Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Categories

Dark Dreams of Furiae - a new module for NWN:EE! Buy now
Attention, new and old users! Please read the new rules of conduct for the forums, and we hope you enjoy your stay!

Poll: Worst/Most Hated Star Wars Character

24

Comments

  • JoenSoJoenSo Member Posts: 904

    Unpopular opinion: Phantom Menace is much, much better than Attack of the Clones

    This reminds me of this guy who thought the expression "like choosing between the plague and cholera" was stupid, because apparently "cholera is the obvious choice!".

    booinyoureyes
  • UnderstandMouseMagicUnderstandMouseMagic Member Posts: 2,142
    Rose

    To be honest, all the movies kind of fit these negative descriptions and tropes. We look at the older movies with sort of nostalgia goggles, but they were pretty much along the same lines. I think the only reason they were so well received at the time was because nothing like them had been seen before.
    I think if we are all honest and if could imagine upgraded episodes 4-6 with a new star cast and new high quality graphics but kept the writing all the same, they wouldn’t stand the test of time like they do now.

    I profoundly disagree.

    Nobody judges books, paintings, music by what has been created since the originals were created.
    Why should films be seen differently?
    And games for that matter.

    After the travesty of watching TLJ, we came home and were on the net letting off steam and happened across a scene from A New Hope.
    Alec Guiness telling Luke about his father, about the Jedi, about the lightsabre. I'm sure you all know the scene. It was superb cinema, acting, music, lighting, shots, pacing ect.

    That will always be superb cinema and it exists and no amount of pointing at people and saying "oh look at you nostalgia junkies" will change it.

    And what negative trope was it portraying?
    Somebody please explain how Obi Wan and his interaction with Luke displays the "negative trope" of young brash know it all winning out against the wisdom of his/her older mentors.

    Luke loses because he doesn't listen.
    Rey in TLJ knocks Luke out with a stick.

    Han and Chewie with all their experience can't fix the Falcon.
    Rey can and does with none.




    I’m judging the originals by the merits of their writing, not by what has come since.

    Take for example the scene: “I was going to go to hitachi station to get some power converters!” Whiny farm-boy turned chosen one due to ancestry trope had been used and abused for years before the Skywalkers came around with their own unique flare.

    Or the scene: “Use the force, Luke...” *deathstar explodes from incalculably “lucky” shot that no one else could make and at the last minute just as all was lost due to mythical powers*

    Just the idea that the deathstar has only one exploitable weakness that results in its downfall is a trope as old as Achilles.

    From the revelations of Darth Vader being the protagonist’s blood relative to the Empire being the “bad guys” with no redeemable qualities and the Rebel Alliance being the “good guys” unworthy of criticism, the whole first trilogy is filled with references to ancient and modern tropes and borrows from works as old as religion: I mean, come on, a group of celibate old men who have mystical powers that can alter reality?

    Not criticizing the movies. I’m just saying that many criticisms leveled against episodes 1-3 and even the newer ones can be applied to the originals from the 70s.

    You are attacking the archetype which has been around for thousands of years across thousands of cultures.
    Subvert it as Johnson proclaimed he was trying to do and everything falls apart because the subversion simply cannot work.

    Archetypes work and exist because they appeal to (and always have) to truths that peoples hold to be fundamentally correct.
    And a hack like Johnson, or Hollywood itself, is nowhere near sophisticated or intelligent enough to challenge the archetypes.



  • gugulug5000gugulug5000 Member Posts: 238
    Holdo
    Well so far it seems the Beamdog community still has Jar Jar reigning as the worst character. The whole reason I even started this poll was because almost all of my friends and family are of the opinion that Holdo or Rose managed to dethrone him. Very interesting indeed.

    I don't think TLJ was a good movie for subverting expectations/tropes. To me, the payoff of these 'subversions' was just so lacking that it just came off as a disappointment. Example: we all wanted to know more about Snoke. There were plenty of fan theories going around about him, so it was obvious people wanted to learn more. Rian Johnson decided to subvert that by just killing him off, which would have been fine, but we got no real payoff from it. We didn't learn anything about him, and the only thing that really changed is Kylo Ren went from being #2 to #1. Is that really a big change though? The character behaves almost exactly the same as he did before. There was no real character development, but hey, at least our expectations were subverted.

