.When first conceived, Fin was one of the most intriguing characters of the new Star Wars trilogy. In many ways the concept of Fin as a reformed Stormtrooper was entirely new. We've already seen prodigy Jedi in the form of Anakin and Ahsoka Tano, and hotshot pilots were numerous in A New Hope, not least of which was Luke, himself. And we'd seen the clone troopers in the Clone Wars.
But Fin gave us a new perspective on the SW universe. He broke through the impersonal facade with which the Empire cloaks itself. The most impenetrable of all are the entirely armor-clad stormtroopers, where we never see a human face. As a character, Fin takes off the helmet and reveals, not a clone, but a unique person with fears and moral principles and failings. Someone struggling with what is right, and with the moral agency to choose not to participate in the mass slaughter of innocents.
In The Force Awakens, Fin had an entire arc of his own, more so than most of the other characters. Fin went from chafing under the oppressive structure of the First Order to balking at the evil acts he was ordered to perform, to forming a brief alliance with Poe, to actively helping Rey. He could have simply abandoned her the moment he heard the tell tale sounds of the tie bombers, but instead chose to warn her and aid her in fleeing, even to the point where she didn't need him anymore. In many ways he needed to be helping someone.
So the brief opening scene shows us this entire character arc of Fin's but we also become aware of conflicts within himself. Like Rey, Fin is looking for a place to belong. Ripped from his parents as an infant, he has grown up within the First Order as the only family he has ever known. Captain Phasma was in some sense the parent who raised him, and Fin was rebelling against her autocratic teaching as well. But in leaving the First Order, now Fin has no place in the Universe. His interaction with the Resistance initially is more one of convenience than of any inner conviction. At the same time, he doesn't want to continue to live a lie. And he wants to escape from the continuous violence that the First Order represents.
When he reaches Maz's smuggler's refuge on Takodano, he has gotten himself into a difficult situation on many levels. He 's a fugitive from the First Order. He's misrepresented himself to Rey as being associated with the Resistance, He wants to avoid conflict and the Resistance seems to be the center of the conflict. Fin is the lonely ronin who has left his wicked master and now walks the earth in search of peace. Only, he cannot find it
Instead, he is drawn back into the conflict, drawn by circumstances, by a plea from his friends, by his own sense of loyalty.
Monday, December 10, 2018
Saturday, November 24, 2018
The Way Forward
Last time, I talked about what wouldn't work. Here's a look at what might be a better start.
Basically, this is going to come down to the things that were promised in The Force Awakens.
The final dagger in the side was when drunken hobo Luke was killed off by vanishing into the Force after his astral projection to save Leia. Rather than a triumphant sacrifice, it was the last gasp of a has-been, using up the pitiful remainder of his strength; the once-proud warrior now enfeebled with age, with disillusionment, all his beliefs betrayed, all his dreams shattered.
Except that wasn't what Luke's character was all about, and he certainly wasn't old or feeble or used up. Luke should be in the prime of his life, as a Jedi. To take that away from fans was unkind, to say the least. I personally think it was a betrayal of the trust that George placed in Lucasfilm
What really happened:
Luke was successful in his mission to Achto, and did actually attain some enlightenment there. His power in the Force is greatly magnified and he has mastered moving in and out of the Force at will. What we saw was Luke shrugging off his self-imposed exile at the Jedi Temple, now firmly resolved to enter the conflict with the first order. He had attained a deeper understanding of the Force, but with it, had harbored some doubts about his place in the struggle. Was it really his place to wield the force in this conflict.. The calling from Leia, and his subsequent conversation as a Force projection with Kylo convinced him that it was right for him to act, and that Kylo needed to be stopped, and that this task was his responsibility.
That is the story that we want to hear about Luke.
Rian ruined all that by destroying the significance of each of those moments. Through Kylo, by having him minimize the significance of the lightsaber vision, and through Luke, by having Luke toss the lightsaber over his shoulder in a comic, buffoonish way.
Rey's character lacked a traditional "earned" backstory, where, like Luke and Anakin, she learned to wield the Force. Instead, it looked like Rey was just unreasonably proficient with the Force, diminishing any struggle or challenge she had to face.
What Really Happened:
Anakin and Luke's stories were enriched by surmounting the challenge of learning to use the Force. This will be important for Rey as well, but her story was enriched by the unique circumstances of the Force calling to her. Far more than simple historic scenes were conveyed to Rey through her initial encounter with the lightsaber at Maz Kenata's temple. Yes, it gave her visions, but I think it also conveyed to her some rudimentary understanding of the Force.
I think this was possible because first, I do think that the Force calls heroes when it has need of them. I think it is very clear in the film that Rey was called to the basement area of Maz's temple, called to that specific wooden trunk where the saber was kept. Neither was it just a coincidence that Rey happened to be on the planet in the company of Han Solo. As Obi Wan said, "In my experience, there's no such thing as coincidence." Everything that happened to Rey on Takodano was shaped by the Force.
Second, because Rey was participating in the lineage of a major Force user. The Force vision seemed to indicate that Rey's parents were unique in some way, and she herself felt that there was more to the story of her parents, to the extent that Maz had to talk her out of her compulsion to return to Jakuu.
And, third, because of whose lightsaber she was holding. This was the lightsaber constructed by Anakin after he lost his first one on Geonosis, the one he wielded throughout the Clone Wars, the one he lost to Obi wan in Revenge of the Sith, who later passed it down to the young Luke Skywalker many years later and who lost it himself when Anakin cut of his hand in Cloud City. The key to this is that this was not merely a random weapon Rey was using but one imbued with the Force of two of the greatest lightside force users of that time period, Clone Wars Anakin and Luke Skywalker. The result was that Luke's lightsaber spoke to her because it was powerful, in and of itself, and because it had been wielded by one of her lineage, or very close to it. It spoke specifically to her, in a way that it did not for Fin, for example, or even to Maz.
Far from being an un-earned golden child, an illegitimate mary sue, JJ Abrams surrounded Rey with many layers of justification for her introduction into the Force where she was imbued with knowledge of the Force on a temporary basis through the Lightsaber.
I also think that we will learn that Rey did quite a bit of training on Achto, both by herself and under the tutelage of Luke. While we didn't see much of those scenes, I think that the training did happen, just offscreen.
Basically, this is going to come down to the things that were promised in The Force Awakens.
1. Luke isn't dead.
Probably the biggest mistake that this second trilogy made was the way that it treated the legacy characters of Luke, Han, and Leia. Rather than giving them a noble role as the returning heroes that all the fans loved, they were each made fallen heroes: failed generals, failed parents, failed crusaders... Too much nihilism was packed into Rian's attempt to make a french art house film.The final dagger in the side was when drunken hobo Luke was killed off by vanishing into the Force after his astral projection to save Leia. Rather than a triumphant sacrifice, it was the last gasp of a has-been, using up the pitiful remainder of his strength; the once-proud warrior now enfeebled with age, with disillusionment, all his beliefs betrayed, all his dreams shattered.
Except that wasn't what Luke's character was all about, and he certainly wasn't old or feeble or used up. Luke should be in the prime of his life, as a Jedi. To take that away from fans was unkind, to say the least. I personally think it was a betrayal of the trust that George placed in Lucasfilm
What really happened:
Luke was successful in his mission to Achto, and did actually attain some enlightenment there. His power in the Force is greatly magnified and he has mastered moving in and out of the Force at will. What we saw was Luke shrugging off his self-imposed exile at the Jedi Temple, now firmly resolved to enter the conflict with the first order. He had attained a deeper understanding of the Force, but with it, had harbored some doubts about his place in the struggle. Was it really his place to wield the force in this conflict.. The calling from Leia, and his subsequent conversation as a Force projection with Kylo convinced him that it was right for him to act, and that Kylo needed to be stopped, and that this task was his responsibility.
That is the story that we want to hear about Luke.
