Interesting Star Wars commentary
BelgarathMTH
Member Posts: 5,653
I thought I'd link this opinion piece about the cultural significance of Star Wars and how Disney is changing it here. It appeared in this morning's Chattanooga Times Free-Press.
I think the author expresses articulately a lot of my own concerns about the direction Disney is taking, as well as explaining why Star Wars is a culturally important shared story, and more than "just a movie" to many people.
Comments and thoughts?
EDIT: I can't link the article, so I'll try copy-pasting it, complete with credits and author information. Article appeared in Chattanooga Times-Free Press, Saturday, January 13, 2018.
On Religion Commentary
Star Wars theology debates heat up
Terry Mattingly
Debates about Star Wars theology have come a long way since kids in the first “Star Wars generation” asked: “Is the Force the same thing as God?”
Later, kids viewing the second George Lucas trilogy faced the puzzling Nativity story of Anakin Skywalker. The future Darth Vader was conceived by bloodstream midi-chlorians — the essence of life — acting in union with the Force? His mother explained: “There is no father.”
Now the middle film in the new trilogy — “Star Wars: The Last Jedi” — has believers debating whether the mythology created by Lucas has evolved into something more polemical, political and commercial, all at the same time. The big question: Can those who loved the early films trust Disney to protect the true faith?
From the beginning, it was clear Lucas was blending the comparative religion scholarship of Joseph “The Hero With a Thousand Faces” Campbell with dashes of Arthurian legend, samurai epics and Flash Gordon. At the heart of it all was the “monomyth” of Luke Skywalker and his epic spiritual quest, noted Bishop Robert Barron of the Archdiocese of Los Angeles.
“A young man (typically) is summoned out of the comfort of his domestic life and compelled to go on a dangerous adventure,” argued Barron at his “Word on Fire” website. “In the process, he comes to realize and conquer his weakness, to face down enemies and finally to commune with the deep spiritual powers that are at play in the cosmos. … Usually, as a preparation for his mission, he is trained by a spiritual master.”
Some of these themes remain in “The Last Jedi,” noted Barron, and it’s obvious that Rey is a young heroine on her own quest. The problem, argued the bishop, is what has happened to Luke Skywalker and the rest of the ensemble. The old myths and archetypes have been buried in “an aggressively feminist ideology.”
“Every male character … is either bumbling, incompetent, arrogant or morally compromised; and every female character is wise, good, prudent and courageous. Even Luke has become embittered and afraid,” wrote Barron. The females “correct, demote, control and roll their eyes at the males, who stumble about when not provided with feminine instruction. I laughed out loud when Rey, the young woman who has come to Luke for instruction in the ways of the Jedi, shows herself already in full possession of spiritual power. No Yoda or Obi-Wan required, thank you very much.”
The Disney team may be changing some of the vague, but potent, Buddhist and Christian themes woven into the original films. For example, mastering “the Force” once required discipline, humility and careful training.
There was good and there was evil, and heroes knew the difference.
Now, Rolling Stone exults that the new film leads viewers “through so many trap doors and blind alleys that we can’t tell the dark side from the light. Heroes die and villains thrive … and then it’s the reverse. That’s the point of the movie.”
Disney insiders may be deconstructing the whole idea of what it means to be a hero or a villain, or to act in a heroic manner, said Alex Wainer of Palm Beach Atlantic University. He is the author of “Soul of the Dark Knight,” a study of mythic themes in Batman fiction, and has studied Star Wars films for decades.
“There are so many things in this new film that don’t make sense, or they don’t make sense yet,” he said. “Why are the males suddenly all losers? I get it that Rey is the new mythic hero, and that’s fine. But why is Rey so unusually gifted? Where does her giftedness come from? What does it mean? Will we eventually get some explanations that make sense, in Star Wars terms?”
It’s also possible, he said, that the old Star Wars theology worked for one or two films, but it’s falling apart as Disney’s principalities and powers attempt to extend the franchise into the future — movie after movie, year after year, world without end.
“Maybe the Force worked for a movie or two, and you didn’t have to explain it. Then you added the midi-chlorians and things started falling apart,” said Wainer. “But this saga has enormous meaning for millions of people. It’s become a ritual for our culture. This is personal, and people want it to make sense.”
