Star Wars Episode VIII SPOILERS thread

[DaneMcCloud]

For all things Episode VIII related info including spoilers.

The release date is now December 15, 2017.

The Official Synopsis from Star Wars.com

“In Lucasfilm’s Star Wars: The Last Jedi, the Skywalker saga continues as the heroes of The Force Awakens join the galactic legends in an epic adventure that unlocks age-old mysteries of the Force and shocking revelations of the past.

Star Wars: The Last Jedi opens in U.S. theaters on December 15, 2017.”









New footage in Japanese Trailer

[Sweet Daddy Hate]

Beautiful ladies.

[Rausch]

Originally Posted by temper11

That's what happened/is happening with the original characters we grew up with and it's been brilliant. What's the problem?

They completely ruin Luke's character for no reason. It doesn't further Ray's character or anyone else's. And while ruining Luke's character they give no reason why Luke did anything he did in the film. (Perhaps if Snoke had a real back story or had "twisted events" it might make sense but as it stands now there's no reason for Luke's 180 on morality.)

Han, after maturing and becoming more of a selfless person for no reason changes and becomes a deadbeat-dad.

Even after TFA Finn (for reasons unknown) goes back to being a coward at the start of TLJ.

Poe goes from being Top Gun to an impulsive buffoon and honestly, treasonous.

There isn't a single male in this film that's redeemable.

On the other hand Leia is now Ms. Marvel, Mary Sue is Mary Sue, and we get PETA adds and Hippie nonsense during the climax of the film.

All the while glaring failures of logic like gravity in space, two characters 50 yards from an overwhelming force who never get shot at once, Ray somehow transports from Snoke's throne room to the Falcon WITH NO EXPLANATION, and for some reason Yoda acting like he did when he was trolling Luke in Empire.

And what's really frustrating is politics being forced into SW's and when it's noticed it's the fans that get blamed for projecting.

Originally Posted by NYT

While writing “The Last Jedi,” the writer-director Rian Johnson moved to San Francisco, spending three months working closely with the story group to develop ideas for the film. Ms. Hart credits Mr. Johnson with the decision to introduce diverse characters for “The Last Jedi.” Of the new cast members, several are women, including Rose Tico, played by Kelly Marie Tran, the first Asian-American women to star in the saga.

“The characters that end up on screen are there because there is a groundswell of energy around this idea of creating a more honest reflection of the world around us,” Ms. Hart said, “and it’s coming from people all over the process. That feels miraculous, and really hopeful, not just for ‘Star Wars,’ but for movies in general.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/22/m...-universe.html

So when criticism from a select group of fans at having a second female lead in a row, as Felicity Jones stars as Jyn Erso in Rogue One: A Star Wars Story next month after Daisy Ridley starred as Rey in Star Wars: The Force Awakens started to hit, Kennedy paid it no mind.

"I have a responsibility to the company that I work with. I don't feel that I have a responsibility to cater in some way [to those particular fans]," Kennedy told the New York Times in an interview focused around Jones. "I would never just seize on saying, 'Well, this is a franchise that's appealed primarily to men for many, many years, and therefore I owe men something.'"

Indeed, the franchise's fandom has balanced out significantly on the gender line over the decades, with ReedPOP reporting their Star Wars Celebration conventions of the last several years have been attended by nearly perfect 50/50 splits of women to men. Felicity Jones, meanwhile, pointed out that just as women are expected to or desired by Hollywood to relate to male leads, she hopes the reverse can be done for Jyn.

"We wanted the audience to relate to Jyn as a person, whether you're a boy or a girl, a a man or a woman," Jones said in the same feature. "Like all of us, she's trying to work out what the hell to do."

http://comicbook.com/starwars/2016/1...t-need-to-cat/

[Rausch]

What Kennedy doesn't get is SW's isn't about our world - it's about THAT galaxy.

In that galaxy you can travel at light speed or be sold into slavery. You can be a ****ing orangutan and fly a starship. It's not progressive or conservative - it's completely different...

[WhiteWhale]

Originally Posted by sedated

JFC.

10 years ago I thought racism was dead in the US, but the internet has reminded me that old white people are PISSED about women and minorities infiltrating their media.

Look, it doesn't bother me that much because it's found in all films to different degrees. I didn't bring up that this could easily be lampooned as the Matriarchy vs. the Patriarchy when listing gripes because I don't find it that important nor do I think it harmed the film, but are you seriously unaware this movie was bombarding you with political lectures and subtext?

It wasn't subtle. I could go into great detail just based on what I picked up by osmosis rather than analysis. I'm not the only one. There's plenty of articles from progressive sites telling you all the reasons this is the most progressive/feminist/woke Star Wars movie yet. It was about as subtle as Forrest Gump and it's right wing message. I loathe the underlying message of Forrest Gump (thump your bible, do as your told, and everything works out), but I love the film.

I didn't like this movie for reasons exclusively movie related.

[WhiteWhale]

Originally Posted by Chiefspants

If you had the opportunity to murder teenage Hitler and prevent Nazi Germany from killing over 10 million people, would you do it?

Ummm..