2. Rey's parents aren't drunken junker nobodies. Rey is connected to the Skywalker or Kenobi lineage.
One of the greatest accomplishments of JJ Abrams in the first movie was the establishment of Rey's character and the narrative arcs for her to follow. Rather than completing these arcs, Rian decided to cut them off, sending Rey's character spinning without foundation. The most symbolic of these was in intentionally subverting the most interesting things that Adams established about her in Force Awakens: the lightsaber Force vision and the way she felt drawn to Luke.Rian ruined all that by destroying the significance of each of those moments. Through Kylo, by having him minimize the significance of the lightsaber vision, and through Luke, by having Luke toss the lightsaber over his shoulder in a comic, buffoonish way.
Rey's character lacked a traditional "earned" backstory, where, like Luke and Anakin, she learned to wield the Force. Instead, it looked like Rey was just unreasonably proficient with the Force, diminishing any struggle or challenge she had to face.
What Really Happened:
Anakin and Luke's stories were enriched by surmounting the challenge of learning to use the Force. This will be important for Rey as well, but her story was enriched by the unique circumstances of the Force calling to her. Far more than simple historic scenes were conveyed to Rey through her initial encounter with the lightsaber at Maz Kenata's temple. Yes, it gave her visions, but I think it also conveyed to her some rudimentary understanding of the Force.
I think this was possible because first, I do think that the Force calls heroes when it has need of them. I think it is very clear in the film that Rey was called to the basement area of Maz's temple, called to that specific wooden trunk where the saber was kept. Neither was it just a coincidence that Rey happened to be on the planet in the company of Han Solo. As Obi Wan said, "In my experience, there's no such thing as coincidence." Everything that happened to Rey on Takodano was shaped by the Force.
Second, because Rey was participating in the lineage of a major Force user. The Force vision seemed to indicate that Rey's parents were unique in some way, and she herself felt that there was more to the story of her parents, to the extent that Maz had to talk her out of her compulsion to return to Jakuu.
And, third, because of whose lightsaber she was holding. This was the lightsaber constructed by Anakin after he lost his first one on Geonosis, the one he wielded throughout the Clone Wars, the one he lost to Obi wan in Revenge of the Sith, who later passed it down to the young Luke Skywalker many years later and who lost it himself when Anakin cut of his hand in Cloud City. The key to this is that this was not merely a random weapon Rey was using but one imbued with the Force of two of the greatest lightside force users of that time period, Clone Wars Anakin and Luke Skywalker. The result was that Luke's lightsaber spoke to her because it was powerful, in and of itself, and because it had been wielded by one of her lineage, or very close to it. It spoke specifically to her, in a way that it did not for Fin, for example, or even to Maz.
Far from being an un-earned golden child, an illegitimate mary sue, JJ Abrams surrounded Rey with many layers of justification for her introduction into the Force where she was imbued with knowledge of the Force on a temporary basis through the Lightsaber.
I also think that we will learn that Rey did quite a bit of training on Achto, both by herself and under the tutelage of Luke. While we didn't see much of those scenes, I think that the training did happen, just offscreen.
3. Rey and Kylo's teen romance no longer exists.
This was never a promising line of the story, and it felt awkward and out of place.Monday, September 10, 2018
Recovery
In my previous post, I argued that the problem that Lucasfilm faces is not one arising from simply making a bad movie. Instead, it is the loss of confidence in the leadership that many Star Wars fans have experienced. And the confidence I am talking about is not in the ability to make a good movie, but in the competence to direct the Star Wars franchise into the future.
Every one of the decisions made has appeared to be a bad one. The treatment of the existing characters has been discouraging, and the direction of the new characters has lacked focus.
The way forward, then, lies not merely in making good movies again. One could argue that Solo: A Star Wars Story was a decent film, and though it suffered from the loss of confidence engendered by The Last Jedi, I think its valid to say that it didn't further the erosion. But it did nothing to repair it, either. Whenever the subject of Episode 9 is brought up in discussion, it is met with profound ambivalence. And that's a problem.
Because if no one is going to see Episode 9, that will make this entire trilogy a failure. And a failed trilogy does not engender any new trilogies. A trilogy is a huge commitment by a studio, usually one that the studio is not willing to make without a solid franchise to work with. What Rian Johnson has done is to take a solid franchise and severely weaken its foundation. In the words of the Star Wars fandom, Rian Johnson has single-handedly killed the Star Wars franchise. Unless Abrams and others in charge of Episode 9 can come up with a miracle, the great revival of the Star Wars saga that Disney promised will be effectively dead for at least the next 10 years.
So what has to happen to the final installment of this trilogy to bring it to a satisfying conclusion?
Here's a couple things that aren't going to work: No amount of obscure shout-outs to favorite characters from the extended universe, no number of cameos or callbacks to previous eras will have any long-term effect on the films' Nostalgic references are rewarding in a film that is otherwise successful, enhancing the experience. In a failure, they often go unnoticed, or appear cheap
The other thing that isn't going to work is continuing the effort to totally restructure the Star Wars philosophy of heroic adventure. If Lucasfilm persists in pushing a psychological teen drama, most of the core fans will fall away.
Unfortunately, the solution will require the exodus of Rian Johnson, and that's mostly due to his behavior after the release of TLJ. If he had just remained behind the scenes, he wouldn't have presented himself as the primary target for everybody's ire.
If he's still out there threatening to direct a future trilogy of his own, something long touted as a promise by Kathleen Kennedy, not only is that trilogy going to be ignored but fans are unlikely to invest in any other Star Wars property while it remains a possibility.For better or worse, Rian has made himself part of the problem rather than part of the solution.
Every one of the decisions made has appeared to be a bad one. The treatment of the existing characters has been discouraging, and the direction of the new characters has lacked focus.
The way forward, then, lies not merely in making good movies again. One could argue that Solo: A Star Wars Story was a decent film, and though it suffered from the loss of confidence engendered by The Last Jedi, I think its valid to say that it didn't further the erosion. But it did nothing to repair it, either. Whenever the subject of Episode 9 is brought up in discussion, it is met with profound ambivalence. And that's a problem.
Because if no one is going to see Episode 9, that will make this entire trilogy a failure. And a failed trilogy does not engender any new trilogies. A trilogy is a huge commitment by a studio, usually one that the studio is not willing to make without a solid franchise to work with. What Rian Johnson has done is to take a solid franchise and severely weaken its foundation. In the words of the Star Wars fandom, Rian Johnson has single-handedly killed the Star Wars franchise. Unless Abrams and others in charge of Episode 9 can come up with a miracle, the great revival of the Star Wars saga that Disney promised will be effectively dead for at least the next 10 years.
So what has to happen to the final installment of this trilogy to bring it to a satisfying conclusion?
Here's a couple things that aren't going to work: No amount of obscure shout-outs to favorite characters from the extended universe, no number of cameos or callbacks to previous eras will have any long-term effect on the films' Nostalgic references are rewarding in a film that is otherwise successful, enhancing the experience. In a failure, they often go unnoticed, or appear cheap
The other thing that isn't going to work is continuing the effort to totally restructure the Star Wars philosophy of heroic adventure. If Lucasfilm persists in pushing a psychological teen drama, most of the core fans will fall away.
Unfortunately, the solution will require the exodus of Rian Johnson, and that's mostly due to his behavior after the release of TLJ. If he had just remained behind the scenes, he wouldn't have presented himself as the primary target for everybody's ire.
If he's still out there threatening to direct a future trilogy of his own, something long touted as a promise by Kathleen Kennedy, not only is that trilogy going to be ignored but fans are unlikely to invest in any other Star Wars property while it remains a possibility.For better or worse, Rian has made himself part of the problem rather than part of the solution.
Monday, August 20, 2018
What now, Lucasfilm?
We've talked briefly about what went wrong with the Last Jedi and how that film failed to understand what made Star Wars great, and so they subsequently betrayed that greatness.
