Kathleen Kennedy's management of the franchise

PSW: discuss Star Wars without "versus" arguments.

Moderator: Vympel

User avatar
Solauren
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 8576
Joined: 2003-05-11 09:41pm

Re: Kathleen Kennedy's management of the franchise

Post by Solauren » 2019-12-30 10:09pm

Personally, I'd like to see the old EU (post Yavin) handed over to a single person, and turned into an extended television series.

Yeah, they'd have to recast alot of roles, but I think it would be worth it.

Also, Billie Lourd could easily pull off Princess Leia.
\

User avatar
Elfdart
The Anti-Shep
Posts: 10437
Joined: 2004-04-28 11:32pm

Re: Kathleen Kennedy's management of the franchise

Post by Elfdart » 2019-12-31 12:16am

The real problem Kennedy has is the one I pointed out before Lucasfilm was sold: Filmmakers with real talent and creativity would rather create their own stories in their own settings where they either don't have to explain themselves to baying neckbeards, or they have enough clout to tell them to fuck off. So the franchise is going to be saddled with jobbers/fanboys because at this point, they're the only ones willing to take the job.
"One way we recognize a mass hysteria movement is that everyone who doesn’t believe is accused of being in on the plot. This has been going on virtually unrestrained in both political and media circles in recent weeks."

--Matt Taibbi

User avatar
Vympel
Spetsnaz
Spetsnaz
Posts: 29168
Joined: 2002-07-19 01:08am
Location: Sydney Australia

Re: Kathleen Kennedy's management of the franchise

Post by Vympel » 2019-12-31 04:49am

Elfdart wrote:
2019-12-30 06:35pm
Marvel stepped into the void and took over. Star Wars is just another label now.
Star Wars hasn't been what Marvel was since the OT, if there ever was an equivalent to Marvel's suffocating all-presence before now. After TPM came out the prequels spent the rest of their time getting their pop-culture lunch eaten by Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter. It's been Just a Big Franchise for 20 years now.
Like Legend of Galactic Heroes? Please contribute to http://gineipaedia.com/

User avatar
Vendetta
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 10834
Joined: 2002-07-07 04:57pm
Location: Sheffield, UK

Re: Kathleen Kennedy's management of the franchise

Post by Vendetta » 2019-12-31 06:07am

Elfdart wrote:
2019-12-30 06:35pm
It's also an admission of sorts that try as they might, the jobbers working on Disney Star Wars just don't know how to create interesting characters (especially not the villains), nor do they know how to construct a story or keep continuity with the established setting. Abrams had to make the good guys unbelievably retarded in TFA so they could be wiped out in one shot because he couldn't tell a story in a restored republic trying to fight a fascist insurgency if his life depended on it. I don't know what the fuck Johnson was trying to accomplish, unless he wants to be Richard Lester and spoof the series from within, like the Musketeer movies or Robin and Marian -in which case he really dropped the ball because a spoof should be at least kinda funny.
I think the core underlying problem is being too reactionary.

The guiding ethos of planning and writing TFA was "Be like the OT because people hated the PT". And JJ decided that the way to do that was to make exactly Star Wars but bigger and faster all the time.

That's why the republic had to go, because the point was to be as much like the OT as possible and the OT was about rebels vs. empire.

Within that framework the characters they made were interesting, a deserting stormtrooper who learns to accept the ideals of the rebellion, a hotshot pilot, and a backwater scavenger desperately looking for a place to belong. Those are all good archetypes for a Star Wars piece.

But it was a bad framework for a Star Wars sequel because it undoes the previous story.

I think Johnson did the best he could with the situation JJ left him in. He made a film where all the characters had arcs and learned and developed as characters (in ways they really don't in TFA). People didn't like it because for a character to learn and develop they have to start out with flaws so they can grow past them and they're too used to putting their Star Wars heroes on pedestals and ignoring flaws in them (especially Luke who never learns to master his fear during the OT, he's still acting on it right at the end). And he did it whilst making some super brave choices not only with the universe (making the rebels actually lose on screen so they can be at their lowest point going into the finale, and getting rid of all of JJ's stupid empty mystery boxes), but with the medium itself (the hyperspace ram scene was one of the boldest scenes in a blockbuster movie, several seconds of absolute silence to let the image of what had happened stand truly alone, nobody does that shit, but it made people pay attention.)

And then when the internet cried about being made to experience real narrative in their Star Wars film, JJ did the same thing he did with TFA, and just made something as slavishly close to the OT as he could as a reactionary response.

User avatar
Vympel
Spetsnaz
Spetsnaz
Posts: 29168
Joined: 2002-07-19 01:08am
Location: Sydney Australia

Re: Kathleen Kennedy's management of the franchise

Post by Vympel » 2019-12-31 06:52am

Vendetta wrote:
2019-12-31 06:07am
I think Johnson did the best he could with the situation JJ left him in. He made a film where all the characters had arcs and learned and developed as characters (in ways they really don't in TFA). People didn't like it because for a character to learn and develop they have to start out with flaws so they can grow past them and they're too used to putting their Star Wars heroes on pedestals and ignoring flaws in them (especially Luke who never learns to master his fear during the OT, he's still acting on it right at the end). And he did it whilst making some super brave choices not only with the universe (making the rebels actually lose on screen so they can be at their lowest point going into the finale, and getting rid of all of JJ's stupid empty mystery boxes), but with the medium itself (the hyperspace ram scene was one of the boldest scenes in a blockbuster movie, several seconds of absolute silence to let the image of what had happened stand truly alone, nobody does that shit, but it made people pay attention.)

