rey (if that's even her real name) was gone forever. This might be why Han and Leia didn't recognize her as Luke's daughter or tell her anything about her past.
If Luke thought she was dead, how is he a dick?

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 15416
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Colin Trevorrow replaced with Abrams as 'Star Wars: Episode IX' Director

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2017-09-13 06:00pm

Crazedwraith wrote:
2017-09-13 05:17pm
The Romulan Republic wrote:
2017-09-13 05:05pm
I still maintain that Rey being Luke's daughter is the most obvious move, and heavily implied (weather or not Abrams intended it). They'd have to work hard, I suspect, to make me buy anything else.
It is an obvious move. Which is why I hope they don't do it. It's obvious and a crappy re-hash of the other suddenly revealed family connection moments.
Except that it does make sense for Rey to be a Skywalker, since the main saga has always been the Skywalker story, and she has parallels to both Luke and, perhaps even more, Anakin. And its been so heavily implied that to not do it might come off as a clumsy attempt at a twist for the sake of a twist, and/or a bait-and-switch.
Plus makes Luke look like dick.
Depends on why he wasn't their. I've seen some theories that would explain this. One is that he thought she was dead. Another, which Galvatron just mentioned and that I am rather fond of, is that she was there as a small child when Kylo Ren massacred Luke's students, but he couldn't bring himself to kill her and instead left her on Jakku. It would tie in beautifully with his characterization as someone who basically wants to be but sucks at being evil, and would sort of explain why he flipped out when he was told that BB-8 was with a girl on Jakku, IIRC. It might also lend weight to his seemingly out-of-the-blue desire to train her during their duel, if she were family. Especially if he regrets killing his father on some level, and wants to reconnect with at least one part of his family.

Granted, that would also make the rape threat undertones of his interrogation of her even creepier.
"Well, Grant, we've had the devil's own day, haven't we?"

"Yes. Lick 'em tomorrow though."

-Generals William T. Sherman and Ulysses S Grant, the Battle of Shiloh.


"You need to believe in things that aren't true. How else can they become?"-Terry Pratchett's DEATH.


I am a dual citizen of the United States and Canada.


Fuck Civility.

User avatar
Crazedwraith
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 10527
Joined: 2003-04-10 03:45pm
Location: Cheshire, England

Re: Colin Trevorrow replaced with Abrams as 'Star Wars: Episode IX' Director

Post by Crazedwraith » 2017-09-13 06:04pm

:roll: Yes, fine. It has the potential to have him be a dick if not carefully handled and even then would still be a shitty retread of previous familial reveals.

Happy?
To the brave passengers and crew of the Kobayashi Maru... sucks to be you - Peter David

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 15416
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Colin Trevorrow replaced with Abrams as 'Star Wars: Episode IX' Director

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2017-09-13 06:09pm

Crazedwraith wrote:
2017-09-13 06:04pm
:roll: Yes, fine. It has the potential to have him be a dick if not carefully handled and even then would still be a shitty retread of previous familial reveals.

Happy?
Referencing a familiar theme in order to reinforce it or for it to resonate is not necessarily a bad idea if done well. Some works have even deliberately used a cyclical concept of history. Albeit the Sequel Trilogy doesn't really need more OT parallels at this point.

If its done just to "surprise" the audience, then yeah, its idiotic.

The problem is, as I've said, I think they've already set it up so that its hard to see it being anything else. Frankly, I wonder if they should have just come out and said "She's Luke's daughter" in TFA, rather than drawing it out.

Edit: I'll add that Galvatron's theory does indeed work especially well for Kylo, because of how it parallels Vader, who Kylo idolizes and seeks to emulate. Vader's fall was marked by his willful murder of younglings. If Kylo couldn't do it, it reinforces his ultimate failure as Vader's successor.
"Well, Grant, we've had the devil's own day, haven't we?"

"Yes. Lick 'em tomorrow though."

-Generals William T. Sherman and Ulysses S Grant, the Battle of Shiloh.