To recap here, the original Star Wars trilogy successfully brought together three storytelling elements:
Where Kathleen Kennedy went wrong was by essentially abandoning the second and third elements entirely, in favor of modern feminist drama. One of the reasons why people have so strong a negative reaction to Rey is that her character does not follow the progress of the hero's journey. Similarly, the mystical connection that Luke feels to the Force has been abandoned, the mentoring that passes the tradition down from one generation to the next, the feeling that Luke and Obi wan are part of a larger tradition that they can benefit from and contribute to... Each of these themes has been, not just abandoned but consciously rejected.
So the lightening in a bottle that Lucas was able to capture has been dissipated. But then Kennedy went ahead with two additional tonal changes that didn't just disappoint fans, but overtly antagonized them.
Han was transformed from a commanding general of the Rebel assault force to a blundering loser, doddering away on the edge of the galaxy, having lost his ship like someone might lose their car keys. Moreover, he's a dead beat dad who's left his wife, Leia, in charge of the Rebellion, and his son Ben during his critical formative years to roam the galaxy with his buddy Chewie pulling off dopey cons involving giant bugs.
Overtly, this is disrespectful to a beloved character. But it also destroys the character of Han as someone who is fiercely loyal, creative and cunning, daring and improvisational. No longer loyal, Han leaves his wife and son to go joyriding with his bro. No longer creative, Han can't even fill a few simple contracts without running afoul of two separate criminal organizations. Rather than being daring and improvisational, we get the image of a spent force. Han is not a sharp as he used to be, and not aware of his limitations. He's a has-been who's fooling himself into thinking he can re-live the glory days of his past.
In fact, this new iteration gives back all the development that Han's character made during the original trilogy. From an aloof loner, Han developed in the first film into someone who is willing to risk his life for a cause greater than himself, someone who is willing to reveal himself and allow himself to fall in love with Leia; from an irresponsible smuggler who gets involved with and on the wrong side of crime bosses like Jabba, to a leader who is willing to shoulder responsibility and take charge of a key role in the operation against the second Death Star. This is the Han that we knew at the end of Return of the Jedi.
A similar complaint can be made of the character of Luke Skywalker. As Mark Hamill has said many times, Luke was a character full of hope, full of optimism, full of idealism, ready to try to change the world and capable of enormous change. It was his success at the end of A New Hope that revitalized the Rebellion, not just protecting it from the Death Star, but also re-energizing it as a force that could contend with the Empire. It was his presence at Cloud City that proved that Vader could be faced, even if at that time he wasn't successful. Yet neither was he entirely defeated. And finally it was his optimism and faith in his friends that allowed the Rebel assault to be successful, the Emperor to finally be destroyed, and his father to be reclaimed to the light side..
Of course, in The Last Jedi this hopeful character was turned into an anti social, semi-disgusting bum living under a freeway overpass at the edge of town, drinking cheap wine from a sea cow, having abandoned his friends, and his position in the Rebellion.
General Hux is a clown, while General Leia is noble and patient. Kylo Ren is an emo poseur while Rey is thoughtful and diligent. Poe is Bad while Holdo is good, Fin is bad but Rose is good. Admiral Akbar dies a meaningless death, but Holdo dies a heroic death. Holdo's self sacrifice was noble and honorable, while Fin's self sacrifice was selfish and impulsive. Leia's extraordinary force powers led to her continued presence and growth as a character, but Luke's extraordinary force powers led him to disappear into the force because he had used up all his strength. At every turn, where comparisons are made between characters, the female character is portrayed in a better light then her male counterpart.
The crowning mistake, after all the errors of judgement in making the film itself, came afterwards when director Rian Johnson and Kathleen Kennedy responded to the initial confusion and mixed feelings that were a typical response to TLJ with scorn and mocking. Rian Johnson posed with mocking signs, "Your Snoke Theory Sucks" and "Happy to Ruin Your Childhood" among others, and posted them to his twitter feed. When obviously weak plot points were discussed, Rian responded with complete denial of any validity. The film was the best Star Wars film ever, he crowed.
The result of all of this was something deeply troubling to the fans. It went deeper that just making one bad movie. In short, Rian Johnson and Kathleen Kennedy lost the trust of the Fans. It wasn't merely a few missteps; Johnson's rhetoric convinced the fans that this film wasn't a mistake but a deliberate attempt to destroy, "Kill it if you have to," as Kylo Ren told us.
It's goal was to rework the entire franchise into something that Star Wars was not. The fans didn't trust Lucasfilm to make a good Star Wars movie. They didn't trust them to make a Star Wars film at all. As a result, when new Star Wars Stories came out, the fans were rightly ambivalent.
They didn't trust Lucasfilm to do justice to such an important and favorite character as Han Solo. When looking at the horrible transition that the Kennedy shop had worked on Han Solo and Luke later in life, fans were loathe to see what damage that same shop would do to their origins and back stories. With the sounds of "Happy to ruin your childhood" ringing in their ears, fans didn't want Kennedy to further mangle their beloved characters. The result was they began actively disliking the Han Solo feature film and to campaign against any further atrocities.
To recap here, the original Star Wars trilogy successfully brought together three storytelling elements:
- Moderately hard science fiction, with an expansive empire spanning multiple worlds, star ships to travel between them, and multiple species interacting in a variety of ways.
- A hero's journey where the protagonist leaves their isolated existence, matures and develops their capabilities within themself and comes to terms with the larger conflict in the galaxy.
- A fantasy story involving mythical knights wielding a magical Force as champions of order and justice.
Where Kathleen Kennedy went wrong was by essentially abandoning the second and third elements entirely, in favor of modern feminist drama. One of the reasons why people have so strong a negative reaction to Rey is that her character does not follow the progress of the hero's journey. Similarly, the mystical connection that Luke feels to the Force has been abandoned, the mentoring that passes the tradition down from one generation to the next, the feeling that Luke and Obi wan are part of a larger tradition that they can benefit from and contribute to... Each of these themes has been, not just abandoned but consciously rejected.
So the lightening in a bottle that Lucas was able to capture has been dissipated. But then Kennedy went ahead with two additional tonal changes that didn't just disappoint fans, but overtly antagonized them.
The Original Cast
The first was the perceived treatment of the original cast: Luke, Leia, and Han.Han was transformed from a commanding general of the Rebel assault force to a blundering loser, doddering away on the edge of the galaxy, having lost his ship like someone might lose their car keys. Moreover, he's a dead beat dad who's left his wife, Leia, in charge of the Rebellion, and his son Ben during his critical formative years to roam the galaxy with his buddy Chewie pulling off dopey cons involving giant bugs.
Overtly, this is disrespectful to a beloved character. But it also destroys the character of Han as someone who is fiercely loyal, creative and cunning, daring and improvisational. No longer loyal, Han leaves his wife and son to go joyriding with his bro. No longer creative, Han can't even fill a few simple contracts without running afoul of two separate criminal organizations. Rather than being daring and improvisational, we get the image of a spent force. Han is not a sharp as he used to be, and not aware of his limitations. He's a has-been who's fooling himself into thinking he can re-live the glory days of his past.
In fact, this new iteration gives back all the development that Han's character made during the original trilogy. From an aloof loner, Han developed in the first film into someone who is willing to risk his life for a cause greater than himself, someone who is willing to reveal himself and allow himself to fall in love with Leia; from an irresponsible smuggler who gets involved with and on the wrong side of crime bosses like Jabba, to a leader who is willing to shoulder responsibility and take charge of a key role in the operation against the second Death Star. This is the Han that we knew at the end of Return of the Jedi.
A similar complaint can be made of the character of Luke Skywalker. As Mark Hamill has said many times, Luke was a character full of hope, full of optimism, full of idealism, ready to try to change the world and capable of enormous change. It was his success at the end of A New Hope that revitalized the Rebellion, not just protecting it from the Death Star, but also re-energizing it as a force that could contend with the Empire. It was his presence at Cloud City that proved that Vader could be faced, even if at that time he wasn't successful. Yet neither was he entirely defeated. And finally it was his optimism and faith in his friends that allowed the Rebel assault to be successful, the Emperor to finally be destroyed, and his father to be reclaimed to the light side..