Terry Mattingly is the editor of GetReligion.
org and Senior Fellow for Media and Religion at
The King’s College in New York City. He lives in Oak Ridge, Tennessee.
I think the author expresses articulately a lot of my own concerns about the direction Disney is taking, as well as explaining why Star Wars is a culturally important shared story, and more than "just a movie" to many people.
Comments and thoughts?
EDIT: I can't link the article, so I'll try copy-pasting it, complete with credits and author information. Article appeared in Chattanooga Times-Free Press, Saturday, January 13, 2018.
On Religion Commentary
Star Wars theology debates heat up
Terry Mattingly
Debates about Star Wars theology have come a long way since kids in the first “Star Wars generation” asked: “Is the Force the same thing as God?”
Later, kids viewing the second George Lucas trilogy faced the puzzling Nativity story of Anakin Skywalker. The future Darth Vader was conceived by bloodstream midi-chlorians — the essence of life — acting in union with the Force? His mother explained: “There is no father.”
Now the middle film in the new trilogy — “Star Wars: The Last Jedi” — has believers debating whether the mythology created by Lucas has evolved into something more polemical, political and commercial, all at the same time. The big question: Can those who loved the early films trust Disney to protect the true faith?
From the beginning, it was clear Lucas was blending the comparative religion scholarship of Joseph “The Hero With a Thousand Faces” Campbell with dashes of Arthurian legend, samurai epics and Flash Gordon. At the heart of it all was the “monomyth” of Luke Skywalker and his epic spiritual quest, noted Bishop Robert Barron of the Archdiocese of Los Angeles.
“A young man (typically) is summoned out of the comfort of his domestic life and compelled to go on a dangerous adventure,” argued Barron at his “Word on Fire” website. “In the process, he comes to realize and conquer his weakness, to face down enemies and finally to commune with the deep spiritual powers that are at play in the cosmos. … Usually, as a preparation for his mission, he is trained by a spiritual master.”
Some of these themes remain in “The Last Jedi,” noted Barron, and it’s obvious that Rey is a young heroine on her own quest. The problem, argued the bishop, is what has happened to Luke Skywalker and the rest of the ensemble. The old myths and archetypes have been buried in “an aggressively feminist ideology.”
“Every male character … is either bumbling, incompetent, arrogant or morally compromised; and every female character is wise, good, prudent and courageous. Even Luke has become embittered and afraid,” wrote Barron. The females “correct, demote, control and roll their eyes at the males, who stumble about when not provided with feminine instruction. I laughed out loud when Rey, the young woman who has come to Luke for instruction in the ways of the Jedi, shows herself already in full possession of spiritual power. No Yoda or Obi-Wan required, thank you very much.”
The Disney team may be changing some of the vague, but potent, Buddhist and Christian themes woven into the original films. For example, mastering “the Force” once required discipline, humility and careful training.
There was good and there was evil, and heroes knew the difference.
Now, Rolling Stone exults that the new film leads viewers “through so many trap doors and blind alleys that we can’t tell the dark side from the light. Heroes die and villains thrive … and then it’s the reverse. That’s the point of the movie.”
Disney insiders may be deconstructing the whole idea of what it means to be a hero or a villain, or to act in a heroic manner, said Alex Wainer of Palm Beach Atlantic University. He is the author of “Soul of the Dark Knight,” a study of mythic themes in Batman fiction, and has studied Star Wars films for decades.
“There are so many things in this new film that don’t make sense, or they don’t make sense yet,” he said. “Why are the males suddenly all losers? I get it that Rey is the new mythic hero, and that’s fine. But why is Rey so unusually gifted? Where does her giftedness come from? What does it mean? Will we eventually get some explanations that make sense, in Star Wars terms?”
It’s also possible, he said, that the old Star Wars theology worked for one or two films, but it’s falling apart as Disney’s principalities and powers attempt to extend the franchise into the future — movie after movie, year after year, world without end.
“Maybe the Force worked for a movie or two, and you didn’t have to explain it. Then you added the midi-chlorians and things started falling apart,” said Wainer. “But this saga has enormous meaning for millions of people. It’s become a ritual for our culture. This is personal, and people want it to make sense.”
Terry Mattingly is the editor of GetReligion.
org and Senior Fellow for Media and Religion at
The King’s College in New York City. He lives in Oak Ridge, Tennessee.
