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:

1.  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.
2. 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.
3. A fantasy story involving mythical knights wielding a magical Force as champions of order and justice.  

The very weapon of the Jedi Order, the light saber, embodied all three elements: it is a technological marvel involving lasers and focusing crystals, but at the same time a "sword" incorporating the use of the Force, and it is a token of the hero's empowerment

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.