And then when the internet cried about being made to experience real narrative in their Star Wars film, JJ did the same thing he did with TFA, and just made something as slavishly close to the OT as he could as a reactionary response.
Yeah, this. Remember that story Mark Hamill related about how he told Johnson that they had to "give the fans what they wanted" because they wouldn't be happy with Luke in the film (because he doesn't Force lift AT-ATs or some stupid Force power Marvel movie fantasy rubbish that some fans have been whining about non-stop for two years), and Johnson just said "no, we have to do what we want"? No matter how much Hamill complained, Johnson got one of the best performances of Hamill's career out of him. Then Abrams comes back and has to actually tackle Luke again once all the hard stuff has already been done by Johnson, and we get this lightweight weird "The Dude" Lebowski performance in a bad wig where he might as well be winking at the screen.

I mean Christ, look at this compared to this.
Like Legend of Galactic Heroes? Please contribute to http://gineipaedia.com/

User avatar
Darth Yan
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2138
Joined: 2008-12-29 02:09pm
Location: California

Re: Kathleen Kennedy's management of the franchise

Post by Darth Yan » 2019-12-31 01:09pm

Vendetta wrote:
2019-12-31 06:07am
Elfdart wrote:
2019-12-30 06:35pm
It's also an admission of sorts that try as they might, the jobbers working on Disney Star Wars just don't know how to create interesting characters (especially not the villains), nor do they know how to construct a story or keep continuity with the established setting. Abrams had to make the good guys unbelievably retarded in TFA so they could be wiped out in one shot because he couldn't tell a story in a restored republic trying to fight a fascist insurgency if his life depended on it. I don't know what the fuck Johnson was trying to accomplish, unless he wants to be Richard Lester and spoof the series from within, like the Musketeer movies or Robin and Marian -in which case he really dropped the ball because a spoof should be at least kinda funny.
I think the core underlying problem is being too reactionary.

The guiding ethos of planning and writing TFA was "Be like the OT because people hated the PT". And JJ decided that the way to do that was to make exactly Star Wars but bigger and faster all the time.

That's why the republic had to go, because the point was to be as much like the OT as possible and the OT was about rebels vs. empire.

Within that framework the characters they made were interesting, a deserting stormtrooper who learns to accept the ideals of the rebellion, a hotshot pilot, and a backwater scavenger desperately looking for a place to belong. Those are all good archetypes for a Star Wars piece.

But it was a bad framework for a Star Wars sequel because it undoes the previous story.

I think Johnson did the best he could with the situation JJ left him in. He made a film where all the characters had arcs and learned and developed as characters (in ways they really don't in TFA). People didn't like it because for a character to learn and develop they have to start out with flaws so they can grow past them and they're too used to putting their Star Wars heroes on pedestals and ignoring flaws in them (especially Luke who never learns to master his fear during the OT, he's still acting on it right at the end). And he did it whilst making some super brave choices not only with the universe (making the rebels actually lose on screen so they can be at their lowest point going into the finale, and getting rid of all of JJ's stupid empty mystery boxes), but with the medium itself (the hyperspace ram scene was one of the boldest scenes in a blockbuster movie, several seconds of absolute silence to let the image of what had happened stand truly alone, nobody does that shit, but it made people pay attention.)

And then when the internet cried about being made to experience real narrative in their Star Wars film, JJ did the same thing he did with TFA, and just made something as slavishly close to the OT as he could as a reactionary response.
The rebels lost on screen in empire. Luke gets brutalized and the only victory the rebels have is their lives. Thing is at the end of last Jedi they’re so beaten I can’t buy them being a threat to the first order. Luke was also a little too broken as well.

There’s a character in Knightfall called Tallus, played by Mark Hamill. He’s a surly somewhat salty character but he’s still a badass and he also does care as well. If Luke has been more like Tallus (still salty and somewhat surly but less broken) I think people would have been less bothered.

Ironically in some ways last Jedi also followed the same bears as the original. As one (conservative but in this case not bitching about sjws or that nonsense) Kylo turning in Snoke is clearly Vader turning on Sidious. Yoda’s force ghost was also fan service.

I get trying to be subversive but TLJ did not work on that score. It was too hopeless and bleak

User avatar
Galvatron
Decepticon Leader
Posts: 6384
Joined: 2002-07-12 12:27am
Location: Kill! Smash! Destroy! Rend! Mangle! Distort!

Re: Kathleen Kennedy's management of the franchise

Post by Galvatron » 2019-12-31 04:31pm

It still remains to be seen what sort of drama went down between Luke and Snoke before the events in the flashbacks from TLJ happened. He may have been in a heightened state of anxiety over the discovery that a powerful dark side user was trying to corrupt his nephew after so many years of relative peace.

Apparently he and Ben also had at least one run-in with the Knights of Ren, which may have added even more fuel to that fire. Unfortunately, the ST completely neglected to expound on any of that (but now there's a comic that's finally doing so).

However, it's now apparent that Luke's anger and impulsivity were character flaws that he always struggled with and never truly overcame. Which is okay. We all have them. It's why I never objected to his depiction in TLJ. In fact, it rang truer to me than the implacable serenity that so many of the old EU writers conferred upon him.

User avatar
Mange
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4158
Joined: 2004-03-26 01:31pm
Location: Somewhere in the GFFA

Re: Kathleen Kennedy's management of the franchise

Post by Mange » 2020-01-01 04:58am

Galvatron wrote:
2019-12-31 04:31pm
It still remains to be seen what sort of drama went down between Luke and Snoke before the events in the flashbacks from TLJ happened. He may have been in a heightened state of anxiety over the discovery that a powerful dark side user was trying to corrupt his nephew after so many years of relative peace.

Apparently he and Ben also had at least one run-in with the Knights of Ren, which may have added even more fuel to that fire. Unfortunately, the ST completely neglected to expound on any of that (but now there's a comic that's finally doing so).

