Star Wars: Episode IX - The Rise of Skywalker Discussion

She is a Palpatine by nature, and a Skywalker by choice. That alone makes me think she was conceived as all powerful by the writers from the start, and since Johnson didn't mess around with her character, they were still able to follow up that initial idea of her.

You misread what I said, they clearly had many of these ideas in mind initially, but were open to changes, this is why I said I'm pretty sure they had the idea of her defeating the Sith with the power of all Jedi from 2014.

Which would make perfect sense because that way she doesn't have to gain her power, she just has to inherit it by adopting those beliefs with conviction. In other words, she won't have to be self made, she would only need to believe, and depending of the level of her conviction depends her power.

Because the Force is not a muscle. The training is not meant to make you stronger by having muscle memory, or making your muscles grow, instead the training is about leveling up your conviction and trust in the Force, so the stronger your conviction, and trust, the more access you have to the Force and the knowledge of what can be done with it.

There are only two ways this can be transmitted from one generation to another, and those ways are genes, and education (which depends of culture, family, and environment). She had both after she was taken (Palapatine genes, and Skywalker environment). So bad writing would be that she wasn't strong with the Force when everything points out that she should, and the same goes with Kylo, he should be strong too, but they failed in showing it.

Keep in mind that having the idea is different than planning to use it. I do believe they had that idea initially because obviously that's what they wanted, but I also believe they felt pressured to do other things instead because I'm pretty sure Disney won't just let them do whatever they want. I'm sure they get some kind of censorship.

When they called J. J. to comeback, he realized that the opportunity was still there, and they went for it. At least that's how it looks to a third eye. I can't say that's what happened because I don't know anything first hand, but that's how it looks from a third eye perspective.

Love it or hate it, this movie sure is polarizing, but I've heard less praise than criticism for Ep9.

As far as I was concerned, it's taking because it was never Disney's baby, it was Lucas's who took more care of his brainchild. Also, Disney likes toy sales. I haven't heard much good about those either either.

Hey, scipioafricanus . Look how in depth Strato goes with all his rationalization. Yet, in the Darth Vader thread, you called me and Dschult a couple of:


?

Ha!

He brings a very good point negative critics forget, and that is that the people behind these movies aren't stupid. They all have agendas, and they also have personal artistic goals.

A lot of the critcism contradicts this notion because they automatically assume illogical, nonsensical decisions have been made, but you don't need to be very smart to realize that it is very hard for that to be the case, specially with these kind of people behind shows like Lost 15 years ago, and many other projects after that.

First of all, you know they are very well aware these movies are bigger than themselves, that millions of people are going to watch it. So it is just fair to assume they aren't going to treat this carelessly.

On the contrary, they will go the extra mile to make sure everything is coherent, and that everything serves a purpose, that it transcends, because they know they aren't only talking to people from this generation, but to future generations as well, that will remember them for this.

The way to do it, to still make it subtle, and to have an impact, is to create ambiguity.

Everyone knows this. Even if you create the slightest amount of ambiguity, people will talk, which is exactly what happened with Blade Runner, or even blockbusters like The Dark Knight, and Inception.

But despite those movies having ambiguity, it is also important for the artist to provide enough evidence to make clear where the creators stand in those debates, and they always do.

In Blade Runner after looking at the details it is very clear that Harrison Ford is human, and not a replicant, which is communicated despite the film affirming that humans, and replicants share the exact same intrinsic value (at least in the film's point of view), and that therefore they are both equal in this respect.

It is also very clear that The Dark Knight points out the US government actions against terrorism. Even 5 years before Edward Snowden was a thing, Hollywood told us they were spying on people through cellphones. They told us that they were breaking foreign policies flying outside our jurisdictions to capture criminals. They told us that maybe that's not what we deserve, but that somehow that's what we need.

On top of that, it is clear that Leonardo DiCaprio is in fact still dreaming. It is impossible to question the fact the he is still dreaming at the end of Inception. The artists really went out of their way to make sure this was clear.

Why is it important for the artists to do this?

Because despite they wanting to create ambiguity, they also feel the need to make sense, that is something they owe to themselves, specially when the material is already sensitive, and it has high stakes.

Even in movies like The Avengers we see them talking about the morality of population control, or in the X-Men they talk about sexual identity, and racism.

These are all agendas, but behind those agendas coherent thought has to be in place, or the whole purpose of the creative process falls apart.

Unless you are incredibly stupid you can't deny that these things are at purpose, they are deliberately place there to make a statement, and they need to make sense in order to work.

So what we have here in Episode IX is a case of mass stupidity. Where someone says it doesn't make sense, that it isn't coherent, and then with the magic of the Internet, massive amounts of people simply like to repeat those words because it is a trending thing to do.

They forget to see the context of these movies, what holds them together, and that is the philosophy behind them, a key part, and the center of the entire plot.

When you take a simple look at the philosophy behind that context, when you recognize the exact same references they are straight up plagiarizing, it is impossible not to see these things are perfectly coherent, and serve the intentions of their creators without making them look like they don't know what they are doing, specially when they clearly do.

Failing to see the context is where people fail. I give them a break because when movies deal with ancient religious concepts, the context becomes abstract in nature, so it is not something you can see, just something you can discern.

However all you need to do is to see that the topics at hand are perfectly in tune with those results, and that it is hard to see those results taking other routes than those given, at least to please the biggest amount of vectors, and still carrying the message.

You can criticize editing, length, transparency, linearity, but saying these decisions aren't logical, or coherent only means things are getting taken out of context by the viewer.

The movie is definitely Disneyfied, but that only means it is easy to follow, and easy to explain, with legitimately stupid jokes to ease a little bit the heavy weight of the philosophy behind it.

Yet people are going out of their way to complicate very straight forward simple things that are pure cause and effect by textbook.

Lol what the hell, of course it's not clear in any way that he is dreaming or not. In fact, the filmmakers made sure it was left ambiguously whether or not he was still dreaming.