Of course, in The Last Jedi this hopeful character was turned into an anti social, semi-disgusting bum living under a freeway overpass at the edge of town, drinking cheap wine from a sea cow, having abandoned his friends, and his position in the Rebellion.
Antagonism
The final major misstep of the Kennedy reign was that she did seem to be intentionally inserting a feminist agenda into the narrative. This was typified in TLJ by diminishing all the male characters as impulsive, reckless, violent buffoons, and replacing them, instead, with newly re-imagined female characters. We've just looked at how the male heroes of the original trilogy were reduced to objects of pity: Han abandons his family, while the noble Leia continues to hold the Rebel Alliance together, while simultaneously trying to raise their son. Luke has a nervous breakdown and rejects the Force, and with it any ability to help his friends, while Rey ends up training herself in the Force and single- handedly saves the scattered Rebellion by opening up the back door.General Hux is a clown, while General Leia is noble and patient. Kylo Ren is an emo poseur while Rey is thoughtful and diligent. Poe is Bad while Holdo is good, Fin is bad but Rose is good. Admiral Akbar dies a meaningless death, but Holdo dies a heroic death. Holdo's self sacrifice was noble and honorable, while Fin's self sacrifice was selfish and impulsive. Leia's extraordinary force powers led to her continued presence and growth as a character, but Luke's extraordinary force powers led him to disappear into the force because he had used up all his strength. At every turn, where comparisons are made between characters, the female character is portrayed in a better light then her male counterpart.
The crowning mistake, after all the errors of judgement in making the film itself, came afterwards when director Rian Johnson and Kathleen Kennedy responded to the initial confusion and mixed feelings that were a typical response to TLJ with scorn and mocking. Rian Johnson posed with mocking signs, "Your Snoke Theory Sucks" and "Happy to Ruin Your Childhood" among others, and posted them to his twitter feed. When obviously weak plot points were discussed, Rian responded with complete denial of any validity. The film was the best Star Wars film ever, he crowed.
The result of all of this was something deeply troubling to the fans. It went deeper that just making one bad movie. In short, Rian Johnson and Kathleen Kennedy lost the trust of the Fans. It wasn't merely a few missteps; Johnson's rhetoric convinced the fans that this film wasn't a mistake but a deliberate attempt to destroy, "Kill it if you have to," as Kylo Ren told us.
It's goal was to rework the entire franchise into something that Star Wars was not. The fans didn't trust Lucasfilm to make a good Star Wars movie. They didn't trust them to make a Star Wars film at all. As a result, when new Star Wars Stories came out, the fans were rightly ambivalent.
They didn't trust Lucasfilm to do justice to such an important and favorite character as Han Solo. When looking at the horrible transition that the Kennedy shop had worked on Han Solo and Luke later in life, fans were loathe to see what damage that same shop would do to their origins and back stories. With the sounds of "Happy to ruin your childhood" ringing in their ears, fans didn't want Kennedy to further mangle their beloved characters. The result was they began actively disliking the Han Solo feature film and to campaign against any further atrocities.
Friday, July 6, 2018
The Last Jedi Theory: a way out
It's not the Star Wars theory we love; it's the Star Wars theory we deserve.
The second film of the latest trilogy rejected storytelling in favor of some other kind of experience. And in doing so, it created apparent narrative inconsistencies that need to be resolved if we want the storyline of the trilogy to make sense in a satisfying way. That is the challenge, and I present a theory that attempts to meet that challenge.
Luke Skywalker's goal is to spread an awareness of the Force to more people in the galaxy. That was the purpose of his "Jedi Academy", in an attempt to re-assemble the structure of the former Jedi Temple where Yoda was a teacher.
Luke fears that he has an incomplete understanding of the working of the Force. Though he has been trained by Yoda, that is his only experience with Jedi teaching and philosophy. Yoda gave him what he needed to meet the crises of the moment, but as the sole representative of the Jedi philosophy in the galaxy, Luke feels that there is more to learn.
This becomes more apparent to him as he is trying to teach Ben Solo to use the Force. He fears that a wrong move on his part will lead Ben down the wrong path, and already he can sense a growing frustration and confusion within Ben that he doesn't know how to cure.
He also mistrusts his understanding of the concept of Balance. He's worried that by being such a powerful Light-side Force user, he was in effect creating a Dark-side force power to match his. When Vader and the Emperor both died, he remained the single most powerful Force user, and that created an imbalance. The emergence of Snoke was a signal to him that the force was still imbalanced.
Luke traveled to Achtoo for two reasons. First, he wanted to remove himself from the Galaxy as a Force presence for the Light. Whether or not this actually works this way, Luke believed that by retreating to an isolated deserted planet, his influence on the balance of the Force would be diminished, and by doing so he would diminish the dark-side power of Snoke. Second, he was keenly aware of how little he knew about the Jedi philosophy of the Force, and so he made a pilgrimage to Achtoo to complete a deeper study of Force philosophy on the planet where the Jedi began.
Kylo Ren was a force user and a student of Luke's. However, when Luke was training him, Kylo could sense Luke's ambivalence in raising up another powerful force user. Luke was also hesitant in imbuing Ben Solo with technical skills without also giving him an understanding of Jedi principles, an understanding that Luke felt that he, himself, lacked. Ben felt frustrated and held back, in much the same way that Anakin did under Obi-wan's teaching.
As a result of his need to better understand the Jedi philosophy, Luke makes the decision to go on a journey in search of a deeper understanding of the Jedi, and in doing so he temporarily suspends his teaching at his Jedi Academy. (Ret-con) When Luke left the school, all was not in flames. In fact, he left peacefully to begin this journey in search of Achtoo.
It is likely that Ben wanted to accompany him as a true padawan should, and Luke refused, feeling that Ben was not yet ready for such a trip. To Ben, however, this felt like a betrayal. Impatient as he was to continue his use of the Force, Ben couldn't just put his life on hold until Luke returned. After he had gone, Ben's frustration was deepened to the point of rage. Just as Ben was on the precipice of accessing enormous power, Luke not only halted his training, but also appeared to reject him as his padawan as signaled by his unwillingness to allow Ben to join him on the journey.
Without the maturity or patience to wait for Luke's return, Snoke appeared and offered himself as an alternative teacher of the Force, possibly presenting himself as another of the remaining Jedi and not revealing, initially, his connection to the dark side. Ben fell under the influence of Snoke, who would be the mentor and teacher that Luke refused to be.
From dialogue in Force Awakens it is likely that Leia realized Snoke's evil connection and advised Ben to stop training with him. However, Ben took this as a further rejection, from his own mother, this time, a feeling no doubt engineered and manipulated by Snoke himself. With his newly unleashed dark-side power, Ben tried to take over the school in Luke's absence, creating the order of the Knights of Ren from those who would follow him.
It was at this point that Leia and others in the resistance openly opposed the direction Ben and Snoke were taking and the conflict was brought out into the open. Ben adopted his new name of Kylo, and with his Knights of Ren, destroyed the school, murdering everyone who opposed him. I believe that it was Snoke who suppressed Ben's memories of what actually happened at the Jedi Academy, and substituted a different version of events where Luke was still present and instigated the conflict. Contrary to that memory, it was Kylo who destroyed the school, leaving it in flames.
Snoke tried to turn Ben, who was essentially a light-side force user, to the dark side. What is fascinating about this story is the lengths necessary to complete that transformation. It is psychological warfare at its most insidious. It started with changing Ben's name, and estranging him from his parents, rejecting his former teacher. In order to do that, Snoke implanted images in Ben's mind that weren't true. The famous moment, when Luke ignited his lightsaber while standing over the sleeping Ben, never happened. This was a fabrication that Snoke implanted in Ben's mind. It was this gaslighting technique that Snoke used repeatedly to break Ben's mind from reality. It is also a fabrication that Ben desperately wants to believe.