However, it's now apparent that Luke's anger and impulsivity were character flaws that he always struggled with and never truly overcame. Which is okay. We all have them. It's why I never objected to his depiction in TLJ. In fact, it rang truer to me than the implacable serenity that so many of the old EU writers conferred upon him.
"Rang truer"? This coming from someone not being a fan of the Luke Skywalker character... Being hesitant to train Rey is one thing, but to turn his back to his family and friends when they are in a desperate situation? No, I don't think so. Luke has already had an arc and if they wanted to build on it, fine, but that wasn't Luke Skywalker in TLJ. I agree with Hamill, it's Jake Skywalker.

User avatar
Vendetta
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 10834
Joined: 2002-07-07 04:57pm
Location: Sheffield, UK

Re: Kathleen Kennedy's management of the franchise

Post by Vendetta » 2020-01-01 06:11am

Mange wrote:
2020-01-01 04:58am
Galvatron wrote:
2019-12-31 04:31pm
It still remains to be seen what sort of drama went down between Luke and Snoke before the events in the flashbacks from TLJ happened. He may have been in a heightened state of anxiety over the discovery that a powerful dark side user was trying to corrupt his nephew after so many years of relative peace.

Apparently he and Ben also had at least one run-in with the Knights of Ren, which may have added even more fuel to that fire. Unfortunately, the ST completely neglected to expound on any of that (but now there's a comic that's finally doing so).

However, it's now apparent that Luke's anger and impulsivity were character flaws that he always struggled with and never truly overcame. Which is okay. We all have them. It's why I never objected to his depiction in TLJ. In fact, it rang truer to me than the implacable serenity that so many of the old EU writers conferred upon him.
"Rang truer"? This coming from someone not being a fan of the Luke Skywalker character... Being hesitant to train Rey is one thing, but to turn his back to his family and friends when they are in a desperate situation? No, I don't think so. Luke has already had an arc and if they wanted to build on it, fine, but that wasn't Luke Skywalker in TLJ. I agree with Hamill, it's Jake Skywalker.
But that was what The Force Awakens decided he had done.

The Last Jedi had to answer why, and him doing a Yoda and hiding after something got fucked up is pretty much the only non-stupid answer.

User avatar
Darth Yan
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2138
Joined: 2008-12-29 02:09pm
Location: California

Re: Kathleen Kennedy's management of the franchise

Post by Darth Yan » 2020-01-01 06:21am

True. They needed a better plan from the beginning.

User avatar
ray245
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7753
Joined: 2005-06-10 11:30pm

Re: Kathleen Kennedy's management of the franchise

Post by ray245 » 2020-01-01 07:36am

Vendetta wrote:
2020-01-01 06:11am
Mange wrote:
2020-01-01 04:58am
Galvatron wrote:
2019-12-31 04:31pm
It still remains to be seen what sort of drama went down between Luke and Snoke before the events in the flashbacks from TLJ happened. He may have been in a heightened state of anxiety over the discovery that a powerful dark side user was trying to corrupt his nephew after so many years of relative peace.

Apparently he and Ben also had at least one run-in with the Knights of Ren, which may have added even more fuel to that fire. Unfortunately, the ST completely neglected to expound on any of that (but now there's a comic that's finally doing so).

However, it's now apparent that Luke's anger and impulsivity were character flaws that he always struggled with and never truly overcame. Which is okay. We all have them. It's why I never objected to his depiction in TLJ. In fact, it rang truer to me than the implacable serenity that so many of the old EU writers conferred upon him.
"Rang truer"? This coming from someone not being a fan of the Luke Skywalker character... Being hesitant to train Rey is one thing, but to turn his back to his family and friends when they are in a desperate situation? No, I don't think so. Luke has already had an arc and if they wanted to build on it, fine, but that wasn't Luke Skywalker in TLJ. I agree with Hamill, it's Jake Skywalker.
But that was what The Force Awakens decided he had done.

The Last Jedi had to answer why, and him doing a Yoda and hiding after something got fucked up is pretty much the only non-stupid answer.
I am willing to bet they didn't consider the consequences of making Luke a big Macguffin for Ep 7.
Humans are such funny creatures. We are selfish about selflessness, yet we can love something so much that we can hate something.

User avatar
Vympel
Spetsnaz
Spetsnaz
Posts: 29168
Joined: 2002-07-19 01:08am
Location: Sydney Australia

Re: Kathleen Kennedy's management of the franchise

Post by Vympel » 2020-01-01 07:43am

Mange wrote:
2020-01-01 04:58am
"Rang truer"? This coming from someone not being a fan of the Luke Skywalker character... Being hesitant to train Rey is one thing, but to turn his back to his family and friends when they are in a desperate situation? No, I don't think so. Luke has already had an arc and if they wanted to build on it, fine, but that wasn't Luke Skywalker in TLJ. I agree with Hamill, it's Jake Skywalker.
Mark Hamill isn't a writer. He's an actor. His opinions on a character he last played quite literally over three decades ago are not at all helpful to who the character could actually be three decades later.

Like honestly, what was going to happen in TLJ, based on what we know of TFA? Han was wrong? He didn't walk away from it all because a young apprentice destroyed his temple? Was he off on some top secret mission which he never bothered to tell anyone about so Leia had to kick off a goddamn galaxy wide manhunt (that got a village wiped out and could've gotten Luke killed) for a map to a temple based on nothing but rumours about where he went?

This is all in TFA, not TLJ. If they wanted to not have Luke be going through some serious personal shit, then they should've considered what TFA actually showed.
Like Legend of Galactic Heroes? Please contribute to http://gineipaedia.com/

User avatar
Mange
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4158
Joined: 2004-03-26 01:31pm
Location: Somewhere in the GFFA

Re: Kathleen Kennedy's management of the franchise

Post by Mange » 2020-01-01 08:15am

Vendetta wrote:
2020-01-01 06:11am
Mange wrote:
2020-01-01 04:58am
Galvatron wrote:
2019-12-31 04:31pm
It still remains to be seen what sort of drama went down between Luke and Snoke before the events in the flashbacks from TLJ happened. He may have been in a heightened state of anxiety over the discovery that a powerful dark side user was trying to corrupt his nephew after so many years of relative peace.

