Star Wars Episode 7: The Force Awakens Thread **SPOILERS THROUGHOUT**

Interesting about the r2d2 deus ex machina. Someone mentioned earlier that maybe he activated when Luke's daughter Rey turned up. Except of course R2D2 never belonged to Luke. He belonged to Obi Wan Kenobi (last) so wouldn't it make sense for him to activate when a Kenobi turned up? Plus it would be a nice mirror of R2 producing a hologram for a Kenobi from ep IV. And as discussed, JJ Abrams likes repeating things...

Just a thought
 
I've read all the many reasons why everyone thinks Rey might be a child of Obi-Wan Kenobi rather than Luke, and on the surface, they all seem quite compelling reasons.

(But you know there is a however coming...) However, I can't quite really see how Obi-Wan Kenobi could have a child of that age. Rey appears to be the same age, or younger, than Ben Solo, who was born after shortly after RotJ. She could be younger, but not a lot younger*. Obi-Wan died in ANH. He was pretty busy in ANH from them discovering him in a cave to his death and he certainly didn't have time for ladies and gentlemen (as Nick Ferrari calls it.) So, the explanation would have to be that while living in a cave on Tatooine, surrounded by Jawas, he was visited by a love interest (only the Force knows how she found him there!) or that he nipped out to Mos Eisley once in a while (well it was a wretched hive of scum and villainy.) Then, he goes off on some damned-fool idealistic crusade while leaving mother and daughter behind without providing for them (which all tends to lower your high opinions of him.) Also, since Rey has memories of her family leaving her behind on Jakku, this would need to be a step-family, meaning that she was abandoned not once, but twice! (Freud would need years to analyse these people.)

In all, it just make the narrative easier if Luke was her father.

*A version of the script that has been released says that she was left behind on Jakku with Unkar Plutt, the junk dealer who had the Millennium Falcon under wraps, at a very young age. I think she had to be born long after Obi-Wan was dead. Even as powerful as he became when struck down by Vader he is unlikely to have been able to sire any children in that form (though I'm just guessing there.)
 
I think it would make more sense if she was a granddaughter or other relative, but still a Kenobi.i think it would be good for them to introduce another family into the mix
 
I see your "Good" in terms of everyone with the Force not being related (as I'm sure that wasn't the original intention.)

Not so "Good," as in it making the saga impossibly complicated and quite frankly, unbelievable. Just for instance, what happened to Rey's father, Obi-Wan's son? Why have we never heard from him before? Was he not also a great Jedi warrior? Did the Force skip a generation with him? That can't have made him a happy bunny?

I prefer to apply Occam's razor but I do like the idea of people spending so much time (including myself here) thinking on this.
 
Can the force skip a generation? Not sure, but it seems to lay dormant until "awakened". Look at Luke. And Rey. So it's conceivable that Rey's father (or mother) just never realised they had the power of the force within. Plus,as mentioned in the blog, the Skywalker family really doesn't seem like the one to bring balance to the force.

And I agree, it's good that the movie has got so many people talking about various theories and not just how much they hate Jar Jar Binks
 
*A version of the script that has been released says that she was left behind on Jakku with Unkar Plutt, the junk dealer who had the Millennium Falcon under wraps, at a very young age. I think she had to be born long after Obi-Wan was dead. Even as powerful as he became when struck down by Vader he is unlikely to have been able to sire any children in that form (though I'm just guessing there.)

It's actually Unkar Plutt who is holding her arm in her force vision. I didn't pick up on that until the third time I saw it!

In the Clone Wars, Obi-Wan had some thing (hard to say what that thing was) going on with Duchess Satine of Manadalor. Maybe Rey could be his grandchild?
 
I've already posted this elesewhere but since I'm lazy so and so who can't be bothered to re phrase it I'll just repeat myself word for word.

While I enjoyed The Force Awakens I suspect it might be in for an ugly backlash. This might seem strange to say now but back when it first came out people kind of liked Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. It got good reviews on Rotten Tomatoes, it was very briefly in IMDB’s top 250 (hardly a certificate of genuine merit as Transformers 1 accomplished the same feat) and the general consensus was that while it wasn’t quite up there with Raiders and the Last Crusade it was still better than Temple of Doom.

Sure, people recognised its flaws and mercilessly poked fun at the cartoon monkeys, gophers and spine shattering fridge antics. But they brushed it aside and were just happy to take the movie as a quick romp down memory lane. But despite the initial positive reception Crystal Skull is now held up with the likes of Batman and Robin in the Great Hall of franchise killers. Even its IMDB score has plummeted below that of the Phantom Menace while even Transformers, has maintained a respectable 7.1 out of 10. On the flip side you have Temple of Doom. Once held universally as the black sheep of the series it’s had a re-evaluation recently. While it hasn’t reached the prestige of the other films many now respect its boldness for breaking with the formula of Raiders and doing its own thing.