    I do agree that that there are a lot of hidden gems in the prequels, as several people have pointed out. They're far from good movies, but there are some great pieces here and there. Duel of the Fates and Darth Maul are some of the only reasons to watch The Phantom Menace.

    UnderstandMouseMagic
  • jjstraka34jjstraka34 Member Posts: 8,730
    edited March 2018
    Jar Jar Binks

    Well so far it seems the Beamdog community still has Jar Jar reigning as the worst character. The whole reason I even started this poll was because almost all of my friends and family are of the opinion that Holdo or Rose managed to dethrone him. Very interesting indeed.

    I don't think TLJ was a good movie for subverting expectations/tropes. To me, the payoff of these 'subversions' was just so lacking that it just came off as a disappointment. Example: we all wanted to know more about Snoke. There were plenty of fan theories going around about him, so it was obvious people wanted to learn more. Rian Johnson decided to subvert that by just killing him off, which would have been fine, but we got no real payoff from it. We didn't learn anything about him, and the only thing that really changed is Kylo Ren went from being #2 to #1. Is that really a big change though? The character behaves almost exactly the same as he did before. There was no real character development, but hey, at least our expectations were subverted.

    I do agree that that there are a lot of hidden gems in the prequels, as several people have pointed out. They're far from good movies, but there are some great pieces here and there. Duel of the Fates and Darth Maul are some of the only reasons to watch The Phantom Menace.

    Did we all want to know more about Snoke?? While I would have loved to see Andy Serkis chew scenery for a little longer, where was this going exactly?? Until 1999, we never knew anything about Palpatine, and even when we found out, the only thing we knew besides him being a Sith Lord operating in the shadows of the political system is that he killed his master in his sleep.

    Besides that, let's say Snoke lives. Are we really going to have a final act showdown with a force lightning-wielding robed main bad guy for the THIRD trilogy in a row?? His scenes were the best in the movie by a long-shot, that is true. But I was definitely absolutely FLOORED when he was killed the way he was, so much so that I said to myself "that can't be the end of him", but of course, it was. The same fate was received by Darth Maul, whose scenes are probably the only real redeeming quality of Episodes 1 & 2. Now, can you make an argument that a full-blown movie based on Darth Maul or Snoke would be BETTER than the prequels OR the new trilogy?? I think so. But that was not their fate. It does make their almost cameo-like appearances something even more to savor when watching the films. And who knows, because with Disney wanting to pump out a Star Wars film every year going forward, I wouldn't write a Snoke back-story off the table. And then you will be glad he was killed off.

    And of course, the best part of the entire scene is that Snoke actually IS seeing exactly what Kylo Ren is about to do. He does have that kind of power. But in his total arrogance he never even fathoms it's him and not Rey who is the target Ren is thinking about.

    ThacoBell
  • mashedtatersmashedtaters Member Posts: 2,243
    Other (Specify)

    To be honest, all the movies kind of fit these negative descriptions and tropes. We look at the older movies with sort of nostalgia goggles, but they were pretty much along the same lines. I think the only reason they were so well received at the time was because nothing like them had been seen before.
    I think if we are all honest and if could imagine upgraded episodes 4-6 with a new star cast and new high quality graphics but kept the writing all the same, they wouldn’t stand the test of time like they do now.

    I profoundly disagree.

    Nobody judges books, paintings, music by what has been created since the originals were created.
    Why should films be seen differently?
    And games for that matter.

    After the travesty of watching TLJ, we came home and were on the net letting off steam and happened across a scene from A New Hope.
    Alec Guiness telling Luke about his father, about the Jedi, about the lightsabre. I'm sure you all know the scene. It was superb cinema, acting, music, lighting, shots, pacing ect.

    That will always be superb cinema and it exists and no amount of pointing at people and saying "oh look at you nostalgia junkies" will change it.

    And what negative trope was it portraying?
    Somebody please explain how Obi Wan and his interaction with Luke displays the "negative trope" of young brash know it all winning out against the wisdom of his/her older mentors.

    Luke loses because he doesn't listen.
    Rey in TLJ knocks Luke out with a stick.