"You need to believe in things that aren't true. How else can they become?"-Terry Pratchett's DEATH.


I am a dual citizen of the United States and Canada.


Fuck Civility.

User avatar
Crazedwraith
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 10527
Joined: 2003-04-10 03:45pm
Location: Cheshire, England

Re: Colin Trevorrow replaced with Abrams as 'Star Wars: Episode IX' Director

Post by Crazedwraith » 2017-09-13 06:13pm

I'm not going to be surprised if either the Luke's her dad or the chosen one avatar cycle theories turn out to be correct. (There is that foreshadowing that implies Ren knows her, or force intuition is at work.)

I just probably won't like it.
To the brave passengers and crew of the Kobayashi Maru... sucks to be you - Peter David

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 15416
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Colin Trevorrow replaced with Abrams as 'Star Wars: Episode IX' Director

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2017-09-13 06:16pm

Fair enough. I think it could work, personally, but it hasn't been handled as well as it might have been, regardless of what the revelation ultimate is.
"Well, Grant, we've had the devil's own day, haven't we?"

"Yes. Lick 'em tomorrow though."

-Generals William T. Sherman and Ulysses S Grant, the Battle of Shiloh.


"You need to believe in things that aren't true. How else can they become?"-Terry Pratchett's DEATH.


I am a dual citizen of the United States and Canada.


Fuck Civility.

User avatar
Galvatron
Decepticon Leader
Posts: 6063
Joined: 2002-07-12 12:27am
Location: Kill! Smash! Destroy! Rend! Mangle! Distort!

Re: Colin Trevorrow replaced with Abrams as 'Star Wars: Episode IX' Director

Post by Galvatron » 2017-09-13 06:25pm

It's like poetry. It rhymes.

Adam Reynolds
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2214
Joined: 2004-03-27 04:51am

Re: Colin Trevorrow replaced with Abrams as 'Star Wars: Episode IX' Director

Post by Adam Reynolds » 2017-09-14 07:31am

Personally I had also believed largely the same thing as Galvetron's theory, but it has changed of late. Unless the new EU is completely irrelevant, that theory can't possibly be true. The novel Bloodline indicates that Ben Solo and Luke were off on some Jedi adventure after Rey was dumped on Jakku, which means Ben can't have fallen yet in order to dump her there.

At this point my belief is that she is exactly what she said in the beginning. She really is no one. She could go through The Last Jedi with the increasing belief that she is Luke's daughter, even taking on the name Skywalker and finding evidence it is true, only to find out the sad truth that she is not, and that her true family really was no one of importance and dumped her for no good reason. That would be a far worse realization for her even than finding that she was Luke's daughter. It could also produce a nice character moment in which she takes on the chosen identity regardless of who she had been, keeping the name Skywalker and claiming the mantle of heir to the Jedi. That could also go the wrong way, in which people feel like it makes her is a fraud, but she is currently well liked enough that is less likely.

Though this does leave a few unanswered questions, there are possible answers as well. Rey's abilities could simply be a product of the Force awakening and Jakku itself, which was also the reason that Lorr Son Tekka was there as well. It also helps that she had a stronger idea of what Jedi abilities where than Luke did, and tried the things she had heard about in stories. The lightsaber choosing her is a bit odd in this case, but that might just be the idea that it is her destiny to be the one who brings Luke back. Honestly given all of the other contrivances in the movie, that is probably enough.

Kylo Ren also knew who she was, but that could easily be the product of a Force vision, in which he saw a mystery girl in the Millennium Falcon with Han. His anger was about a girl from Jakku in a YT-1300 freighter, not that it was just a girl from Jakku.

Another amusing theory is that she is a wound in the Force, in the same manner as the Jedi Exile(KOTOR 2), but I really doubt that one. KOTOR 2 was a deconstruction of the RPG hero and the binary nature of The Force itself. I really doubt they are going in that direction again, especially for the mainstream films. This movie might take a bit of a chance, but I seriously doubt it would go that far.

Post Reply