Later, Snoke would attempt the same technique on Rey, through Ben. When speaking about Rey's parents, Ben said that they were nothing and nobody. Ben firmly believed it at the time, since Snoke has so firmly convinced him of its truth. However, it was simply an attempt by Snoke to turn Rey to the dark side as well, gaining another apprentice for himself. As with Ben, the first step is to separate the pupil from their parents, from their family.
When Kylo Ren reaches out to Rey's mind, this was obviously not the first time that he had experienced such communication. Since Snoke later claims that he facilitated this mental communication, it was likely that Kylo had communicated with Snoke in the same manner. Everything that Ben said in those conversations was largely influenced by Snoke. It was clearly an effort to wrest Rey away from Luke and bring her over to his side. He did that with lies and persuasion and with reaching out a hand to her in her confusion; all techniques that Snoke had used against him.
Importantly, all the things that Kylo showed to Rey were in contradiction to the images that Luke's lightsaber showed her. The Knights of Ren scene against the Luke's saber scene at the school. The voice of (her grandfather) Obi-wan (both from Alec Guinness and Ewen McGregor) against the claims of Kylo about her parentage, (for example, the lightsaber was found in the same box where Obi-wan kept it before presenting it to Luke.)
The call to belonging opposed by Kylo's call to leave it all behind, the appeal to important events in the past (Darth Vader's breathing, the corridors of Cloud City, the voice of Yoda) against the mandate to "let the past die, kill it if you have to." The saber showed Luke embedding the map of his journey in R2D2, vs Kylo telling Rey that Luke was unimportant.
The interesting thing is that Kylo is not fully persuaded of the rightness of his path. Like Anakin before him, there is still good in him. He clearly killed Han in an attempt to irrevocably plunge himself to the dark side, a choice no doubt heavily influence by Snoke. But when he had the same chance with his mother, he refused (and also, I believe, actively used the Force to preserve his mother's life.)
Kylo Ren's journey is toward truth. This truth has been denied to him first by Luke, who was uncertain and fearful, and then by Snoke, who was manipulative and deceitful. In the end, I think that Ben will eventually be shown the truth, possibly by Rey. In the light of this new understanding and in order to balance out his former evil acts, Ben will be moved to make a sacrifice to help the resistance, thereby achieving redemption and completing his arc.
The second film of the latest trilogy rejected storytelling in favor of some other kind of experience. And in doing so, it created apparent narrative inconsistencies that need to be resolved if we want the storyline of the trilogy to make sense in a satisfying way. That is the challenge, and I present a theory that attempts to meet that challenge.
Luke Skywalker's goal is to spread an awareness of the Force to more people in the galaxy. That was the purpose of his "Jedi Academy", in an attempt to re-assemble the structure of the former Jedi Temple where Yoda was a teacher.
Luke fears that he has an incomplete understanding of the working of the Force. Though he has been trained by Yoda, that is his only experience with Jedi teaching and philosophy. Yoda gave him what he needed to meet the crises of the moment, but as the sole representative of the Jedi philosophy in the galaxy, Luke feels that there is more to learn.
This becomes more apparent to him as he is trying to teach Ben Solo to use the Force. He fears that a wrong move on his part will lead Ben down the wrong path, and already he can sense a growing frustration and confusion within Ben that he doesn't know how to cure.
He also mistrusts his understanding of the concept of Balance. He's worried that by being such a powerful Light-side Force user, he was in effect creating a Dark-side force power to match his. When Vader and the Emperor both died, he remained the single most powerful Force user, and that created an imbalance. The emergence of Snoke was a signal to him that the force was still imbalanced.
Luke traveled to Achtoo for two reasons. First, he wanted to remove himself from the Galaxy as a Force presence for the Light. Whether or not this actually works this way, Luke believed that by retreating to an isolated deserted planet, his influence on the balance of the Force would be diminished, and by doing so he would diminish the dark-side power of Snoke. Second, he was keenly aware of how little he knew about the Jedi philosophy of the Force, and so he made a pilgrimage to Achtoo to complete a deeper study of Force philosophy on the planet where the Jedi began.
Kylo Ren was a force user and a student of Luke's. However, when Luke was training him, Kylo could sense Luke's ambivalence in raising up another powerful force user. Luke was also hesitant in imbuing Ben Solo with technical skills without also giving him an understanding of Jedi principles, an understanding that Luke felt that he, himself, lacked. Ben felt frustrated and held back, in much the same way that Anakin did under Obi-wan's teaching.
As a result of his need to better understand the Jedi philosophy, Luke makes the decision to go on a journey in search of a deeper understanding of the Jedi, and in doing so he temporarily suspends his teaching at his Jedi Academy. (Ret-con) When Luke left the school, all was not in flames. In fact, he left peacefully to begin this journey in search of Achtoo.
It is likely that Ben wanted to accompany him as a true padawan should, and Luke refused, feeling that Ben was not yet ready for such a trip. To Ben, however, this felt like a betrayal. Impatient as he was to continue his use of the Force, Ben couldn't just put his life on hold until Luke returned. After he had gone, Ben's frustration was deepened to the point of rage. Just as Ben was on the precipice of accessing enormous power, Luke not only halted his training, but also appeared to reject him as his padawan as signaled by his unwillingness to allow Ben to join him on the journey.
Without the maturity or patience to wait for Luke's return, Snoke appeared and offered himself as an alternative teacher of the Force, possibly presenting himself as another of the remaining Jedi and not revealing, initially, his connection to the dark side. Ben fell under the influence of Snoke, who would be the mentor and teacher that Luke refused to be.
From dialogue in Force Awakens it is likely that Leia realized Snoke's evil connection and advised Ben to stop training with him. However, Ben took this as a further rejection, from his own mother, this time, a feeling no doubt engineered and manipulated by Snoke himself. With his newly unleashed dark-side power, Ben tried to take over the school in Luke's absence, creating the order of the Knights of Ren from those who would follow him.
It was at this point that Leia and others in the resistance openly opposed the direction Ben and Snoke were taking and the conflict was brought out into the open. Ben adopted his new name of Kylo, and with his Knights of Ren, destroyed the school, murdering everyone who opposed him. I believe that it was Snoke who suppressed Ben's memories of what actually happened at the Jedi Academy, and substituted a different version of events where Luke was still present and instigated the conflict. Contrary to that memory, it was Kylo who destroyed the school, leaving it in flames.
Snoke tried to turn Ben, who was essentially a light-side force user, to the dark side. What is fascinating about this story is the lengths necessary to complete that transformation. It is psychological warfare at its most insidious. It started with changing Ben's name, and estranging him from his parents, rejecting his former teacher. In order to do that, Snoke implanted images in Ben's mind that weren't true. The famous moment, when Luke ignited his lightsaber while standing over the sleeping Ben, never happened. This was a fabrication that Snoke implanted in Ben's mind. It was this gaslighting technique that Snoke used repeatedly to break Ben's mind from reality. It is also a fabrication that Ben desperately wants to believe.
Later, Snoke would attempt the same technique on Rey, through Ben. When speaking about Rey's parents, Ben said that they were nothing and nobody. Ben firmly believed it at the time, since Snoke has so firmly convinced him of its truth. However, it was simply an attempt by Snoke to turn Rey to the dark side as well, gaining another apprentice for himself. As with Ben, the first step is to separate the pupil from their parents, from their family.
When Kylo Ren reaches out to Rey's mind, this was obviously not the first time that he had experienced such communication. Since Snoke later claims that he facilitated this mental communication, it was likely that Kylo had communicated with Snoke in the same manner. Everything that Ben said in those conversations was largely influenced by Snoke. It was clearly an effort to wrest Rey away from Luke and bring her over to his side. He did that with lies and persuasion and with reaching out a hand to her in her confusion; all techniques that Snoke had used against him.