    Han and Chewie with all their experience can't fix the Falcon.
    Rey can and does with none.




    I’m judging the originals by the merits of their writing, not by what has come since.

    Take for example the scene: “I was going to go to hitachi station to get some power converters!” Whiny farm-boy turned chosen one due to ancestry trope had been used and abused for years before the Skywalkers came around with their own unique flare.

    Or the scene: “Use the force, Luke...” *deathstar explodes from incalculably “lucky” shot that no one else could make and at the last minute just as all was lost due to mythical powers*

    Just the idea that the deathstar has only one exploitable weakness that results in its downfall is a trope as old as Achilles.

    From the revelations of Darth Vader being the protagonist’s blood relative to the Empire being the “bad guys” with no redeemable qualities and the Rebel Alliance being the “good guys” unworthy of criticism, the whole first trilogy is filled with references to ancient and modern tropes and borrows from works as old as religion: I mean, come on, a group of celibate old men who have mystical powers that can alter reality?

    Not criticizing the movies. I’m just saying that many criticisms leveled against episodes 1-3 and even the newer ones can be applied to the originals from the 70s.

    You are attacking the archetype which has been around for thousands of years across thousands of cultures.
    Subvert it as Johnson proclaimed he was trying to do and everything falls apart because the subversion simply cannot work.

    Archetypes work and exist because they appeal to (and always have) to truths that peoples hold to be fundamentally correct.
    And a hack like Johnson, or Hollywood itself, is nowhere near sophisticated or intelligent enough to challenge the archetypes.



    You’re misunderstanding me. I love the Star Wars movies. But the writing of the originals would not stand the test of time without nostalgia goggles.

    My last argument before checking out, which is the same one I made earlier: if the original Star Wars movies were made today with new cast and new graphics, fans of the series would criticize it without mercy for its horrible writing... which has actually happened:

    The Force Awakens is basically a remake of A New Hope. It was almost identical to the first in plot, writing, and delivery with new graphics and cast. Even the title, “the force awakens,” implies the idea that there is new hope.

    Check out this side-by-side comparison of the two movies.



    The reason I disliked the Force Awakens so much is because it is a remake of a New Hope. If I wanted to watch A New Hope, I would watch it. But the movie gets tons of flack and criticism for writing and other issues from die-hard Star Wars fans who don’t seem to understand that they are criticizing the same flaws contained in their favorite movie released in the 70s.

    ThacoBell
  • AstroBryGuyAstroBryGuy Member Posts: 3,414
    edited March 2018
    Other (Specify)
    Kylo becoming the #1 Bad Guy is a big change. Kylo is no longer following Anakin's path, with "will Rey redeem Ben Solo?" as the theme for Episode XI: Return of the JJ. Kylo has made his choice, and he's chosen the Dark Side. That makes Snoke unnecessary. To let Kylo really stand on his own, Snoke needed to go.

    Also, I didn't care about Snoke's backstory. He's not a main character. He was there as the embodiment of the tempation of the Dark Side for Kylo Ren while Kylo was struggling with his choice between the Light Side and the Dark Side. You no more need Snoke's backstory than the backstory of the Emperor in Return of the Jedi or of Boba Fett in The Empire Strikes Back. Neither of those movies would have been made better by shoehorning those secondary character backstories into the narrative. Would you want Palpatine to stop the throne room scene and launch into an explanation of trade negotiations and how he ascended to power? Or Fett to have a scene with IG-88 and Dengar talking about how he's actually a clone of his dad? No. They are secondary villains, and didn't need fleshed out backstories. Heck, one of the best things about The Phantom Menace was Darth Maul, and he was left a mystery.

    I also liked what Rian did with Rey in making her NOT another descendant of Anakin. I thought one of the worst ideas introduced by the prequels was the Anakin-as-Space-Jesus metaphor (conceived by the Holy Spirit Force and born of the Virgin Mary Shmi) and midichlorians. Because of midichlorians, the Jedi basically possess "Sang Real" (royal blood) that is passed from generation to generation. I like that Rian Johnson broke with this concept; anyone can be strong in the Force, you don't need to be a Skywalker.

    mashedtatersThacoBell
  • gugulug5000gugulug5000 Member Posts: 238
    edited March 2018
    Holdo
    I was totally fine with Rey being a nobody, and I was also fine with Snoke dying. I just think the execution of the things was wrong for a few reasons. With Rey's ancestry, people were given the impression that she was someone special with things like Anakin's lightsaber calling to her, R2 waking up when she comes near, Obi-wan's voice calling out to her in the vision, etc. I'm not saying that's what those were necessarily meant to be, but that's the impression they gave, and the internet went crazy with fan theories. Rey's heritage became one of those things that fans went in expecting an answer, and the answer they got was underwhelming to say the least.