Apparently he and Ben also had at least one run-in with the Knights of Ren, which may have added even more fuel to that fire. Unfortunately, the ST completely neglected to expound on any of that (but now there's a comic that's finally doing so).

However, it's now apparent that Luke's anger and impulsivity were character flaws that he always struggled with and never truly overcame. Which is okay. We all have them. It's why I never objected to his depiction in TLJ. In fact, it rang truer to me than the implacable serenity that so many of the old EU writers conferred upon him.
"Rang truer"? This coming from someone not being a fan of the Luke Skywalker character... Being hesitant to train Rey is one thing, but to turn his back to his family and friends when they are in a desperate situation? No, I don't think so. Luke has already had an arc and if they wanted to build on it, fine, but that wasn't Luke Skywalker in TLJ. I agree with Hamill, it's Jake Skywalker.
But that was what The Force Awakens decided he had done.

The Last Jedi had to answer why, and him doing a Yoda and hiding after something got fucked up is pretty much the only non-stupid answer.
No, it doesn't answer that. Very little is said and what was said was by Han Solo: "He was training a new generation of Jedi. One boy, an apprentice, turned against him, destroyed it all. Luke felt responsible. He just walked away from everything."

TLJ showed us an insanely bad characterization of Luke Skywalker who considered murdering his nephew, who he had known since the boy's childhood, in cold blood based on visions of the future. A man who saw the good in Darth Vader and who had been taught at a cost that "always in motion the future is".

To go from there to turning his back to Leia's plight, Han's death and to the galaxy as a whole for a mess he was responsible for, is bullshit. If anything, the implication from TFA is clear: Luke went into isolation until needed. That's the simple reason as to why Lor San Tekka gave the Resistance the map which was the reason for the map's (stupid concept as it is) existence in the first place! Rian Johnson ignored the most important MacGuffin of TFA and the quest for it completely by having Luke saying: "What did you think was going to happen here? Do you think that I came
to the most unfindable place in the galaxy for no reason at all?"

Rian Johnson has Luke repeating the same two major mistakes he did in the OT. Johnson has no understanding of the character and if he wanted to "subvert expectations" then he should've done it in his own SW movies with his own characters. However, the blame is mostly on Kennedy who gave Johnson free reigns to write the most boring plot of a Star Wars movie and without the movie really setting anything up, knowing he wouldn't do Episode IX.

Vympel, the TFA MacGuffin (the map) was important enough. Remember that this is a trilogy and with TLJ starting off immediately after TFA. In any case, your other argumentation falls flat. Yes, he went through some shit. But to go from there to what I write about above? No, extremely bad characterization and regression of the character.

Also, yes there were rumors about WHAT he went searching for, but there was A MAP leading to him, yet he claimed it was "unfindable". A map it is implied he left.

And on a sidenote, the destruction of the Jedi academy has now been retconned:
Spoiler
According to the new Rise of Kylo Ren comic, Ben didn't destroy the Jedi academy, didn't murder the other students and no students went with him to become the Knights of Ren.

User avatar
Vympel
Spetsnaz
Spetsnaz
Posts: 29168
Joined: 2002-07-19 01:08am
Location: Sydney Australia

Re: Kathleen Kennedy's management of the franchise

Post by Vympel » 2020-01-01 08:36am

Mange wrote:
2020-01-01 08:15am
No, it doesn't answer that. Very little is said and what was said was by Han Solo: "He was training a new generation of Jedi. One boy, an apprentice, turned against him, destroyed it all. Luke felt responsible. He just walked away from everything."
That's literally all we needed to know.
TLJ showed us an insanely bad characterization of Luke Skywalker who considered murdering his nephew, who he had known since the boy's childhood, in cold blood based on visions of the future. A man who saw the good in Darth Vader and who had been taught at a cost that "always in motion the future is".
Luke flipped out and almost killed Vader at the mere taunt that Leia would turn to the dark side. Instinctively turning on his lightsaber and then immediately dismissing the idea isn't some unforgiveable assassination of the character.
To go from there to turning his back to Leia's plight, Han's death and to the galaxy as a whole for a mess he was responsible for, is bullshit. If anything, the implication from TFA is clear: Luke went into isolation until needed. That's the simple reason as to why Lor San Tekka gave the Resistance the map which was the reason for the map's (stupid concept as it is) existence in the first place! Rian Johnson ignored the most important MacGuffin of TFA and the quest for it completely by having Luke saying: "What did you think was going to happen here? Do you think that I came
to the most unfindable place in the galaxy for no reason at all?"
I'm sorry, but that's the most ridiculous storytelling device I've ever heard. "went into isolation until needed". What does that mean? What good is he doing the galaxy hiding? Why is it only after Han has been killed, and Hosnian Prime has been destroyed, that he is "needed"?

This idea turns Luke from a human in pain into a gigantic jackass. He's not in trauma, he's some mysterious inscrutable asshole with bizarre, Byzantine plans no one understands and which he couldn't possibly justify!

None of your story idea makes any sense at all. Rian Johnson didn't ignore the MacGuffin - you misunderstood it. It's a map to where Luke is rumored to have gone - the first Jedi temple. The idea that Luke left it behind to be found is nowhere in the actual film. Why would anyone do that? To kick off an intergalactic easter egg hunt that the Resistance could lose, which would lead the First Order to come to Ach'To and kill him?