Much like The Force Awakens Crystal skull banked all its money on tickling people’s fond memories. And with the honeymoon over the good will that initially kept it afloat dissipated. The film’s shortcomings which had once been dismissed as minor flaws became the only thing people remembered, largely because there was little to remember beyond the nostalgia value.

It’s often said that Lucas and Spielberg don’t care enough about what their fans say but a brief look at both Crystal Skull and the prequels shows they have the opposite problem. Huge swathes of the Jones sequel are dripping with lines, plot points, shots and dialogue copy pasted straight out of the first three films. Lucas cut Jar Jar out of the prequels to please fans and Revenge of the Sith was nothing but an exercise in pandering to fan demands (Make it Dark! Millennium Falcon cameo! Chewbacca! Old Trilogy Lines! Binary sunset on Tatooine!). So much time was devoted to evoking the original films that they neglected to add any meat of their own.

Interestingly the opposite occurred with the original Star Wars movies. Many were lukewarm at first about Empire’s darker tone and welcomed the more energetic, fun Jedi as a return to form. Of course, we all know how that turned out.

Will The Force Awakens meet with the same backlash? Possibly, though I doubt it will be anywhere as brutal. For all its pandering there’s a well-made, compelling movie underlying its missteps. The director of Episode 8 has assured us that he’ll take the series in a radically different direction. Hopefully this is a sign that Disney realise the risks of playing it too safe and are merely trying to wash away the stink of the prequels. But whatever the outcome we should remember that more often than not even fans don’t know what we really want.
 
The director of Episode 8 has assured us that he’ll take the series in a radically different direction. Hopefully this is a sign that Disney realise the risks of playing it too safe and are merely trying to wash away the stink of the prequels. But whatever the outcome we should remember that more often than not even fans don’t know what we really want.

Given that director is Rian Johnson - who gave us Brick and Looper - I'm not exactly filled with hope.
 
Just seen Episode VII.

Overall, I liked it. The new British leads held up, and whilst Kylo Ren is no Darth Vader, he's still a major step up from prequel Anakin/Vader. I also like the way he's established as a Sith but essentially still in training (Sith Lower Sixth?), which makes him losing the fight to Rey a little more credible.

CGI on Snoke [or whatever his stupid name was] was perplexingly bad.
 
Much like The Force Awakens Crystal skull banked all its money on tickling people’s fond memories. And with the honeymoon over the good will that initially kept it afloat dissipated. The film’s shortcomings which had once been dismissed as minor flaws became the only thing people remembered, largely because there was little to remember beyond the nostalgia value.

It’s often said that Lucas and Spielberg don’t care enough about what their fans say but a brief look at both Crystal Skull and the prequels shows they have the opposite problem. Huge swathes of the Jones sequel are dripping with lines, plot points, shots and dialogue copy pasted straight out of the first three films. Lucas cut Jar Jar out of the prequels to please fans and Revenge of the Sith was nothing but an exercise in pandering to fan demands (Make it Dark! Millennium Falcon cameo! Chewbacca! Old Trilogy Lines! Binary sunset on Tatooine!). So much time was devoted to evoking the original films that they neglected to add any meat of their own.

I don't really see them as comparable. For one thing, Crystal Skull had far more serious deficiencies. It relied heavily on a phoning-it-in Harrison Ford and Mariane (I'm embarrassingly blanking on her name) to provide crucial plot points, and attempted to set up Shia Labeuof as "the next Indy" with poor results. The Star Wars flicks incorporated the old characters but are clearly phasing them out for a new, planned trilogy, not just throwing stuff at the wall hoping to get a one-off blockbuster. Also, the new Star Wars characters are far more interesting and compelling and recalled the chemistry and humor that made the originals a hit and was totally lacking from Crystal Skull.

Also, fan pandering in the prequels is debatable, or at the very least Lucas grossly misinterpreted what fans clamored for and received in this new movie: humor instead of overbearing self-seriousness, a lived in universe not a CGI magic eye, characters with compelling plotlines rather than reducing Darth Vader to an emo charicature.

Given that director is Rian Johnson - who gave us Brick and Looper - I'm not exactly filled with hope.

Odd, that gives me hope. Looper was not great, but it was at least interesting and felt unique. Brick is one of my favorite modern noirs... very sly and satirical. But then, I love that genre so seeing the tropes handles so deftly was a rare treat for me. I feel he can do for Star Wars what Bryan Singer once did well for XMen.
 