0
Comments
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/01/yo-yo-ma-we-need-culture-to-survive-and-thrive-future/
luck"power of the Force" just happens to blow up the master droid control ship, but if a *woman* shows Force powers, there's something wrong with Star Wars universe.Did I get that right?
Maybe The Last Jedi would have been better if Rey had tried spinning. That's a good trick.
Now, seriously, without being cynical or sarcastic. After my viewing of the Last Jedi I spend my sweet time to look at articles, opinions, videos regarding the movie and noticed a pattern. Of course, opinions vary, but in general two extremes could be found.
One extreme is utterly dissapointed at the movie, blaming everything on their boogie-men they call feminism and SJWs. On the other side there are exactly already mentioned boogie-men, accusating the other side of bigotry/sexism/racism/misogony or anything they would like. The funny thing is, I noticed some things in common between those two extremes.
Both are idologically driven, both are showing their politics or "ideologies" when thier does not belong, both are prone to see characters in categories of race and gender, which is bordeline bigotic and both sides in many ways are ignoring the plot of the movie, why things happen like they do, they don't think of character's motivations, goals or anything of actual importance. In short, one side has their boogie-man to blame if they don't like the movie, the other side is acting like their usual.
I would like for people to be able to let go of their prejudices, harmful ideologies and political beliefs for just 3 hours in their life. That would make things better for them. Alas, it's naive to think so if what I see on the internet is of any indication.
Now, to quote something interesting:
With Rey and her skills, it is interesting matter. While I agree that origins of her skills and potentials are not stated, I think this is type of material that will be expanded upon in comics and other non-movies materials. Take a notice that from the Star Wars main characters, only Anakin had sufficient training to explain his skills. On the movies alone, Luke barely does any. Few minutes with Obi-Wan and few hours/days with Yoda shouldn't be enough to justify anything. Not to mention learning the Lightsaber forms. By movies alone, him having any sensible skills in Lightsaber and having ghost of a chance against Vader is utterly unbelievable. But, comics and books greatly expanded upon this, and I have no reasons to believe Rey wouldn't get similar explanations. I even have some theories, but these aren't really worth anything. I don't see them being superior to anyone's other as for now.
I overall think that her grimmick is that she is inversion of a "Hero of the prophecy" trope. She really is no one, who just happens to be in certain place and time, who just happens to have huge potential in the Force. Such potentials are not unheart of, if Palpatine was of any indication.
Luke is a farmboy, he's flown the equivalent of a cropduster on the farm (his T-16). Yet, at the end of A New Hope, he's jumping into a combat starfighter with no combat flight training and no flying experience in space (i.e., gravity vs zero-g). It's the equivalent of going from a Cessna to an F-35. Red Leader not only allows this green farmboy into his squadron, but actually puts him in charge of Biggs and Wedge, two much more experienced pilots.
As far as Luke's Force powers, after a brief combat training session with a floating remote, Luke can use Force telekinesis (in the Wampa cave) and guide his proton torpedoes to make a 90-degree turn at exactly the right moment. (Remember, Luke's targeting computer is turned off. For the torpedoes to make the dive into the port at exactly the right moment required Luke to be exerting influence via the Force.) ALso, Luke becomes a fully-trained Jedi after just a few days or weeks on Dagobah, compared to the lifetime of training Jedi are supposed to require.
Anakin is a 10-year old who can build and program a fully sentient protocol droid from spare parts, race in the Tatooine equivalent of the Daytona 500, and also jump into a combat starfighter with no flight training. He not only survives this, but by randomly pushing buttons, manages to save the day.
It's a conceit of the movie, the hero needs to be unnaturally talented (or be able to achieve skill mastery after a ridiculously brief training, rather than the years it would take a typical person). A New Hope wouldn't be as satisfying if Luke were standing next to Leia in the command bunker on Yavin IV, waiting for Wedge to blow up the Death Star. So, the movie needs that "farmkid/slave/scavenger-turned-hero". But, for some reason, when the unnaturally talented hero is female (Rey) instead of male (Luke or Anakin), many people go apoplectic.