It's complete rubbish from beginning to end, I'm sorry to say.
Rian Johnson has Luke repeating the same two major mistakes he did in the OT. Johnson has no understanding of the character and if he wanted to "subvert expectations" then he should've done it in his own SW movies with his own characters. However, the blame is mostly on Kennedy who gave Johnson free reigns to write the most boring plot of a Star Wars movie and without the movie really setting anything up, knowing he wouldn't do Episode IX.
No, Johnson understands the character just fine. He simply disagrees with the idea that Luke overcoming issues in OT means those issues have been solved for all time. As he said recently:
“I understand that point of view but I completely disagree with it,” Johnson wrote in a tweet that went out to his 976,000 followers. “In fact I think it disrespects the character of Luke by treating him not as a true mythic hero overcoming recurring wounds & flaws, but as a video game character who has achieved a binary, permanent power-up.”
Vympel, the TFA MacGuffin (the map) was important enough. Remember that this is a trilogy and with TLJ starting off immediately after TFA. In any case, your other argumentation falls flat. Yes, he went through some shit. But to go from there to what I write about above? No, extremely bad characterization and regression of the character.

Also, yes there were rumors about WHAT he went searching for, but there was A MAP leading to him, yet he claimed it was "unfindable". A map it is implied he left.
As above, it is not implied he left it. No one ever says this. It's a nonsense, made-up fan belief that doesn't stand up to any scrutiny when compared to the film's actual plot.

I mean honestly, there is no reason for Luke to do something like this. He could simply tell Leia that this was his intent! He could leave the map with her!

This sort of convoluted, unbelievable bullshit is not good storytelling. It's not even storytelling. It's just a bunch of plot, and a stupid plot at that? And for what? To preserve this shrine to Luke Skywalker? No thanks.
And on a sidenote, the destruction of the Jedi academy has now been retconned:
This is false, people aren't actually paying attention to the comic. It's strongly implied that the lightning blast which destroyed the temple and killed the students was caused by Ben, in his anger. Matt Martin of the Lucasfilm Story Group (noting always he's reluctant to speak in details since its only the first issue) has expressly denied that the comic is saying that he didn't destroy the academy.

Also, it was actually a fan misconception that the students went with him to become the Knigths of Ren. That they were pre-exisitng and Ben joined them was actually stated back in the Episode 7 VD. We just all kind of forgot/missed it. The comic seems to say that its the students who Luke thought he took with him apparently actually gave chase. They'll probably die by the end of the series.
Like Legend of Galactic Heroes? Please contribute to http://gineipaedia.com/

User avatar
Mange
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4158
Joined: 2004-03-26 01:31pm
Location: Somewhere in the GFFA

Re: Kathleen Kennedy's management of the franchise

Post by Mange » 2020-01-01 10:19am

Vympel wrote:
2020-01-01 08:36am
Mange wrote:
2020-01-01 08:15am
No, it doesn't answer that. Very little is said and what was said was by Han Solo: "He was training a new generation of Jedi. One boy, an apprentice, turned against him, destroyed it all. Luke felt responsible. He just walked away from everything."
That's literally all we needed to know.
TLJ showed us an insanely bad characterization of Luke Skywalker who considered murdering his nephew, who he had known since the boy's childhood, in cold blood based on visions of the future. A man who saw the good in Darth Vader and who had been taught at a cost that "always in motion the future is".
Luke flipped out and almost killed Vader at the mere taunt that Leia would turn to the dark side. Instinctively turning on his lightsaber and then immediately dismissing the idea isn't some unforgiveable assassination of the character.
Bullshit, it wasn't instinct. I forced myself to sit through the horrendously bad, boring and bland TLJ the other day and that scene was one of those I took especially note of. Luke didn't draw the sword from instinct. He drew the sword and actively considered murdering his nephew, which he had known since Ben's birth, in cold blood for many seconds based on a vision. I have already established the lessons learned by Luke in TESB. Visions is one thing, but Vader became even more of a direct threat to Leia once he learned Luke and Leia were siblings. Luke, even though the immense psychological pressure he was under, finally came through and threw away his lightsaber. Luke was under no such pressure here and Ben wasn't a direct threat. In fact, Johnson portrayed Luke Skywalker as a psychopath who considered murdering his nephew who, unlike Vader, hadn't done anything evil.
Vympel wrote:
Mange wrote:To go from there to turning his back to Leia's plight, Han's death and to the galaxy as a whole for a mess he was responsible for, is bullshit. If anything, the implication from TFA is clear: Luke went into isolation until needed. That's the simple reason as to why Lor San Tekka gave the Resistance the map which was the reason for the map's (stupid concept as it is) existence in the first place! Rian Johnson ignored the most important MacGuffin of TFA and the quest for it completely by having Luke saying: "What did you think was going to happen here? Do you think that I came
to the most unfindable place in the galaxy for no reason at all?"
I'm sorry, but that's the most ridiculous storytelling device I've ever heard. "went into isolation until needed". What does that mean? What good is he doing the galaxy hiding? Why is it only after Han has been killed, and Hosnian Prime has been destroyed, that he is "needed"?

This idea turns Luke from a human in pain into a gigantic jackass. He's not in trauma, he's some mysterious inscrutable asshole with bizarre, Byzantine plans no one understands and which he couldn't possibly justify!

None of your story idea makes any sense at all. Rian Johnson didn't ignore the MacGuffin - you misunderstood it. It's a map to where Luke is rumored to have gone - the first Jedi temple. The idea that Luke left it behind to be found is nowhere in the actual film. Why would anyone do that? To kick off an intergalactic easter egg hunt that the Resistance could lose, which would lead the First Order to come to Ach'To and kill him?

It's complete rubbish from beginning to end, I'm sorry to say.
Finally you get it: Luke, as portrayed by Johnson in TLJ, is a jackass, in pain or not. I'll leave it at that.