Did anyone like the Crystal Skull when it was released?!?!

There were at least 199 of the buggers.

Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull


Not to mention it managed to get in IMDB's top 250 very briefly. Not that that's any kind of achievement as Michael Bay's Transformers managed the same feat, but it does show the initial response was pretty positive. To go from that to having a lower rating than The Phantom Menace suggests an above average backlash. I'm not suggesting that The Force Awakens can be compared to Crystal Skull or the prequels in terms of quality. But I can't help but suspect that a lot of the initial buzz is coasting on nostalgia. With the Jones sequel and Revenge of the Sith reactions quickly turned sour once viewers got over their earlier euphoria. That's not going to happen with The Force Awakens, it's too good a film to garner the levels of contempt the prequels are rightly held in. But it could still suffer a similar backlash, albiet on a smaller scale.

In the wake of its release many fans gushed over Revenge of the Sith's call backs to the original trilogy. The film felt like a check list of everything they'd been clamouring for. The crude attempts at witty banter in the first act were a transparent effort to capture the quiping of the original trilogy, Chewbacca gobbled up 15 minutes of screen time for no other reason than to please the converted. And Anakin butchering a classroom of munchkins was no doubt there to placate those who had been demmanding a darker movie (Lucas orignally wanted a PG rating but later relented and went for a PG-13). And at first it worked. At first the film was hailed as a return to form by both critics and fans. Now whenver they discuss it it's with that same pensive stutter they employ when someone brings up that one time in 1998 when they voted BNP.

Another problem with the constant references is that they remind you of things the original movies did better. The destruction of the Honsian system echoes Alderean but since we have no emotional connection to anyone on the planet it rings hollow compared to Leia seeing her home world obliterated in front of her. The final assault on Starkiller Base evocation of A New Hope's climax, right down to the imagery only reminds you of how much more suspenseful, tense and well-constructed original film compared to the new one. These issues certainly aren't fatal to the film. The characters are too charismatic and compelling for that and for all its problems it's a solid movie. But in the long run that might prove even more detrimental to the series than if it had just been plain awful.

Complete and utter rubbish as the prequels were they at least gave us plenty to talk about, which in turn only stoked our passion for the series. The sheer gulf in quality between them and the old films only magnified our love for them. In contrast a lot of people I know both online and off seem a bit lukewarm about The Force Awakens. They liked it well enough but weren't overly bowled over by it. And nothing breeds stagnation like apathy. I fear that unless the new films make a strong impression on us that doesn't rely on the old films then they'll piddle away into a stream of irreversible disintrest and mediocrity*, especially with one movie coming out every year.

* Here's a completely unrelated link to another movie: The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (2012) - IMDb
 
I think Crystal Skull gets more flack than it deserves. It's not as good as the original Indy films, but it's not terrible.

That said, if I were writing Indiana Jones 5, I'd have Shia LaBoeuf's[sp] character get killed in the first five minutes.

Agree entirely on the chemistry between the two new Star Wars main characters. That worked very well. I was less taken with BB-8, until the thumbs up.
 
Did anyone like the Crystal Skull when it was released?!?!

Not me! :D

Regarding the Star Wars prequels, I'm working my way through The Clone Wars tv series on blu-ray at the moment and I'm very pleasantly surprised by how it takes those same characters/situations and makes it all so much more engaging and exciting. To me, it hints that the prequels might have worked if Lucas had stuck to producing.
 
For me, the only real bad about Crystal Skull, is it just didn't feel like Indiana Jones, in the 50's versus Russians - the Indy happy space is the 30's/40's facing off the Nazis, if he is to face a baddy with global influence.

One thing I am confused about in Awakens - that moment when Ren tells his Dad that its tearing him apart, and he is confused, doesn't know what to do etc - was that genuine, is he potentially savable like his Grandfather eventually was, or was he just playing games with Han?

I am a little conflicted about the First Order - I would very much have liked the baddy to be some sort of Imperial Rump, perhaps even one that eventually made an uneasy military peace with the New Republic, but has now been taken over by Supreme Leader Snoke and the peace is over, but at the same time, I suppose there could be some advantage in a new enemy - but why use Stormy Armour for example - in the Wars following the breakup of the Former Yugoslavia, Bosnian Muslim Extremists reformed the SS Handschar Division. The SS Uniform like the Stormies is one designed to intimidate, to strike fear, and anyone who lived under German Occupation would still feel that fear a little today I bet, but I don't believe the Bosnians swanned around in replica SS Uniforms, but even had they done so, the elderly survivors of Nazi attacks and occupation, anywhere, would feel that little fear, but people of my Generation, and younger, to us, they are grainy old photo's and video footage, we don't feel that fear, because we did not live under it, or in a world, where the real SS were strutting around.