I've actually had someone argue with me on Youtube that Luke was with Yoda on Dagobah for 6 months. Which would mean Han and Leia were dodging Star Destroyers for over half a year. They would come with arcane and obtuse arguments based on the extended universe, which, for one thing, isn't even canon for the most part anymore. And for another, 90% of movie-goers are never going to touch a Timothy Zahn novel. Anakin is the only one of the 3 who received extensive training (somewhere in the neighborhood of 10 years I believe). There is virtually no difference between Luke and Rey.
As for the other complaints....look, I can't take any argument that uses the phrase "SJW" non-ironically seriously. I've seen Youtube videos claim that Leia and Laura Dern's character are lesbian lovers because they held hands for a moment. The idea that the movie hates men seems to be be focused on the idea that Poe is somehow getting a bad rap. Poe gets people killed for almost no reason, and his entire story-arch of the movie is him learning to grow up and face that fault in himself. If the people who teach him happen to be women, I'm not sure how that matters. Did we not all have mothers??
Moreover, I've seen alot of hate directed at Kathleen Kennedy, who is sort of curating this whole project. Thousands of comments about her feminist agenda ruining Star Wars. You couldn't seperate it from the ideaology of Gamergate if you tried. And that's the point. I don't think "The Last Jedi" was trying to push anything on anyone. I think the "Ghostbusters" reboot proved, and the "The Last Jedi" cemented the fact that there is a certain group of people online who are always on red-alert for the next anti-PC crusade, and if they can't find one, they'll invent one using the easiest target they can find.
It is also quite insane to suppose there is a significant genetic component to Force sensitivity, given that jedi are celibate. It must occur spontaneously in a small random cross-section of the population.
It was actually Rogue One that threw in more questions about understanding the Force, by depicting jedi as just one of many Force focused religions, and depicting a non-jedi character with extraordinary abilities, which may be powered purely by faith rather than Force-sensitivity. But that passed with minimal comment - because the character in question was male?
That being said, Disney straight-up took aspects of the EU to build the basis of the new movies. Han and Leia had 3 powerful Jedi children, and one of them became a Sith Lord. And in the Jedi Academy Trilogy, Luke did in-fact run a school for young force-sensitives that he lost control over. But what you have now is 25 years of books out there called "Star Wars Legends" which function as basically fan-fiction at this point. The only thing that is cannon now is the movies, the Clone Wars animated series, and any books that came out AFTER "The Force Awakens" was announced.
To address the comment above: Yes, the prequels have been universally derided. But they have bee derided because of the dialogue and the fact that 2/3 of them are genuinely bad movies with nothing to redeem them but art direction, music, and some fight scenes. No one complains about the "social message" of the prequels, even though certain aspects of "Revenge of the Sith" couldn't have had more ham-fisted allusions to the then-current Bush Administration if it tried. Padme's reaction to Palpatine's speech to the Senate and Anakin's last comment to Obi-Wan before their fight on Mustafar were a direct comment on the current political situation, far, FAR more than anything in "The Last Jedi" could ever hope of being.
I agree that Revenge of the Sith is the most obviously political film in the series.
I totally loved this movie.
I did however blubbed like an idiot when...That said, I don't have good form on this. I hate all the transformer movies, apart from the cartoon release of 1984. Reboots can alienate the old fanbase (I think Beamdog know this as well)
The dropping of the expanded universe was, in my opinion the greatest mistake Lucas made with the prequels. Timothy Zahn in his Hier to the Empire series, A trilogy so good that Geroge Lucas relinquished his grip on the rights to print Star Wars material had practically told the story in part about the clone wars and the 1000 capital starships that went rogue when they all followed a hacked command (the proto trade federation anyone) that could have easily, I thought be explained by a young Anakin Skywalker... And don't get me started on midiclorians...
I felt really let down they did not use the lore created from the Lucasart computer games... I really wanted to see Z-95 Headhunters flying around in those prequels...
As for political correctness. I see none. Just a bunch of boys being jocks in space playing with their extendable phallic lightsabres, that grow on command...
It is a fairy tale, first and foremost, with a princess, swords, sorcery and numerous stand ins for the big bad wolf, who usually has just deserts by stories end (I will admit fairy tales have less guns).