You are quite correct of course. It's a map to the first Jedi temple. However, it's referred to by Kylo and indirectly by Snoke as to being a map leading to Skywalker. His whereabouts were known by the First Order (which only had a partially complete map from the Imperial Archives with R2 having the rest. Geez, haven't they heard about coordinates?).
Vympel wrote:
Rian Johnson has Luke repeating the same two major mistakes he did in the OT. Johnson has no understanding of the character and if he wanted to "subvert expectations" then he should've done it in his own SW movies with his own characters. However, the blame is mostly on Kennedy who gave Johnson free reigns to write the most boring plot of a Star Wars movie and without the movie really setting anything up, knowing he wouldn't do Episode IX.
No, Johnson understands the character just fine. He simply disagrees with the idea that Luke overcoming issues in OT means those issues have been solved for all time. As he said recently:
“I understand that point of view but I completely disagree with it,” Johnson wrote in a tweet that went out to his 976,000 followers. “In fact I think it disrespects the character of Luke by treating him not as a true mythic hero overcoming recurring wounds & flaws, but as a video game character who has achieved a binary, permanent power-up.”
Oh, the arrogance of that man! A character which even isn't his own creation... Aaand you just showed that Johnson has no grasp of the character whatsoever. I sure don't want to see Luke as some sort of divinity (heck I'm not a fan of the character as is), but Luke is a hero who overcame "wounds & flaws" through his arc in the OT and had certainly matured over the three decades since ROTJ and left him more equipped with handling "recurring wounds & flaws". Johnson hit the reset button (and not in a good way as Johnson's failure to grasp the character made Luke see Kylo Ren as unredeemable). A good comparison would be Obi-Wan (and Yoda as well). Heck, Obi-Wan didn't even want to fight his friend, but Luke was about to murder his own nephew in his sleep! It's so bad I can't stand it!
Vympel wrote:
And on a sidenote, the destruction of the Jedi academy has now been retconned:
This is false, people aren't actually paying attention to the comic. It's strongly implied that the lightning blast which destroyed the temple and killed the students was caused by Ben, in his anger. Matt Martin of the Lucasfilm Story Group (noting always he's reluctant to speak in details since its only the first issue) has expressly denied that the comic is saying that he didn't destroy the academy.

Also, it was actually a fan misconception that the students went with him to become the Knigths of Ren. That they were pre-exisitng and Ben joined them was actually stated back in the Episode 7 VD. We just all kind of forgot/missed it. The comic seems to say that its the students who Luke thought he took with him apparently actually gave chase. They'll probably die by the end of the series.
Oh, so Matt Martin has authored the comic, has he? I yield that for now, however.

"...stated back in the Episode 7 VD." And? Heck, the Episode 8 VD states that the Sith lineage was "undone" when Vader "destroyed" Darth Sidious... No,it's not a fan misconception (and the people reading the VD's, especially the general audience, is a minuscule). In fact, Luke states in TLJ that Kylo: "...vanished with a handful of my students." Sounds like Abrams had another idea than that forward in the VD, huh? (I doubt Johnson, like Abrams, was strong-armed by the Story Group to adhere to a passing reference in a children's book.) To cite the title of an article by Screen Crush about the Episode IX VD: "You shouldn't have to buy a book to understand Star Wars".

User avatar
Tribble
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2817
Joined: 2008-11-18 11:28am
Location: stardestroyer.net

Re: Kathleen Kennedy's management of the franchise

Post by Tribble » 2020-01-01 12:59pm

Mange wrote:Oh, the arrogance of that man! A character which even isn't his own creation... Aaand you just showed that Johnson has no grasp of the character whatsoever. I sure don't want to see Luke as some sort of divinity (heck I'm not a fan of the character as is), but Luke is a hero who overcame "wounds & flaws" through his arc in the OT and had certainly matured over the three decades since ROTJ and left him more equipped with handling "recurring wounds & flaws". Johnson hit the reset button (and not in a good way as Johnson's failure to grasp the character made Luke see Kylo Ren as unredeemable). A good comparison would be Obi-Wan (and Yoda as well). Heck, Obi-Wan didn't even want to fight his friend, but Luke was about to murder his own nephew in his sleep! It's so bad I can't stand it!
To be fair, that can equally be said about Abrams as well. Abrams had Luke abandon his friends and family when he knew he was needed... for reasonz. Namely, that Abrams didn't want Luke outshining his new favourites. Any reason that Johnson came up with for Luke's absence was going to be stupid because the fundamental flaw was Luke abandoning everyone in the first place. That's just not the type of character he was in the OT, let alone how he should have been by now given three decades he had to mature and grow as a person.

Han Solo wasn't treated any better... he abandoned his family and friends too, not to mention the Falcon. And became a smuggler again. Because, you know, reasonz. So much for his character growth from the OT.

Johnson may have served a pile of crap, but the ingredients were given to him by Abrams.
"I reject your reality and substitute my own!" - The official Troll motto, as stated by Adam Savage

User avatar
Mange
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4158
Joined: 2004-03-26 01:31pm
Location: Somewhere in the GFFA

Re: Kathleen Kennedy's management of the franchise

Post by Mange » 2020-01-01 01:20pm

Tribble wrote:
2020-01-01 12:59pm
Mange wrote:Oh, the arrogance of that man! A character which even isn't his own creation... Aaand you just showed that Johnson has no grasp of the character whatsoever. I sure don't want to see Luke as some sort of divinity (heck I'm not a fan of the character as is), but Luke is a hero who overcame "wounds & flaws" through his arc in the OT and had certainly matured over the three decades since ROTJ and left him more equipped with handling "recurring wounds & flaws". Johnson hit the reset button (and not in a good way as Johnson's failure to grasp the character made Luke see Kylo Ren as unredeemable). A good comparison would be Obi-Wan (and Yoda as well). Heck, Obi-Wan didn't even want to fight his friend, but Luke was about to murder his own nephew in his sleep! It's so bad I can't stand it!
To be fair, that can equally be said about Abrams as well. Abrams had Luke abandon his friends and family when he knew he was needed... for reasonz. Namely, that Abrams didn't want Luke outshining his new favourites. Any reason that Johnson came up with for Luke's absence was going to be stupid because the fundamental flaw was Luke abandoning everyone in the first place. That's just not the type of character he was in the OT, let alone how he should have been by now given three decades he had to mature and grow as a person.