    Same with Snoke. Had Disney not teased beforehand that we would be seeing much more of Snoke, and had Andy Serkis not toyed with people by talking about how Snoke is even more powerful than the emperor, people would not have had such high expectations. Now we are left without answers to questions like where did Snoke get his powers if he's not a Sith? How did he come into power? Why did Palpatine not sense Snoke back in his time, when Snoke is clearly a threat to him? All of that plus Snoke was killed in a very unsatisfactory way. Had he not literally said the absurd lines "I cannot be beaten! I cannot be betrayed!" seconds before being beaten and betrayed, it would have been better. As it was, it was stupid. I'm amazed that there are actually people who didn't see that coming after those lines.

    I'm not saying they needed to shoehorn in a 20 minute flashback, but they could have answered a bunch of questions with just a few lines of dialogue. Plus, the middle of the film is FULL of pointless material that doesn't further the plot or develop characters in a meaningful way. They could have cut plenty of scenes to make way for answers to questions that JJ Abram left open.

  • gugulug5000gugulug5000 Member Posts: 238
    Holdo
    Also, here's a fun fact for all the Jar Jar haters: did you know that there was a comic in which Jar Jar's father, George R Binks, attempted to kill himself after seeing what an idiot his son was? True story.

    mashedtatersFinneousPJ
  • AstroBryGuyAstroBryGuy Member Posts: 3,414
    Other (Specify)

    Nobody judges books, paintings, music by what has been created since the originals were created.
    Why should films be seen differently?
    And games for that matter.

    That's actually not true. If I read Lord of the Rings and the Hobbit, the former can certainly change my opinion of the latter. Another example, find more recently written reviews of Michael Jackson's "Off the Wall" (1979). Many of them will talk about Michael's overall career and compare his work in Off the Wall to Thriller (1983) or Bad (1987). That's judging Michael's earlier work through the lens of his later albums.

    mashedtatersThacoBelllolien
  • mashedtatersmashedtaters Member Posts: 2,243
    Other (Specify)
    I really wish Disney had done something like the Thrawn trilogy. I haven’t read the books, but the synopsis of them look amazing.

    booinyoureyes
  • booinyoureyesbooinyoureyes Member Posts: 6,162
    Holdo

    I really wish Disney had done something like the Thrawn trilogy. I haven’t read the books, but the synopsis of them look amazing.

    While I love the Thrawn Trilogy and the subsequent Thrawn Duology, I think people should be careful what they wish for. If they made those people would complain about predictability and lack of ambition.

    mashedtaters
  • booinyoureyesbooinyoureyes Member Posts: 6,162
    edited March 2018
    Holdo
    ThacoBell said:

    Unpopular opinion: Phantom Menace is much, much better than Attack of the Clones

    I agree, but only because "Duel of the Fates" is just that good.
    Also, Qui Gon Jinn, while being the WORST JEDI EVER, was actually an interesting character. He had a key part to play in the series, and Liam Neeson did a wonderful job with him.

    He was interesting for more reasons though. He was the first rebellious Jedi, laying the groudwork for both Count Dooku and Anakin. Remember, Obi Wan said that that Qui Gon could have been a member of the Jedi High Council if he followed the Code. He clearly was a skeptic about Jedi teachings.

    But it gets even more interesting... he was Count Dooku's padawan. I'm sure they shared some unorthodox philosophical positions on Jedi teachings. I always imagined that part of Dooku's betrayal of the Jedi was related to his grief after the death of his beloved padawan.