Importantly, all the things that Kylo showed to Rey were in contradiction to the images that Luke's lightsaber showed her. The Knights of Ren scene against the Luke's saber scene at the school. The voice of (her grandfather) Obi-wan (both from Alec Guinness and Ewen McGregor) against the claims of Kylo about her parentage, (for example, the lightsaber was found in the same box where Obi-wan kept it before presenting it to Luke.)
The call to belonging opposed by Kylo's call to leave it all behind, the appeal to important events in the past (Darth Vader's breathing, the corridors of Cloud City, the voice of Yoda) against the mandate to "let the past die, kill it if you have to." The saber showed Luke embedding the map of his journey in R2D2, vs Kylo telling Rey that Luke was unimportant.
The interesting thing is that Kylo is not fully persuaded of the rightness of his path. Like Anakin before him, there is still good in him. He clearly killed Han in an attempt to irrevocably plunge himself to the dark side, a choice no doubt heavily influence by Snoke. But when he had the same chance with his mother, he refused (and also, I believe, actively used the Force to preserve his mother's life.)
Kylo Ren's journey is toward truth. This truth has been denied to him first by Luke, who was uncertain and fearful, and then by Snoke, who was manipulative and deceitful. In the end, I think that Ben will eventually be shown the truth, possibly by Rey. In the light of this new understanding and in order to balance out his former evil acts, Ben will be moved to make a sacrifice to help the resistance, thereby achieving redemption and completing his arc.
Sunday, June 24, 2018
Star Wars vs MCU
Star Wars has always been about the story. The audience cared what happened to the heroes because they were the catalyst for what happened to the galaxy. the struggle of the Rebel Alliance was the story of the galaxy. Star Wars tells stories that last not just for a single movie, but that span multiple films in trilogies that all focus on the same story.
The Marvel Cinematic Universe turns this concept on its head. Because the characters are indestructable, it truly does not matter what happens to them in any individual book or movie. In Thor Ragnarok, Odin dies and Asgaard is burned to ashes, and in both cases Thor literally tells the audience that it does not matter. Marvel movies are all about the characters and their immediate environments. Story is not important. Story is mutable. Something could happen in the narrative in this installment which will be reversed and negated in the very next episode. Asgaard will rise from its own ashes the next time around. No one is really worried that Odin has gone for good. It is axiomatic that no one ever truly dies in a comic book world.
And that is one of the strengths of the format. You can have dramatic conflicts and huge seemingly world altering events take place without sacrificing continuity, because change is continuity for a superhero universe. Instead of being a single long story, MCU films tend to be a series of short stories told within a single movie. From the previous example, we have a series of three giant set pieces (for example the Hulk vs Thor fight, the Thor vs Hela's army, the destruction of Asgaard). Each of these set pieces is only marginally related to each other.
Sunday, June 10, 2018
Solo: a review
So first, a few notes about the overall film.
This was a competent film, a decent heist movie, and a ok buddy film. That was all it needed to be, and it worked on that level. It wasn't a grand epic with galaxy-altering consequences, but it didn't aspire to that, either.
It seemed to me as if it was originally titled, "Solo: a smuggler's story" because that was what it was, a story about the smuggler's side of the Star Wars universe. It wasn't about Jedi, or the Force. It wasn't about the Rebellion, though that was mentioned. Instead, it lived in the world of the pirates, smugglers and the common man, living in the shadow and under the boot heel of the Empire.
I loved the visuals of the ore train, clinging to the side of the mountain. But mostly the cinematography was small, close, simple. It wasn't a particularly beautiful film, either. We spent some time on the mean streets of Corellia, but many of the shots were closely framed interiors while the long shots of the chase sequence had the flat feel of cgi over a matte.
It was a story on the level of one of the better Clone Wars episodes. I liked the introduction between Chewbacca and Han and the development of their friendship. I especially liked the fact that we took time to give Chewie a chance to make his own decisions about the duo, and that he didn't just fall in with Han by default. He got to make a conscious choice, and he did so based on Han's character.
Now a few words about what this film was not. It was not a horrible betrayal of Star Wars, and of all the movies that had come before, and of the ethos and philosophy which Star Wars represents. It did justice to the established characters, and didn't destroy Han or Chewie or Lando. It did introduce L337, fixated on the equality and liberation of her fellow droids, and was suitably over the top in her vocal protestations. If audience members were looking for a trigger to bring up all the simmering feelings of Vice-Admiral Holdo, L3 was it. But as it was realized in the film, these things didn't seem so out of place.
The role of droids in Star Wars lore has always been a point of contention, from the the earliest moments of Episode IV onward. Lucas has always explored the second-class status of droids, and continually compared their plight to slavery. "We're not allowed in there. It's restricted." "Your droids, we don't serve their kind here. They'll have to wait outside." "Well, I can see that you're serving drinks." "We seem to be made to suffer. It's our lot in life."
Rather than being a jarring distraction from the story, L3's rebellion seems to compliment and further the story of the escape from Kessel, And we take the time to humanize L3 by showing us how she sees herself. At the same time, the movie's portrayal of L3-37 (who's name spells Leet in geekspeak) did not invite us to take her entirely seriously. She may have been parodying her SJW overtones as much as seriously pushing them. Donald Glover shows the way that Lando doesn't take her seriously, but also convinces us at the end that he genuinely cares for her.
In the end, it wasn't the missteps or the cultural anachronisms that damaged Solo. It was the mediocre scope of the tale. It started out with a desperate escape and a daring train robbery, but then it started to go down hill and got lost in boring talky parts. For example, I hate to say it, but I felt like Enfys Nest and the proto-rebel Cloud Riders were terribly underused in the later half of the story. The final confrontation with Dryden Vos was stolen by Qi'ra, while Solo had yet another underwhelming, talky scene with his former mentor Beckett. The climactic scenes of betrayal were all of people standing around a room talking. The show went out with a whimper.
It felt like the film had ground to cover, rather than a story to tell. Rather than having a core narrative thread, it had things to do, boxes to check (millenium falcon, Kessel Run, Chewbacca, speaking Wookie, Lando, fair and square, etc. Check, check, check. Random easter egg callbacks to expanded universe comics, Check.)
And on the other hand, I didn't feel like there were solid Han Solo moments, here. Remember that line from Leia? "You do have your moments... You don't have many of them, but you do have them." This was what I felt Solo ultimately lacked, the moment when Han's daring and ingenuity pulled the whole thing off for us. I want the escape from the Maw to be one of those moments, injecting the coaxium, riding the lightening, squeezing through the collapsing opening. But, since Beckett did the injecting, and L3's navigational charts plotted their escape, Solo himself didn't actually do anything.
Which was true throughout the entire movie.
This was a competent film, a decent heist movie, and a ok buddy film. That was all it needed to be, and it worked on that level. It wasn't a grand epic with galaxy-altering consequences, but it didn't aspire to that, either.
It seemed to me as if it was originally titled, "Solo: a smuggler's story" because that was what it was, a story about the smuggler's side of the Star Wars universe. It wasn't about Jedi, or the Force. It wasn't about the Rebellion, though that was mentioned. Instead, it lived in the world of the pirates, smugglers and the common man, living in the shadow and under the boot heel of the Empire.
I loved the visuals of the ore train, clinging to the side of the mountain. But mostly the cinematography was small, close, simple. It wasn't a particularly beautiful film, either. We spent some time on the mean streets of Corellia, but many of the shots were closely framed interiors while the long shots of the chase sequence had the flat feel of cgi over a matte.
It was a story on the level of one of the better Clone Wars episodes. I liked the introduction between Chewbacca and Han and the development of their friendship. I especially liked the fact that we took time to give Chewie a chance to make his own decisions about the duo, and that he didn't just fall in with Han by default. He got to make a conscious choice, and he did so based on Han's character.