Han Solo wasn't treated any better... he abandoned his family and friends too, not to mention the Falcon. And became a smuggler again. Because, you know, reasonz. So much for his character growth from the OT.

Johnson may have served a pile of crap, but the ingredients were given to him by Abrams.
I'm not questioning that! :) Abrams is a horrible writer and I wonder how much Kasdan contributed to the script (not that he is the greatest writer either). Yes, both Luke and Han regressed as characters in TFA but I think Johnson manhandled Luke even worse. I certainly agree with that he had three decades to mature even more.

As for TFA in general... While the original Star Wars was a standalone movie, it still set up much more than its remake, TFA.

As for reasonz, there are so many in TFA. Why did Kylo Ren kill the aforementioned Lor San Tekka when he later brought Poe onboard his ship for "enhanced interrogation"? Reasonz. It's pretty dumb.

User avatar
Galvatron
Decepticon Leader
Posts: 6384
Joined: 2002-07-12 12:27am
Location: Kill! Smash! Destroy! Rend! Mangle! Distort!

Re: Kathleen Kennedy's management of the franchise

Post by Galvatron » 2020-01-01 03:27pm

Mange wrote:
2020-01-01 01:20pm
Why did Kylo Ren kill the aforementioned Lor San Tekka when he later brought Poe onboard his ship for "enhanced interrogation"?
Because he knew Poe had the map last and wanted to find it? What would he need Tekka for?

User avatar
Gandalf
SD.net White Wizard
Posts: 15602
Joined: 2002-09-16 11:13pm
Location: A video store in Australia

Re: Kathleen Kennedy's management of the franchise

Post by Gandalf » 2020-01-01 03:48pm

Ralin wrote:
2019-12-30 06:25pm
Gandalf wrote:
2019-12-30 11:48am

Got it. So when they go to make a hundred million dollar film with the old continuity, should films come with a reading list? Or do you just film it in some way that doesn't contradict them? Also, best hope that no actors get old/quit/die! :lol:
So, when they go make a hundred million dollar film in the old continuity, should the films come with a viewing list?
Yes, like pretty much every other sequel made.
Or do you just film it so it doesn't contradict the old movies? Best hope no actors get old/quit/die!
Well, yeah? It's easier to keep continuity with six films as opposed to six films plus their merch.
Because reading is HARD and normal people just don't DO that sort of thing!
"Hey everyone, we're bring back Star Wars, with all of the characters you remember from the OT. But before turning up to the cinema, please read these books with Wacky Art Admiral, Luuke, and the Hutt Death Star."

Not the best way to bring back a billion dollar franchise.
"Oh no, oh yeah, tell me how can it be so fair
That we dying younger hiding from the police man over there
Just for breathing in the air they wanna leave me in the chair
Electric shocking body rocking beat streeting me to death"

- A.B. Original, Report to the Mist

"I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately."
- George Carlin

User avatar
Mange
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4158
Joined: 2004-03-26 01:31pm
Location: Somewhere in the GFFA

Re: Kathleen Kennedy's management of the franchise

Post by Mange » 2020-01-01 04:19pm

Galvatron wrote:
2020-01-01 03:27pm
Mange wrote:
2020-01-01 01:20pm
Why did Kylo Ren kill the aforementioned Lor San Tekka when he later brought Poe onboard his ship for "enhanced interrogation"?
Because he knew Poe had the map last and wanted to find it? What would he need Tekka for?
Because he didn't know that. Kylo wasn't made aware of Poe until after he killed Lor San Tekka who Kylo knew had been in possession of the map.

Ralin
Sith Devotee
Posts: 3137
Joined: 2008-08-28 04:23am

Re: Kathleen Kennedy's management of the franchise

Post by Ralin » 2020-01-01 06:33pm

Gandalf wrote:
2020-01-01 03:48pm

Well, yeah? It's easier to keep continuity with six films as opposed to six films plus their merch.
'Their merch.' What is it with this weird hard-on you have against books?
"Hey everyone, we're bring back Star Wars, with all of the characters you remember from the OT. But before turning up to the cinema, please read these books with Wacky Art Admiral, Luuke, and the Hutt Death Star."

Not the best way to bring back a billion dollar franchise.
Franchise never went away. If people are eager to see a new Star Wars movie then there's no reason not to give them an actual Star Wars movie, not a fanfic by some director who only saw the original movies back in the 70s and 80s.

But apparently you think they need to specifically cater to people who want to see a Star Wars movie even though they hate Star Wars and will get confused and angry if it references or builds on the rest of the series because reading is hard.