Darth Vader murdered hundreds of billions of people with super weapons and probably personally killed thousands if not millions with his own hands/force powers. Luke threw down his weapon rather than kill him. Vader was already FAR worse than Hitler, he blew up planets as an intimidation tactic, but Luke thought he could save him because he had a sliver of good in him.

Now he'll act on fear and try to murder his sleeping nephew because of something he MIGHT do? What he MIGHT do makes him so irredeemable that he's gonna kill him... in his SLEEP?!

I'm not Luke Skywalker. This isn't about what I would do. It's about following what you've established as a character, and in my eyes (and in the eyes of many fans) this movie absolutely botches it. It goes 100% against what has been established.

[Rausch]

Originally Posted by sedated

All of this has been explained.

No, it hasn't.

It's been explained away - but none of this shit makes any sense. The film was a purposeful fire in a dumpster to purge the original characters other than Rey and (I'm assuming her new guru) Leia.

I'm fine with a female lead. It didn't stop me from loving Alien/s or Fringe (God bless Anna Torv.) That said it needs a good story and these two films have ruined what came before while giving nothing new.

What, leaving The Last Jedi, did you take away as "the moral of the story?"

What did it say to you?

What was the message you were left with after seeing it?

[Chiefspants]

Originally Posted by WhiteWhale

Ummm..
.

So uh, you planning on answering the question? Luke saw Kylo (quite correctly) become a murdering psychopath who was going to wreak havoc on the galaxy. It was a moment of weakness - not an unredeemable decision like killing younglings or some such.

[WhiteWhale]

Originally Posted by Chiefspants

So uh, you planning on answering the question?

No.

As I said, what I would do is not relevant. I'm a real person, I'm not an established fictional character named Luke Skywalker.

I explained that. Did you just not read the part you omitted?

You can like Luke the Coward. I don't.

[unlurking]

Originally Posted by Chiefspants

So uh, you planning on answering the question? Luke saw Kylo (quite correctly) become a murdering psychopath who was going to wreak havoc on the galaxy. It was a moment of weakness - not an unredeemable decision like killing younglings or some such.

I thought his response perfectly pointed out that your equating of Ren to Hitler was flawed, and that we had already seen Luke NOT make the decision to "kill Hitler" when he was vulnerable. No further answer required.

[WhiteWhale]

Originally Posted by unlurking

I thought his response perfectly pointed out that your equating of Ren to Hitler was flawed, and that we had already seen Luke NOT make the decision to "kill Hitler" when he was vulnerable. No further answer required.

He seems concerned with what I would do in that situation, as if my hypothetical actions relate to Luke.

It's weird. If Luke isn't an established character then this conversation doesn't happen... but he is, and here we are.

[Hammock Parties]

A healthy $32 million domestic on Christmas day.

Rogue one did $25 million.

TFW did $49 million.

TLJ is going to be just fine.

[Chiefspants]

Originally Posted by unlurking

I thought his response perfectly pointed out that your equating of Ren to Hitler was flawed, and that we had already seen Luke NOT make the decision to "kill Hitler" when he was vulnerable. No further answer required.

Sure, let’s have this debate I guess. Luke did have this option before, and you better believe he chose to wipe out Nazi Germany for the greater good.

Are you really arguing the ethics of Luke “lighting his lightsaber” when he was responsible for the deaths of over 300,000 mothers, fathers, innocent contractors and good people in the Death Star? Are we just choosing to gloss over that fact now? So why did Luke decide to commit one of the biggest genocides ever? (His kill count is behind Tarkin, but more than his father). He did it for the greater good, because he knew killing this amount of people would ultimately save more - a decision he weighed but ultimately didn't make with Ren.

Luke’s decision to ignite his lightsaber game at a moment of weakness, similar to when he tried to kill his father in ESB, and when he lopped his arm off in Jedi. The fact is, failure and these massive mental lapses are a major part of Luke’s character.

But if claiming that igniting his lightsaber ruins his character helps justify your stance on TLJ, that’s fine, but we’re going to disagree.

Originally Posted by WhiteWhale

He seems concerned with what I would do in that situation, as if my hypothetical actions relate to Luke.

It's weird. If Luke isn't an established character then this conversation doesn't happen... but he is, and here we are.

An established character who's responsible for the deaths of almost half a million people, if anything, Luke is much more likely to end Hitler than you would be.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by Hammock Parties

A healthy $32 million domestic on Christmas day.

Rogue one did $25 million.

TFW did $49 million.

TLJ is going to be just fine.

That number was already in the 4 day projection.

You’re grasping and I have no idea why.

[Hammock Parties]

Such a great moment.

[WhiteWhale]

Originally Posted by Chiefspants

An established character who's responsible for the deaths of almost half a million people, if anything, Luke is much more likely to end Hitler than you would be.

Darth Vader blew up a planet. It was one of his first actions as a character.

Half a million? Oh, you mean the people piloting an active super-weapon of mass murder?

Vader was Hitler X 1,000,000, and Luke didn't end him when given the chance. You're desperately trying to make this about me for some bizarre reason. Knock it off.

You're getting pretty salty and not thinking clearly. Stopping a super weapon that kills billions isn't the same as murdering a sleeping child, and the closest thing he has to a living descendant, for something he might do. Get over it.

I didn't like it, and your arguments against my reasons are falling flat. I'm not trying to convince you to hate it.