They have locked in lots of added extras to that original fairy tale story. Remember that scrolling text sequence wasn't added until Star Wars was re-released again in 1978 (having not left most cinemas from its debut in 1977) Whatever they did it was going to be shady and ad-hoc and I don't believe George Lucas had it all planned in his head because he got less gritty and more soft with age... Han Solo fires first and Ewoks are for kids (why couldn't he have visited the enslaved Wookies on Kasshyks if he wanted some furball action?)
Anyway... I TOTALLY LOVED
THIS
MOVIE...Basically we were shown a "training montage" in ANH/TESB, shorthand that was pretty much universally accepted for what it was and what the filmaker was trying to convey.
And now we are supposed to agree with the defenders of Rey's extrodinary prowess that that "shorthand" meant something else?
Although it was as plain as day what the aim of showing it was.
Jeez Louise, the lengths people will go to to defend their politics.
And somebody has of course mentioned Gamergate.
You couldn't make it up.
Though if it is to be mentioned, one can't help but feel it would be more relevent to mention it in relation to why a Hollywood Blockbuster about a very silly story (and don't think I don't love SW, but it is simplistic) got such universal high scores from paid critics.
Moreover, the other big argument (as far as TLJ having a politcal agenda) is how it makes men look. Luke was portrayed the exact same way as Poe in the first two movies, especially Empire, when he flips out on Yoda when he doesn't know who he is, and leaves to save his friends explicitly against Yoda's advice. I would argue Luke's portrayal (in a negative light) is FAR more substantial than anyone thing Poe receives in "The Last Jedi". He acts like a whiny little brat from the moment he arrives on Dagobah.
As for the critic scores, this is hardly the first time the scores on Rotten Tomatoes in regards to critics and fans have been at odds. Beyond that, it is going to easily come in somewhere between $600-625 million when it's run ends. Both "Empire" and "Attack of the Clones" came nowhere near the box office numbers of "A New Hope" and "The Phantom Menace". The drop-off has happened both times before. All available evidence tells us that Episode IX will do better. As much as we are being told people hate this movie, the money is talking, and the money says it is doing exactly what second acts of Star Wars trilogies do.
It's a pity when people are so busy bashing feminism that they miss the interesting stuff. The movie makes it pretty clear that Rey and Ben Solo are characters that mirror each other. Luke says outright that Ben is "unusally gifted" in the exact same way Rey is. But I still haven't seen anyone laugh dismissively at Ben and the stuff he's able to do (and it seems he could do a lot of it even before being trained).
All right, people do laugh dismissively at Ben, but not because he is a man.
Is that what you think?
Or is it a massive strawman that you have created to negate any critisism of the female characters we have been presented with?
Why I don't like Rey?
She bores me and I find nothing about her I can relate to. Any male/female that self assured makes me want to run to the hills.
Same for Holdo.
No weakness, no humanity.
And yes, it may well be my own lack of confidence or even some deep psychological trauma I experienced in childhood that I have a repressed memory of if you want to denigrate my opinion some more. Seeing as I don't have a "neckbeard" and don't live in a basement as that's the usual response
Go for it.
And FYI, I find Ben laughable as a character. But I haven't got around to laughing at what he can do because I haven't managed to stop laughing at the Emo BS yet. And that does stem from him being male.
FFS, man up, you're behaving like a baby.
And one thing he can't do anyway, as been made quite clear in two films, is fight particularly well.
The film's efforts to portray characters is incoherent nonsense.
1. I honestly think that people who obsess over Rey's lack of training get Star Wars wrong - or, to be more precise, take SW prequel-style. In prequels we saw Jedi being trained extensively and doing impossible feats, jumping around and swinging lightsaber in ridiculous choreography. Meanwhile, in The New Hope, when Kenobi is training Luke with that little droid, he doesn't say to him "okay, repeat that movement 1000 times and you are good to go". He asks him to "use the Force" (or something among those lines) and makes him reflect bolts blind-folded. Suddenly, Luke start showing some progress! The same situation repeats itself in the finale, when Luke resigns from using advanced equipment and relays on his feelings, not training. What happens? He destroys Death Star.
We seen it yet *again* on Dagobah - I mean, Yoda says it literally: there is no try. This is explicit negation of any training you can imagine. Luke can rise his X-wing using Force - but only if he does... It sounds like tautology, but this is how Force works in original trilogy and this is source of it's magic: it's not about decades of training. It's about trusting your feelings and all that spiritual mumbo-jumbo that makes SW great and memorable. Luke doesn't lose to Vader on Bespin because he is 4th lvl Jedi, and Vader is 16th level Sith. It's something more subtle. He loses because of lack of belief.
