If you want to discuss sexism in media, that is fine, but I would prefer you take that to a more appropriate thread. This is about Star Wars Rogue One.
Please explain to me how pointing out that the world is made up of more than white males (even in a sarcastic manner) is worthy of an infraction? For real?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The artist formerly known as Dimir Impersonator.
Follow me on Twitter @VapidPodcast and listen to my podcast "Vapid Existentialism" on iTunes!
Please explain to me how pointing out that the world is made up of more than white males (even in a sarcastic manner) is worthy of an infraction? For real?
Star Wars is one of the single largest franchises in film and/or TV history. It is one of the most recognizable brands in all of modern history. It influences and informs pop culture and has done so for decades.
When they want to start going against film conventions and focus on female and minority leads, we should talk about that. It's important and relevant.
I don't care that you wear a "moderator" badge, this is exactly the perfect place to discuss sexism in the media. I apologize by starting my part of that discussion in a sarcastic fashion, but, despite your authority, I disagree with your opinion. This is the only place it should be discussed in this context.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The artist formerly known as Dimir Impersonator.
Follow me on Twitter @VapidPodcast and listen to my podcast "Vapid Existentialism" on iTunes!
If you want to discuss sexism in regards to this specific film or comparing it to other films and media, that is fine. I do not want this to become a discussion for "media is sexist" that talks about other media outside of this film that has nothing to do with this film specifically.
That said, I do look forward to this movie and hope it is not too...forced.
In any case, Rogue One looks amazing. I'm hoping there are at least hints to the Dark Forces series.
A nod to Dark Forces would be really great. I'm begrudgingly okay with Kyle Katarn being retconned, especially since it was in favour of a female protagonist, but I still have some great memories from that game.
Also my god is the new Mon Mothma ever a dead ringer for the old one.
In any case, Rogue One looks amazing. I'm hoping there are at least hints to the Dark Forces series.
A nod to Dark Forces would be really great. I'm begrudgingly okay with Kyle Katarn being retconned, especially since it was in favour of a female protagonist, but I still have some great memories from that game.
Also my god is the new Mon Mothma ever a dead ringer for the old one.
A nod to Kyle Katarn would be really awesome. I don't quite recall where on his arc this would be taking place though so I'm not sure how realistic a cameo could be. He should still be a storm trooper during this time right?
Also my god is the new Mon Mothma ever a dead ringer for the old one.
A nod to Kyle Katarn would be really awesome. I don't quite recall where on his arc this would be taking place though so I'm not sure how realistic a cameo could be. He should still be a storm trooper during this time right?[/quote]So my other fandom obsession, next to Magic and Marvel, is Star Wars.
This movie takes place right around when Dark Forces would have. Katarn was already a mercenary, and the first level of the game is him stealing the plans.
I'm okay with a specific Kyle Katarn reference, but I want themes from the game - like Dark Troopers - to be a thing. And there are a lot of very convenient similarities.
Man, woman, black, white, hispanic, don't really care. I'm most excited about this movie because my biggest complaint about Star Wars has always been "If you took out the Jedi, what's left?", and now I get to see what that looks like.
Is there a book/comic this movie is based off of?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Oath of the Gatewatch; the set that caused the competitive community to freak out over Basic Lands.
Rey is not any more a Mary Sue than Anakin, Obi-Wan, Luke or any other Force Sensitive in any of the films.
She did kinda master the force just about instantly and she is the best at everything she does in the movie. I don't think that makes her a Mary Sue though but her lack of character flaws make her just about as interesting as Anakin and Obi-wan in my opinion. But this is more of a problem with Jedi characters in general than with Rey specifically.
She almost got everyone killed on Han's ship because she made a mistake when trying to close the doors. Even after a vision of things past, she still refuses to let go of the idea that her parents are gone and she should look to the future (and only finally does so at the end of the film). She is definitely a flawed character as she is over-confident and in some ways still stubborn like a child.
For someone Force-sensitive, she is probably the best written character so far and the least "Mary-Sue"-ish. As a Force-sensitive who was raised learning ships inside and out, she is very good with technology, languages and fighting, and in a multi-cultural, futuristic, violent setting, she obviously seems well-suited for it and may come off as a bit too convenient. I read the prelude novella, though, and her obsession with not leaving Jakku plays out in that story as well, so perhaps my view of it is a bit different than most.