    But it gets even more interesting... Palpatine had his fingers on Dooku, for who knows how long? I'm sure he was playing the long game, and was in Dooku's ears for years before The Phantom Menace. But also, what does that mean? That, through Dooku, Palpainte also had his dirty little Sith fingers on... Qui Gon Jinn. Who guilted Obi Wan into swearing to train the boy who would grow up to destroy the Jedi while on his deathbed? Qui Gon Jinn. Qui Gon very well could have been the victim of manipulation for a long time.

    That said, he was also the WORST JEDI EVER. Find Anakin. Guilts Obi Wan into training Anakin despite EVERYONE saying it was a bad idea. Anakin grows up to betray the Jedi Order, virtually destroy it, and kill all the younglings.... but did Qui Gon Jinn stick around to deal with the consequences of his actions? NO, he died way before. Totally irresponsible.

    ThacoBellmashedtatersSkatanlolien
  • JoenSoJoenSo Member Posts: 904
    My favorite moment from Phantom menace is when Anakin says that he doesn't want to be a problem and Qui-Gon assures him that "you won't be". The rest of the galaxy disagrees with you there, mr. Jinn! "I don't sense anything" indeed.

    Balrog99gugulug5000mashedtaterslolien
  • JoenSoJoenSo Member Posts: 904
    What did they think "balance to the force" actually meant? They didn't even know there were still any sith out there before Maul showed up, right? Not that the sith are the only users of the dark side, but still. Yoda seems to be the only one who for even a moment considers that bringing about balance might not be a good thing for the jedi themselves.

    (I'm sure this has been explained in detail in the EU somewhere)

    mashedtaters
  • ThacoBellThacoBell Member Posts: 11,394
    Jar Jar Binks
    @Squire Luke wasn't any less a Mary Sue. He trained for, what, a few months? A year at most? And despite everyone from Obi Wan to Yoda saying that he wasn't reasy, he would fail, etc. He was able to defeat Vader (The most powerful force user in the galaxy at this time, and had DECADES of experience using said power) and Luke beats him in a one on one duel. Rey seems MORE believable to me than Luke when it comes to power levels.

    mashedtaterslolien
  • jjstraka34jjstraka34 Member Posts: 8,730
    edited March 2018
    Jar Jar Binks
    ThacoBell said:

    @Squire Luke wasn't any less a Mary Sue. He trained for, what, a few months? A year at most? And despite everyone from Obi Wan to Yoda saying that he wasn't reasy, he would fail, etc. He was able to defeat Vader (The most powerful force user in the galaxy at this time, and had DECADES of experience using said power) and Luke beats him in a one on one duel. Rey seems MORE believable to me than Luke when it comes to power levels.

    If we're going to be technical about it, I'd say it was at most a few WEEKS. However long the Falcon was in the asteroid field and Han and Leia were in Cloud City is the answer. Something tells me it wasn't meant to be six months. Quite honestly, you could make the case it should be measured in days. His training with Obi-Wan measured in hours.

    Moreover, Luke and the Falcon left Hoth at essentially the same time. There isn't any ambiguity about the time-frame.

  • KuronaKurona Member Posts: 881
    Other (Specify)
    Yoda is the primary reason I never really got into Star Wars.

    mashedtaterslolien
  • jjstraka34jjstraka34 Member Posts: 8,730
    Jar Jar Binks
    Squire said:

    ThacoBell said:

    @Squire Luke wasn't any less a Mary Sue. He trained for, what, a few months? A year at most? And despite everyone from Obi Wan to Yoda saying that he wasn't reasy, he would fail, etc. He was able to defeat Vader (The most powerful force user in the galaxy at this time, and had DECADES of experience using said power) and Luke beats him in a one on one duel. Rey seems MORE believable to me than Luke when it comes to power levels.

    I disagree. Luke rushed off before his training was finished, and he lost the fight, achieved nothing, and lost his hand in the process. Also, for most of the first film, Luke was completely out of his depth. He was subdued and captured by a tusken raider, almost got on the wrong side of a dangerous criminal and had to be rescued by Obiwan, and most of what he did successfully was by being clever and resourceful (using Chewie as a fake-prisoner, contacting C3PO to stop the garbage masher, etc) rather than skill and power. Even when he did train, he was unable to lift his X-wing out of the swamp and Yoda had to do it for him. There were plenty of times when he was vulnerable, and plenty of times he needed help from friends.