J. J. Abrams directly copies that approach. Rey is strong with the Force and this is why she is powerful - not other way around.
2. I think that people hating on Rey is not just matter of feminism - it is a factor in my opinion, but not the key one. The main problem is the fact that people *do not* want Rey to exist. They want Luke. Almost every criticism boils down to "Luke did it differently". It's pretty obvious in TFA that new trio isn't direct copy of Luke, Leia and Han - for an instance, it seems that Finn resembles Luke in many ways - he is unsure of himself, he takes beating, he grows to be ready to be a hero. Rey is just different - more similar to, let's say, Eggsy from Kingsman movies.
3.
Maybe... Maybe because we already had 6 movies with 2 female heroine in total? In prequles we have Qui-Gon, Dooku, Maul, Sidous, Anakin, Windu, Yoda, Jango, Grevious, Kenobi, Nute Gunray... oh, and Padme. In originals we had Luke, Han, Vader, Lando, Tarkin, Emperor, Boba Fett, Jabba, Chewbacca, and Leia. And Mon Mothma, I guess.
It really baffles me. Why is it okay and normal that in 6 movies politics, ethics, action, villainy and heroism are solely Man's World bussiness and on one bats an eye, but when female characters start to show some agency and suddenly it is an issue worth discussing?
And quoted question seems bizarre, considering only one character in TLJ succeeded - Kylo Ren. Everyone else lost. So... what the hell?
I'm sorry if I'm incoherent, but it's the middle of the night and I can't sleep, and just wanted to get that out of my chest.
4. Regarding SW in general, my friend showed me reddit quote that I think is very insightful:
"I think we need to consider the probable reality that after Return of the Jedi, there is nothing left to tell. JJ came back with The Fourth Awakens, but that left very little to do except a conceptual retread of the story that has already been told. Then Rian tears all that down - probably just to make room to go somewhere else. The problem there is that it was kind of like a hyper-agressive relay race runner. Rather than smoothly taking the baton, the next runner turned around, grabbed the baton and beat the piss out of the guy trying to hand it to him. But maybe because there really is nowhere to go here. George sold the rights to a story that has already been told. Now, Rogue One was cool, but it was from that story that has already been told. It just explored a gap between the two trilogies. The only real option would have been to start something completely different from some corner of the EU. But JJ didn't set that up. In all honesty, I think we have to look at TFA as the strategic error here. How do you get away from that in a way that provides continuity and doesn't piss everybody off? That is a real hard question to answer. And maybe there isn't an answer. Maybe Star Wars was already finished and we just aren't ready to admit it yet."
" I just don't know why so much of it is focused on the current political situation, especially the online arguments about feminism."
I'm not sure what you are talking about in this sentence.
Do you mean the film being focused on the current political situation?
Or do you mean the arguments about the film?
If it's the first then I would suggest that it's because the film has such a narrow perspective.
For instance, the nonsense about "the only people rich enough for this place are arms dealers".
As one of my daughters pointed out, in a galaxy spanning society, the only way people can make money is by dealing in weapons?
So this galaxy spanning society doesn't have popular entertainers making money hand over fist because they can provide entertainment that billions and billions will pay to watch?
Or all those creating art/music ect, with mass audiences?
Or those on a particular planet with a galaxy wide rare resource would be not selling it at a very high price?
What are they basing these "facts" on we are being told about this galaxy?
Nothing on earth for a start off, walk into any very expensive venue and it will be populated by resource millionaires (oil/gas/ect.), entertainers, corrupt rulers, providers of consumables (Bill Gates et all) ect.
So critisising the political message in this particular example depicted in the film is legitimate IMO because it so patently absurd. And for Disney/Hollywood to try and get away with it makes it doubly absurd.
$4 billion was paid for the rights wasn't it, and they dare to lecture the audience about the evils of captitalism?
Now, TESB does have a training montage. Even then, as exhibited by Yoda's initial comment that Luke was "too old to being the training" and the prequels, where it is shown that Jedi begin training at early childhood and don't graduate from padawan status until adulthood, Luke's training to full Jedi is abnormally fast.