Now a few words about what this film was not. It was not a horrible betrayal of Star Wars, and of all the movies that had come before, and of the ethos and philosophy which Star Wars represents. It did justice to the established characters, and didn't destroy Han or Chewie or Lando. It did introduce L337, fixated on the equality and liberation of her fellow droids, and was suitably over the top in her vocal protestations. If audience members were looking for a trigger to bring up all the simmering feelings of Vice-Admiral Holdo, L3 was it. But as it was realized in the film, these things didn't seem so out of place.
The role of droids in Star Wars lore has always been a point of contention, from the the earliest moments of Episode IV onward. Lucas has always explored the second-class status of droids, and continually compared their plight to slavery. "We're not allowed in there. It's restricted." "Your droids, we don't serve their kind here. They'll have to wait outside." "Well, I can see that you're serving drinks." "We seem to be made to suffer. It's our lot in life."
Rather than being a jarring distraction from the story, L3's rebellion seems to compliment and further the story of the escape from Kessel, And we take the time to humanize L3 by showing us how she sees herself. At the same time, the movie's portrayal of L3-37 (who's name spells Leet in geekspeak) did not invite us to take her entirely seriously. She may have been parodying her SJW overtones as much as seriously pushing them. Donald Glover shows the way that Lando doesn't take her seriously, but also convinces us at the end that he genuinely cares for her.
In the end, it wasn't the missteps or the cultural anachronisms that damaged Solo. It was the mediocre scope of the tale. It started out with a desperate escape and a daring train robbery, but then it started to go down hill and got lost in boring talky parts. For example, I hate to say it, but I felt like Enfys Nest and the proto-rebel Cloud Riders were terribly underused in the later half of the story. The final confrontation with Dryden Vos was stolen by Qi'ra, while Solo had yet another underwhelming, talky scene with his former mentor Beckett. The climactic scenes of betrayal were all of people standing around a room talking. The show went out with a whimper.
It felt like the film had ground to cover, rather than a story to tell. Rather than having a core narrative thread, it had things to do, boxes to check (millenium falcon, Kessel Run, Chewbacca, speaking Wookie, Lando, fair and square, etc. Check, check, check. Random easter egg callbacks to expanded universe comics, Check.)
And on the other hand, I didn't feel like there were solid Han Solo moments, here. Remember that line from Leia? "You do have your moments... You don't have many of them, but you do have them." This was what I felt Solo ultimately lacked, the moment when Han's daring and ingenuity pulled the whole thing off for us. I want the escape from the Maw to be one of those moments, injecting the coaxium, riding the lightening, squeezing through the collapsing opening. But, since Beckett did the injecting, and L3's navigational charts plotted their escape, Solo himself didn't actually do anything.
Which was true throughout the entire movie.
Monday, January 8, 2018
The Power of Trilogy
One of the main ways that the Star Wars series is fundamentally different from any other movie franchise to come out of Hollywood has to do with the power of trilogy.
We've talked about several of the important distinctions that set Star Wars apart from the rest: the struggle between Good and Evil, the mixing of fantasy and science fiction, and the creation of a internally consistent mythology. But one of the most important differences is structural.
Sequels are big business in Hollywood. If you can make a successful film, the next stage is to capitalize on the franchise by creating sequels. And examples abound, from Spiderman to Pirates of the Caribbean, to Oceans 11.
When you talk about a Star Wars trilogy, however, you are referring to something different from a series of sequels. Empire Strikes Back is not a sequel to Star Wars in the way that Home Alone 2 is a sequel to Home Alone. Star Wars is presented in trilogies because the story continues throughout all three films. The three films of the trilogy tell a single story in three acts, three complex movements. The original Star Wars trilogy not only shares a single universe and a single myth arc, it also shares a closely linked continuity, where each of the three narratives contribute to a larger story.
This is a structure that is almost never replicated in Hollywood. Mostly, sequels may follow in the same universe but always tell a different story. It is a shared universe rather than a continuation of the narrative. One reason is that it is very difficult task to sustain a continually evolving story with ever-increasing complexity. The last time we saw something like this was from Phillip Jackson's adaptation of the Lord of the Rings, and much of the work was done for him by the author, Tolkien. Although they were released as three films, Fellowship, Two Towers and Return were all telling different phases of the same story.
As a counter-example, the Star Trek franchise has always been built around an episodic storytelling experience that finds itself right at home in Hollywood. We can tell endless, unrelated stories in this universe because Star Trek invests very little in mythology and story arcs. This is also clearly the appeal of the innovation Disney introduced of telling stand-alone stories like Rogue One. These are much easier to write, and should be easier to appeal to new audiences.
So when a producer takes up the mantle of the Star Wars franchise, they are embracing this very difficult task. And in fact, that was the way that the first installment of this trilogy was set up as well. The Force Awakens did exactly what it was supposed to do, create a trajectory for the entire trilogy. It introduced the bad guys, it created new characters that we would follow throughout the three films, and it introduced character arcs for each of them. the first film of the trilogy has to create the basic parameters of the story and sets all the important arcs of the larger narrative.
The second film of the trilogy, in many ways, has the hardest job to do because it is driven almost entirely by characterization. It is meant to convince us of the power and menace of the antagonist. and it gives the heroes a chance to grow.
Finally, the third film pays out on all the story elements that the first and second set up. It's challenge is to bring all the disparate threads together and find a meaningful and coherent way to resolve them all.
But it felt as if the second film didn't want to participate in the trilogy. The Last Jedi closed down all the arcs that were set up in Force Awakens, and it subverted all the character development that had already taken place. And then it failed to establish any new arcs or develop any new characters to carry on to the third film.
The odd thing was that it wasn't a great stand-alone film either. It didn't really have a cohesive narrative on its own, with a conflict that resolves or a hero to follow.
1. Death by Committee. The crux of the idea is that there were a number of people who needed to have input in the making of the film and that they basically got in each other's way. Of course we had Rian Johnson who was given a writing and directing credit. But we know that Disney takes a very active role in directing their directors, and firing those who don't comply. Episode IX is on its second director and the Han Solo movie is on its third, citing irreconcilable creative differences. So the most obvious suggestion is that Johnson, perhaps, wrote a better movie but Kathleen Kennedy and others at Disney made edits or contributions that ultimately brought down the film. Too many cooks spoiled this broth.
2. Death by Execution. In this scenario, Rian Johnson was brought in as a hit man to disrupt the Star Wars universe. What we're seeing now is a conscious effort to break up the preconceptions by the fans about what a Star Wars movie is, and why it's enjoyable. According to the powers that be, it was time to "Let the past die. Kill it if you have to." This means kill off all the old characters, Luke, Leia, and Han, of course, but also to kill off the old preconceptions about the nature of heroes, the myth of the Jedi, and the clash between good and evil. These all need to be swept away to make room for the new direction that the franchise is going to take.
3. Death by Incompetence. Rian Johnson made a film following all the modern philosophies of Hollywood. Among his peers, this was a triumph of subtlety of narrative, nuanced characterizations, and a hip, irreverent wit. Rian wants to be socially conscious and to make a clear break from the patriarchal narratives of the past. Good and evil are childish concepts. Heroes like Luke are one-dimensional, and trite. Deadbeat-father Han, and cowardly Luke are more realistic portrayals of the modern struggle. We need strong female leaders bashing their male counterparts, we need to do away with outmoded male notions of heroic sacrifice, we need to embrace the idea that success doesn't always mean winning, and that saving what you love is better than fighting what you hate.
I think that the third theory is closest to the truth, but with a healthy dose of the first two also present at the scene.
Let's ask the next question: why do people like The Last Jedi?
1. Some people, particularly people coming late to a tradition, like iconoclastic experiences. They like the thought of turning smug pretension and hidebound dogma on its head. And I think this film delivers that experience.