    Rey was never once out of her depth, never failed at anything, never made any bad decisions, was never even remotely vulnerable, never needed any help from anyone, and won the first fight easily and could lift an entire blockage despite having not even as much training as Luke had.
    She wasn't out of her depth because Kylo Ren isn't that good (and was injured). He is 85% bluster and acrifice.

    ThacoBell
  • ThacoBellThacoBell Member Posts: 11,394
    Jar Jar Binks
    @jjstraka34 I was being generous and included the time skip between Strikes Back and Return.

  • booinyoureyesbooinyoureyes Member Posts: 6,162
    Holdo

    ThacoBell said:

    @Squire Luke wasn't any less a Mary Sue. He trained for, what, a few months? A year at most? And despite everyone from Obi Wan to Yoda saying that he wasn't reasy, he would fail, etc. He was able to defeat Vader (The most powerful force user in the galaxy at this time, and had DECADES of experience using said power) and Luke beats him in a one on one duel. Rey seems MORE believable to me than Luke when it comes to power levels.

    If we're going to be technical about it, I'd say it was at most a few WEEKS. However long the Falcon was in the asteroid field and Han and Leia were in Cloud City is the answer. Something tells me it wasn't meant to be six months. Quite honestly, you could make the case it should be measured in days. His training with Obi-Wan measured in hours.

    Moreover, Luke and the Falcon left Hoth at essentially the same time. There isn't any ambiguity about the time-frame.
    Well, he was decidedly outmatched on Bespin, unlike Rey on Starkiller Base, so this cuts against your conclusion.

    Over a year past between Empire and Jedi, where Luke had time to train.

  • jjstraka34jjstraka34 Member Posts: 8,730
    edited March 2018
    Jar Jar Binks

    ThacoBell said:

    @Squire Luke wasn't any less a Mary Sue. He trained for, what, a few months? A year at most? And despite everyone from Obi Wan to Yoda saying that he wasn't reasy, he would fail, etc. He was able to defeat Vader (The most powerful force user in the galaxy at this time, and had DECADES of experience using said power) and Luke beats him in a one on one duel. Rey seems MORE believable to me than Luke when it comes to power levels.

    If we're going to be technical about it, I'd say it was at most a few WEEKS. However long the Falcon was in the asteroid field and Han and Leia were in Cloud City is the answer. Something tells me it wasn't meant to be six months. Quite honestly, you could make the case it should be measured in days. His training with Obi-Wan measured in hours.

    Moreover, Luke and the Falcon left Hoth at essentially the same time. There isn't any ambiguity about the time-frame.
    Well, he was decidedly outmatched on Bespin, unlike Rey on Starkiller Base, so this cuts against your conclusion.

    Over a year past between Empire and Jedi, where Luke had time to train.
    Right, but it would have been training by himself. There is no indication he has seen Yoda again until the scene in Return. I put Luke's training under actual Jedi at no more than 2 weeks, or one pay period.

    As for Rey, I look to her when face to face with Snoke, where she is utterly powerless without Kylo Ren's betrayal. Hardly a situation an all-powerful character would find themselves in.

    But I maintain my position. Yeah, Luke is bested in Cloud City, but Vader had at least a DECADE of Jedi training and nearly TWO decades under Palpatine. Kylo Ren is basically cosplaying as his grandfather in a Hitler Youth movement. He is like an athlete of a hall of fame parent coasting on raw talent and a reputation that wasn't earned.

    Or, maybe (just maybe) Rey actually IS a uniquely powerful force user. But I'm fairly sure no one wants her midiclorian count brought into this.

    semiticgodronaldoThacoBelllolien
  • booinyoureyesbooinyoureyes Member Posts: 6,162
    Holdo

    ThacoBell said:

    @Squire Luke wasn't any less a Mary Sue. He trained for, what, a few months? A year at most? And despite everyone from Obi Wan to Yoda saying that he wasn't reasy, he would fail, etc. He was able to defeat Vader (The most powerful force user in the galaxy at this time, and had DECADES of experience using said power) and Luke beats him in a one on one duel. Rey seems MORE believable to me than Luke when it comes to power levels.