Since we're defending Rey (probably the best thing about Episode 7), she doesn't "instantly master" the force. It is awakened in her because someone exposed her directly to its power. While we've never seen the Force used this way, it didn't take me out of the film. It's established that she can fight with a staff early in the film so her usage of the lightsaber against Kilo Ren isn't far fetched, especially considering Ren had been shot with Chewie's blaster which had previously been used to blow the snot out of several stormtroopers at once. Ren was fighting with a handicap. If you're going to criticize Episode 7 criticize the fact that it essentially erased the entire story of the original trilogy (something that irritates me beyond comprehension), or criticize the fact that it's just a remake of the original films or criticize the fact that they had to completely erase Han Solo's story arc from the original trilogy to make this film work, but don't criticize Rey.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The artist formerly known as Dimir Impersonator.
Follow me on Twitter @VapidPodcast and listen to my podcast "Vapid Existentialism" on iTunes!
Since we're defending Rey (probably the best thing about Episode 7), she doesn't "instantly master" the force. It is awakened in her because someone exposed her directly to its power. While we've never seen the Force used this way, it didn't take me out of the film. It's established that she can fight with a staff early in the film so her usage of the lightsaber against Kilo Ren isn't far fetched, especially considering Ren had been shot with Chewie's blaster which had previously been used to blow the snot out of several stormtroopers at once. Ren was fighting with a handicap. If you're going to criticize Episode 7 criticize the fact that it essentially erased the entire story of the original trilogy (something that irritates me beyond comprehension), or criticize the fact that it's just a remake of the original films or criticize the fact that they had to completely erase Han Solo's story arc from the original trilogy to make this film work, but don't criticize Rey.
How did they "erase" Han's story arc from the original trilogy? Especially considering the character had almost zero development in the earlier films? Or how did it erase the entire story of the original trilogy? Maybe it is just the wording that is confusing me, but most of what we saw in the first trilogy still works in a continuity sense.
Since we're defending Rey (probably the best thing about Episode 7), she doesn't "instantly master" the force. It is awakened in her because someone exposed her directly to its power. While we've never seen the Force used this way, it didn't take me out of the film. It's established that she can fight with a staff early in the film so her usage of the lightsaber against Kilo Ren isn't far fetched, especially considering Ren had been shot with Chewie's blaster which had previously been used to blow the snot out of several stormtroopers at once. Ren was fighting with a handicap. If you're going to criticize Episode 7 criticize the fact that it essentially erased the entire story of the original trilogy (something that irritates me beyond comprehension), or criticize the fact that it's just a remake of the original films or criticize the fact that they had to completely erase Han Solo's story arc from the original trilogy to make this film work, but don't criticize Rey.
How did they "erase" Han's story arc from the original trilogy? Especially considering the character had almost zero development in the earlier films? Or how did it erase the entire story of the original trilogy? Maybe it is just the wording that is confusing me, but most of what we saw in the first trilogy still works in a continuity sense.
Han's arc in the original trilogy is his journey from selfish anti-hero to selfless hero of the rebellion. When he is first introduced his only concern is money and his own self interest. By the end of the trilogy he is willing to volunteer for the most dangerous missions with no concern for self or no selfish motivations. He fights for others, not himself. In Episode 7 he's right back to being the smuggler outlaw abandoning his friends and family. It negates the entire growth of his character in the original trilogy... I thought this was obvious.
The story from the original trilogy was that the good guys won. For real. Finally. The end.
Except not really because when we pick things up in this film it's like the Empire wasn't really destroyed, they just re-branded. Did the rebels just stop fighting after the Death Star was destroyed a second time? How did the First Order become such a powerful force if the Rebels won? Why won't the republic outright fight the First Order instead of letting a tiny band of fighters take them on (at the very detriment of several planets, btw)? Episode 7 leaves us at a place where basically the same type of people that were in power at the beginning of Episode 4 are now in charge again. It's as if the entire first trilogy never actually happened because the good guys didn't finish the job after the credits rolled at the end of Episode 6. It's probably the laziest aspect of the story. Instead of writing a new and interesting evil force to deal with we're almost literally sent right back to the beginning of the original trilogy (complete with Darth Vader stand in and Stormtroopers). It's not a creative story in the slightest.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The artist formerly known as Dimir Impersonator.