So the Stormy Armour doesn't even really work as an intimidation factor, sure, the elders of the Galaxy would be genuinely terrified, as they remember living under them before, but to the young, they are just old pictures and holofeed vids. And the armour doesn't really deserve the name, since it doesn't protect the trooper. I can understand the use of Imperial Ships, I would imagine there were plenty around, endless supplies of spares, which is likely the motivation of their use. We of course know absolutely nothing about the FO yet, but it seems fair to assume they are not an Imperial Remnant that has rebranded, given the Imperials loathed Aliens, and Snoke is rather Alieny looking!

How many of you guys, who like me were avid EU Readers, when Snoke appeared the first time immediately got excited and thought IT'S ADMIRAL BLOODY THRAWN!!!!!! (I did I am ashamed to admit :p

I know he only shares skin colour, but it depends on the licensing deal that Del Rey made when they got the go ahead to produce the EU Novels. In Doctor Who for example, the Terry Nation Estate owns the copyright to the Daleks, and there is absolutely nothing to stop them from licensing the Daleks to appear in another franchise, or their own movie or TV Series, BUT for any such non BBC appearance, the Daleks used could not resemble any Daleks that have appeared under the BBC Brand. It's a bit of a vague concept, but take the Bronze Dalek design in use since Dr Who returned in 2005 you could not replicate that design. I am not sure how much colour is affected though, it is easy to tweak it enough to make it different enough from the BBC designs, but I don't know if copyright would also stop you from painting your new design Bronze, or using the White and Gold design of the Imperial Daleks of late 80's classic Dr Who.

So I did wonder if it was a similar deal going on, they used Thrawn but had to give him a different look to any Del Rey or other non Lucasarts originated products.
 
I recently saw The Force Awakens for a second time, and now I think I like it even better than on my first viewing. Kylo Ren didn't sit well with me as a villain at first, but he is growing on me. It is a very enjoyable throwback to the original trilogy.
 
Is there any official word on exactly what worlds where destroyed by the FO Weapon? Coruscant obviously, it looked like at least several Core Worlds were destroyed. Is the EU Galactic Map the official Lucasarts cartography, or is that also now a thing of the past and up to Disney to rebuild from scrap?

I am kind of excited about the Rogues film, but erm, none of the pictured team who will apparantly locate the death star plans were Bothan - Mon Mothma said in A New Hope "Many Bothan spies died to bring us this information" not "Many Bothan Spies and Human Commandos died to bring us this information" Though admittedly, I suppose there is some room for interpretation since she doesnt say the Bothans GOT the information, just brought it.
 
How many of you guys, who like me were avid EU Readers, when Snoke appeared the first time immediately got excited and thought IT'S ADMIRAL BLOODY THRAWN!!!!!! (I did I am ashamed to admit :p

Nope, I think you may be the only one! I don't see any resemblance at all, to be honest. Especially given that Snoke is obviously a Force user and Thrawn never was. If it was the fact that he had a bluish tinge that made you think this, just remember that all holograms in the Star Wars universe are blue. At least I can't remember any that weren't.

But in any case, my understanding is that Disney brought Star Wars whole, and if they wanted to use Thrawn they could have, without worrying about any kind of change to adhere to licensing agreements. They've been pretty open about saying that they've discarded pretty much the entirety of the EU, but will cherry pick things when it suits them. I don't think this is one of those times, though.

Is there any official word on exactly what worlds where destroyed by the FO Weapon? Coruscant obviously, it looked like at least several Core Worlds were destroyed. Is the EU Galactic Map the official Lucasarts cartography, or is that also now a thing of the past and up to Disney to rebuild from scrap?

I am kind of excited about the Rogues film, but erm, none of the pictured team who will apparantly locate the death star plans were Bothan - Mon Mothma said in A New Hope "Many Bothan spies died to bring us this information" not "Many Bothan Spies and Human Commandos died to bring us this information" Though admittedly, I suppose there is some room for interpretation since she doesnt say the Bothans GOT the information, just brought it.

There is official word that Coruscant definitely wasn't one of the worlds destroyed - that was Hosnian Prime, apparently, currently hosting the New Republic senate (it moves planets regularly, it seems). I don't know about the other worlds, though, or the state of play of the galaxy map.

Also, Mon Mothma is talking about the plans for the second Death Star in the bit you quote. I believe Rogue One is focused on the theft of the first Death Star plans, and we don't have any real info on how these were acquired.
 

Back
Top