User avatar
Gandalf
SD.net White Wizard
Posts: 15602
Joined: 2002-09-16 11:13pm
Location: A video store in Australia

Re: Kathleen Kennedy's management of the franchise

Post by Gandalf » 2020-01-01 06:39pm

The jump from "disliking the EU" to "you hate books" is an amusing one. :lol:
"Oh no, oh yeah, tell me how can it be so fair
That we dying younger hiding from the police man over there
Just for breathing in the air they wanna leave me in the chair
Electric shocking body rocking beat streeting me to death"

- A.B. Original, Report to the Mist

"I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately."
- George Carlin

User avatar
Vympel
Spetsnaz
Spetsnaz
Posts: 29168
Joined: 2002-07-19 01:08am
Location: Sydney Australia

Re: Kathleen Kennedy's management of the franchise

Post by Vympel » 2020-01-01 07:10pm

Mange wrote:
2020-01-01 10:19am
Bullshit, it wasn't instinct. I forced myself to sit through the horrendously bad, boring and bland TLJ the other day and that scene was one of those I took especially note of. Luke didn't draw the sword from instinct. He drew the sword and actively considered murdering his nephew, which he had known since Ben's birth, in cold blood for many seconds based on a vision. I have already established the lessons learned by Luke in TESB. Visions is one thing, but Vader became even more of a direct threat to Leia once he learned Luke and Leia were siblings. Luke, even though the immense psychological pressure he was under, finally came through and threw away his lightsaber. Luke was under no such pressure here and Ben wasn't a direct threat. In fact, Johnson portrayed Luke Skywalker as a psychopath who considered murdering his nephew who, unlike Vader, hadn't done anything evil.
What rubbish. It's literally in the script that it was pure instinct on Luke's part, and quickly passed. The idea that Luke flipped out because "Vader became even more of a direct threat to Leia" is also rubbish. Luke literally turned to the dark side based on a taunt Vader had no way of actioning in the moment.
Finally you get it: Luke, as portrayed by Johnson in TLJ, is a jackass, in pain or not. I'll leave it at that.
And why are you 'leaving it at that'? Is it because I pointed out how "he was in isolation until he was needed" is pure nonsense that doesn't actually mean anything and doesn't do anything to improve the story?

That's my point: given the premise of TFA, you can either have Luke as someone suffering from trauma, or as a bizarre inscrutable mystery figure who does things that make no sense and make things infinitely more complicated for everyone for no goddamn reason at all.

Only one of those two things allow for a character with an actual arc.
Oh, the arrogance of that man! A character which even isn't his own creation... Aaand you just showed that Johnson has no grasp of the character whatsoever. I sure don't want to see Luke as some sort of divinity (heck I'm not a fan of the character as is), but Luke is a hero who overcame "wounds & flaws" through his arc in the OT and had certainly matured over the three decades since ROTJ and left him more equipped with handling "recurring wounds & flaws". Johnson hit the reset button (and not in a good way as Johnson's failure to grasp the character made Luke see Kylo Ren as unredeemable). A good comparison would be Obi-Wan (and Yoda as well). Heck, Obi-Wan didn't even want to fight his friend, but Luke was about to murder his own nephew in his sleep! It's so bad I can't stand it!
Dude, you're so desperate to preserve his divinity you literally just came up with a bunch of inscrutable, incoherent "I must go until I am needed" nonsense as an acceptable alternative to him simply being a human being in suffering - which is an infinitely more interesting story than ... well, nothing. Because that's what" I must go until I am needed" is. A total cul-de-sac.

The idea that Johnson 'hit the reset button' is ridiculous. Luke never had to deal with a personal failure like he had with Kylo Ren. When did that happen in the OT? Did he fail his sister and her husband in preventing their son from falling to the dark side in the OT?
Oh, so Matt Martin has authored the comic, has he? I yield that for now, however.

"...stated back in the Episode 7 VD." And? Heck, the Episode 8 VD states that the Sith lineage was "undone" when Vader "destroyed" Darth Sidious... No,it's not a fan misconception (and the people reading the VD's, especially the general audience, is a minuscule). In fact, Luke states in TLJ that Kylo: "...vanished with a handful of my students." Sounds like Abrams had another idea than that forward in the VD, huh? (I doubt Johnson, like Abrams, was strong-armed by the Story Group to adhere to a passing reference in a children's book.) To cite the title of an article by Screen Crush about the Episode IX VD: "You shouldn't have to buy a book to understand Star Wars".
I don't know the relevance of this, Rise of Kylo Ren is also a book that is not necessary to understand the movies? In any event, I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here. Everyone knows Palpatine in Episode IX is an ass-pull that wasn't set up in either Episode VII or VIII. And Abrams didn't have any ideas at all. Maybe Johnson considered that all/some of Luke's students were part of the KoR, or maybe he just left a loose thread dangling in case it wanted to be used, but it hardly contradicts the comic.
Like Legend of Galactic Heroes? Please contribute to http://gineipaedia.com/

User avatar
Galvatron
Decepticon Leader
Posts: 6384
Joined: 2002-07-12 12:27am
Location: Kill! Smash! Destroy! Rend! Mangle! Distort!

Re: Kathleen Kennedy's management of the franchise

Post by Galvatron » 2020-01-01 07:37pm

Mange wrote:
2020-01-01 04:19pm
Because he didn't know that. Kylo wasn't made aware of Poe until after he killed Lor San Tekka who Kylo knew had been in possession of the map.
The dialogue implied that Tekka and Ben were well-acquainted. Maybe Tekka was knowledgeable enough about the Force to resist a mind probe so Kylo knew that interrogating him would be futile.

Too bad Poe didn't have the good sense to just run far away from the village with BB-8.

User avatar
Solauren
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 8576
Joined: 2003-05-11 09:41pm

Re: Kathleen Kennedy's management of the franchise

Post by Solauren » 2020-01-01 09:44pm

Luke's walking away would have made sense if..

#1 - Ben had only been Kylo for a few months (or maybe a year) then The Force Awakens occurs
#2 - He didn't walk away. it was a tactical retreat to find the First Jedi Temple, to figure out what went wrong/heal from what happened

and...

#3 - He was 'in hiding' to prepare to train Rey, who he saw in a vision. He was waiting there, because that is where the Force told him to wait.

But, they didn't go that route....
\

Post Reply