This is a common trope for the hero in a Star Wars film. As the hero, Luke has abilities beyond those a normal person, or even a normal Jedi, would have. Anakin was portrayed similarly. As a 10-year old with no flight training, he not only survives a pitched space battle, but ends up destroying the main enemy ship.
Rey is portrayed in this same mold. She is lower-class kid from a backwater, desolate world who happens to be supernaturally talented in the Force. The major difference between her and Luke or Anakin is her gender. Well, that and not being born of the Virgin
Mary, er, Shmi.And in the context of Star Wars, where the largest and richest organization in the known universe is the First Order, which is currently at war, it makes sense that arms manufacturing would be one of the most profitable sectors of the galactic economy--or even the most profitable.
After all, we're talking about a world where people once made a weapon the size of a moon. I don't know of any non-military construct that even approached the scale of the Death Star.
[ducks into bomb shelter]
I'll grant the part about the arms dealers is a bit ham-fisted, though certainly not more ham-fisted than Padme's reaction to Palpatine's speech or Anakin basically quoting George W. Bush in the run-up to Iraq. But beyond that comparison, who among us is in favor of arms dealers?? Do they have a constituency I'm not aware of??
How?
The rebels won, they destroyed the Empire, people had parties, Ewoks danced, the huge megacities had firework displays to celebrate, we saw it.
Come on, it was a clumsy attempt to showhorn some "edgy" political comment into the film and completely unecessary, a bit like the character saying it.
What they did to the character of Finn was dreadful, did the director even consider how bad that looked?
They turned him into a fool, into comic relief and then completely abandoned the possibility, it seems, that he will get the girl.
(basing that presumption on the whole Kylo shirtless scene)
Or even to further the bromance that was going on with Poe.
Will be interesting to see if that Kylo/Rey dynamic is explored and if it isn't in the next film and people are disappointed, I look forward to future defenders of the film telling us that nothing was supposed to happen, it was all in the audiences imagination and that it's intelligent filmaking to thwart expectations
Have you ever considered that when you push an idea too far you end up with something that is too far removed from an individuals suspension of disbelief?
This film was full of this, Leia, by all means strong in the force.
Mary Poppins in Space, too far.
Holdo, woman in charge, no problem.
A dictator who doesn't consult with senior officer and nobody questions her, too far.
Poe, senior pilot with an organisation and nobody has ever pulled him up before, no chain of command, no discipline?
Too far.
Finn, lowly maintenence worker for the First Order who knows everything about secret trackers?
Too far.
Captain Phasma, flashy armour, dedicated soldier, beaten down with a stick.
Too Far
(and lets not even consider the continuity of that scene, I'm standing right next to you and going to kill you, big explosion, I'm on the other side of the area undamaged)
Get put in jail and there's a code breaker/lock picker there who can do what they need.
Too far.
Glittery Pokomon foxes run into the base under attack to lead you to a "secret" back escape route.
Too far.
Rey, strong in the force can beat anybody straight away.
Too far.
Can you remember in A New Hope when Leia blasted a hole in the wall and they escaped into the garbage disposal. Genuine tension building scene, actors/audience/droids, nobody knew what was going on.
This film they would have fallen in the garbage and met a uniformed guide who showed them the way back to the ship, after letting them out and giving them a shoe polish.
Edited to Add
Even BG had the decency to make the Neb who helps you break out of jail make you work for it and was clearly portrayed as mad and unbalanced.
And you know why?
Because the writers had to make some plausible reason that they would do this, would still be waiting around.
An example (Just to demonstrate)
We know virtually nothing about Poe. They attempt to discipline him, but it's clear that there are very (very) few members of the resistance left, so Leia probably lets a lot slide.
Is my argument based on conjecture? Sure! Is yours? Absolutely yes. Keep in mind that a lot of the backstory of the characters has not been written. You arent the arbiter of what is known and what isnt known.
Last point - keep in mind the exact same argument for unbelievable plot points can be made for any of the Star Wars movies.
An example: Stone-arm 2.5 foot tall teddy bears managed to stall and effectively defeat the single most complex military fighting force in the galaxy (one that was tasked with defending the one of the single most important facilities in all of the galaxy. What a terrible movie...
or in print...
http://www.whysanity.net/monos/hooper.html