2. Some people are not invested in the greater Star Wars myth arc. They aren't compelled by the dictates of The Original Trilogy, nor even of the current trilogy. They want to participate in a self-contained, stand-alone movie with high quality graphics and sound. They want to go to the theater and experience a modern Disney blockbuster with vivid tableaus and tense scenes. They are reacting to the structure of the film, rather than the story.
3. I do think that modern filmmaking has entered a post-narrative phase, where storytelling as a tightly woven tapestry of narrative threads has given way to it being a collection of dramatic and highly visual scenes. In the Last Jedi, we move from one visual high point to another, with little concern for how or why we moved from one to the next. We transition from hyperspace Holdo to Kylo's AT-AT line up without any intervening story. It is the striking imagery that is important, and the accompanying emotions that carry the impact of the movie.
This is not a new trend for Disney, either. Most of the Pirates of the Caribbean movies have very little in the way of a storyline, for example. Instead, they are a sequence of striking scenes that visually capture your attention.
When you consider the myriad of screenwriting guides and aids, many of them make no reference to story. They are all about presenting a particular moment or beat in the story, (see Something Startling Happens). When the beats line up in the proper order, the audience will leave the theater with the experience of having been entertained, regardless of whether or not the plot conveyed a deeper meaning.
This was exactly the experience that many people talked about with the Last Jedi. As they were leaving the theater, they felt like it was a good film. Their immediate reaction was positive. But as they reflected on it for several days they grew to become less and less satisfied.
We've talked about several of the important distinctions that set Star Wars apart from the rest: the struggle between Good and Evil, the mixing of fantasy and science fiction, and the creation of a internally consistent mythology. But one of the most important differences is structural.
Sequels are big business in Hollywood. If you can make a successful film, the next stage is to capitalize on the franchise by creating sequels. And examples abound, from Spiderman to Pirates of the Caribbean, to Oceans 11.
When you talk about a Star Wars trilogy, however, you are referring to something different from a series of sequels. Empire Strikes Back is not a sequel to Star Wars in the way that Home Alone 2 is a sequel to Home Alone. Star Wars is presented in trilogies because the story continues throughout all three films. The three films of the trilogy tell a single story in three acts, three complex movements. The original Star Wars trilogy not only shares a single universe and a single myth arc, it also shares a closely linked continuity, where each of the three narratives contribute to a larger story.
This is a structure that is almost never replicated in Hollywood. Mostly, sequels may follow in the same universe but always tell a different story. It is a shared universe rather than a continuation of the narrative. One reason is that it is very difficult task to sustain a continually evolving story with ever-increasing complexity. The last time we saw something like this was from Phillip Jackson's adaptation of the Lord of the Rings, and much of the work was done for him by the author, Tolkien. Although they were released as three films, Fellowship, Two Towers and Return were all telling different phases of the same story.
As a counter-example, the Star Trek franchise has always been built around an episodic storytelling experience that finds itself right at home in Hollywood. We can tell endless, unrelated stories in this universe because Star Trek invests very little in mythology and story arcs. This is also clearly the appeal of the innovation Disney introduced of telling stand-alone stories like Rogue One. These are much easier to write, and should be easier to appeal to new audiences.
So when a producer takes up the mantle of the Star Wars franchise, they are embracing this very difficult task. And in fact, that was the way that the first installment of this trilogy was set up as well. The Force Awakens did exactly what it was supposed to do, create a trajectory for the entire trilogy. It introduced the bad guys, it created new characters that we would follow throughout the three films, and it introduced character arcs for each of them. the first film of the trilogy has to create the basic parameters of the story and sets all the important arcs of the larger narrative.
The second film of the trilogy, in many ways, has the hardest job to do because it is driven almost entirely by characterization. It is meant to convince us of the power and menace of the antagonist. and it gives the heroes a chance to grow.
Finally, the third film pays out on all the story elements that the first and second set up. It's challenge is to bring all the disparate threads together and find a meaningful and coherent way to resolve them all.
But it felt as if the second film didn't want to participate in the trilogy. The Last Jedi closed down all the arcs that were set up in Force Awakens, and it subverted all the character development that had already taken place. And then it failed to establish any new arcs or develop any new characters to carry on to the third film.
The odd thing was that it wasn't a great stand-alone film either. It didn't really have a cohesive narrative on its own, with a conflict that resolves or a hero to follow.
Why?
So I have three possible theories as to what happened to destroy the integrity of this second film.1. Death by Committee. The crux of the idea is that there were a number of people who needed to have input in the making of the film and that they basically got in each other's way. Of course we had Rian Johnson who was given a writing and directing credit. But we know that Disney takes a very active role in directing their directors, and firing those who don't comply. Episode IX is on its second director and the Han Solo movie is on its third, citing irreconcilable creative differences. So the most obvious suggestion is that Johnson, perhaps, wrote a better movie but Kathleen Kennedy and others at Disney made edits or contributions that ultimately brought down the film. Too many cooks spoiled this broth.
2. Death by Execution. In this scenario, Rian Johnson was brought in as a hit man to disrupt the Star Wars universe. What we're seeing now is a conscious effort to break up the preconceptions by the fans about what a Star Wars movie is, and why it's enjoyable. According to the powers that be, it was time to "Let the past die. Kill it if you have to." This means kill off all the old characters, Luke, Leia, and Han, of course, but also to kill off the old preconceptions about the nature of heroes, the myth of the Jedi, and the clash between good and evil. These all need to be swept away to make room for the new direction that the franchise is going to take.
3. Death by Incompetence. Rian Johnson made a film following all the modern philosophies of Hollywood. Among his peers, this was a triumph of subtlety of narrative, nuanced characterizations, and a hip, irreverent wit. Rian wants to be socially conscious and to make a clear break from the patriarchal narratives of the past. Good and evil are childish concepts. Heroes like Luke are one-dimensional, and trite. Deadbeat-father Han, and cowardly Luke are more realistic portrayals of the modern struggle. We need strong female leaders bashing their male counterparts, we need to do away with outmoded male notions of heroic sacrifice, we need to embrace the idea that success doesn't always mean winning, and that saving what you love is better than fighting what you hate.
I think that the third theory is closest to the truth, but with a healthy dose of the first two also present at the scene.
Let's ask the next question: why do people like The Last Jedi?
1. Some people, particularly people coming late to a tradition, like iconoclastic experiences. They like the thought of turning smug pretension and hidebound dogma on its head. And I think this film delivers that experience.
2. Some people are not invested in the greater Star Wars myth arc. They aren't compelled by the dictates of The Original Trilogy, nor even of the current trilogy. They want to participate in a self-contained, stand-alone movie with high quality graphics and sound. They want to go to the theater and experience a modern Disney blockbuster with vivid tableaus and tense scenes. They are reacting to the structure of the film, rather than the story.
3. I do think that modern filmmaking has entered a post-narrative phase, where storytelling as a tightly woven tapestry of narrative threads has given way to it being a collection of dramatic and highly visual scenes. In the Last Jedi, we move from one visual high point to another, with little concern for how or why we moved from one to the next. We transition from hyperspace Holdo to Kylo's AT-AT line up without any intervening story. It is the striking imagery that is important, and the accompanying emotions that carry the impact of the movie.
This is not a new trend for Disney, either. Most of the Pirates of the Caribbean movies have very little in the way of a storyline, for example. Instead, they are a sequence of striking scenes that visually capture your attention.
When you consider the myriad of screenwriting guides and aids, many of them make no reference to story. They are all about presenting a particular moment or beat in the story, (see Something Startling Happens). When the beats line up in the proper order, the audience will leave the theater with the experience of having been entertained, regardless of whether or not the plot conveyed a deeper meaning.
This was exactly the experience that many people talked about with the Last Jedi. As they were leaving the theater, they felt like it was a good film. Their immediate reaction was positive. But as they reflected on it for several days they grew to become less and less satisfied.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)