    If we're going to be technical about it, I'd say it was at most a few WEEKS. However long the Falcon was in the asteroid field and Han and Leia were in Cloud City is the answer. Something tells me it wasn't meant to be six months. Quite honestly, you could make the case it should be measured in days. His training with Obi-Wan measured in hours.

    Moreover, Luke and the Falcon left Hoth at essentially the same time. There isn't any ambiguity about the time-frame.
    Well, he was decidedly outmatched on Bespin, unlike Rey on Starkiller Base, so this cuts against your conclusion.

    Over a year past between Empire and Jedi, where Luke had time to train.
    Right, but it would have been training by himself. There is no indication he has seen Yoda again until the scene in Return. I put Luke's training under actual Jedi at no more than 2 weeks, or one pay period.
    Huh, to be honest I always assumed that Luke returned to Yoda with time before Yoda's passing. I could be mistaken there. No real way to know (unless someone has a EU source?)

    But then again, the Millennium Falcon had no hyperdrive when they traveled to Bespin. For all we know that could have been a year. It was at least enough time for Luke's X-Wing to get completely submerged in the swampl

    Yeah, Luke is bested in Cloud City, but Vader had at least a DECADE of Jedi training and nearly TWO decades under Palpatine. Kylo Ren is basically cosplaying as his grandfather in a Hitler Youth movement. He is like an athlete of a hall of fame parent coasting on raw talent and a reputation that wasn't earned.

    Or, maybe (just maybe) Rey actually IS a uniquely powerful force user. But I'm fairly sure no one wants her midiclorian count brought into this.

    Two points here:
    1. Vader wasn't even trying to kill Luke on Bespin, yet still bested him with ease. On the second Death Star Luke tapped into the Dark Side, which is easier to master (as TLJ showed us)
    2. Rey IS uniquely powerful. Period. That's not a guess, that's simply true from everything Snoke and Luke said in the last two films. Much like Anakin, she is simply more powerful than everyone else in the film.

    The question is whether that was a good choice thematically. Especially if she is so much more powerful than the primary villain. If Kylo is indeed as weak as you say (I disagree, I think it had to do more with his doubt after killing his father and his physical injury) then it detracts from Rey's heroism in the long run, since we all know having the odds stacked against you is the first step to badassery.

    mashedtaters
  • booinyoureyesbooinyoureyes Member Posts: 6,162
    Holdo
    Squire said:


    Rey was never once out of her depth, never failed at anything, never made any bad decisions, was never even remotely vulnerable, never needed any help from anyone, and won the first fight easily and could lift an entire blockage despite having not even as much training as Luke had.

    I disagree that Rey never made any bad decisions. All of TLJ was Rey making rash decisions. She was definitely vulnerable in Snoke's throneroom as well.

    ThacoBell
  • jjstraka34jjstraka34 Member Posts: 8,730
    edited March 2018
    Jar Jar Binks
    I hesitate to bring any EU material into a discussion about the films (and I read EVERYTHING as a youth from the Thrawn Trilogy all the way to Vector Prime). For one, for every 10 people who have seen these movies, you'd probably be hard pressed to find even one who has read the books or comics. And (more importantly) they completely eliminated the vast majority of the Expanded Universe when Disney got the rights and rebooted the Saga. Though it still exists in a netherworld known as "Star Wars Legends", which is just bizarre. I believe the only things that are canon anymore are the films and (of all things) the Clone Wars animated series.

  • gugulug5000gugulug5000 Member Posts: 238
    Holdo
    @Kurona You have piqued my interest. Why did Yoda keep you from it?

    Regarding Rey not making any bad decisions: I don't think Rey being vulnerable before Snoke even qualifies, and the reason for that is because it was totally a situation of her choice. She knew that going to meet Kylo would be like going into a nest of vipers, she knew she would be captured, and she knew that Kylo would be there to bail her out. In the end, she was right, and Kylo did bail her out, so everything went according to plan, with exception of Kylo actually turning good. Then she goes on to kill 3 of the 8 praetorian guards in the throne room (Kylo kills 4, and 1 is unaccounted for; I reviewed it with a friend while discussing her being a Mary Sue). Sure she struggles with one of them briefly, but I don't think we actually got to see a legitimate flaw or weakness in her from these scenes.

Sign In or Register to comment.