Follow me on Twitter @VapidPodcast and listen to my podcast "Vapid Existentialism" on iTunes!
Han's arc in the original trilogy is his journey from selfish anti-hero to selfless hero of the rebellion. When he is first introduced his only concern is money and his own self interest. By the end of the trilogy he is willing to volunteer for the most dangerous missions with no concern for self or no selfish motivations. He fights for others, not himself. In Episode 7 he's right back to being the smuggler outlaw abandoning his friends and family. It negates the entire growth of his character in the original trilogy... I thought this was obvious.
I don't think it negates his growth. Or perhaps I could say that the negation of his growth is itself a part of his continuing development. The movie isn't saying, "Remember Han's character growth? Too bad! Just pretend that never happened." It's saying, "Remember Han's character growth? Good! Then the fact that he's abandoned his family and fallen back on his old ways should tell you that Something Has Gone Terribly Wrong." Then it spends the rest of the movie exploring what that Something is. It's leveraging his previous characterization to tell his story through implication before it spells out the story explicitly. Showing before telling.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vive, vale. Siquid novisti rectius istis,
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
Han's arc in the original trilogy is his journey from selfish anti-hero to selfless hero of the rebellion. When he is first introduced his only concern is money and his own self interest. By the end of the trilogy he is willing to volunteer for the most dangerous missions with no concern for self or no selfish motivations. He fights for others, not himself. In Episode 7 he's right back to being the smuggler outlaw abandoning his friends and family. It negates the entire growth of his character in the original trilogy... I thought this was obvious.
I don't think it negates his growth. Or perhaps I could say that the negation of his growth is itself a part of his continuing development. The movie isn't saying, "Remember Han's character growth? Too bad! Just pretend that never happened." It's saying, "Remember Han's character growth? Good! Then the fact that he's abandoned his family and fallen back on his old ways should tell you that Something Has Gone Terribly Wrong." Then it spends the rest of the movie exploring what that Something is. It's leveraging his previous characterization to tell his story through implication before it spells out the story explicitly. Showing before telling.
The reason I think it negates his growth in the original trilogy is because we didn't need it for the story to work. Han doesn't need a character arc in this film because we already got a solid one for him in the original films. He should have been the Obi-wan in this film. The story focused too much on him when we had at least three far more interesting new characters to focus on.
That said, I think you're talking semantics. I can agree with everything you said about why they did what they did with his character and still say they negated his arc from the original trilogy. Just because "something went wrong" doesn't mean it's not taking away from his original arc.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The artist formerly known as Dimir Impersonator.
Follow me on Twitter @VapidPodcast and listen to my podcast "Vapid Existentialism" on iTunes!
The reason I think it negates his growth in the original trilogy is because we didn't need it for the story to work. Han doesn't need a character arc in this film because we already got a solid one for him in the original films. He should have been the Obi-wan in this film. The story focused too much on him when we had at least three far more interesting new characters to focus on.
I mean, it would be sloppy writing to have Han Solo be this fully realized character with no arc in the movie on the grounds that he already had a character arc in the first three films when, in between all of that, he had a son and lost him to the Dark Side, and lost Leia as well. Right?
---
As for Rey, I found Rey to be the only interesting new character, and I'm not sure where the great objection to her comes from (aside from her having ovaries). Yes, she's underdeveloped and isn't well-written, but nothing in Episode 7 is well-written. Yes, she's got exceptional force abilities, but that's because she's THE CHOSEN ONE for this particular trilogy, and she might even be Luke Skywalker's descendant. Yes, she's great with machines, that's because she's a scavenger who works for scavengers. Yes, she's good at fighting and is resilient and can take care of herself because how the hell would she be alive otherwise? The girl lives on a desert planet on the Outer Rim that looks like a backwater by Tatooine standards.
Really the only unusual skill I can think of that Rey has is her gift with piloting, as it's not clear where she got that from, but it's possible she was taught that, as she does live near an outpost where people with ships go to trade, and she does ride around in a hoverbike-thing.
The reason I think it negates his growth in the original trilogy is because we didn't need it for the story to work. Han doesn't need a character arc in this film because we already got a solid one for him in the original films. He should have been the Obi-wan in this film. The story focused too much on him when we had at least three far more interesting new characters to focus on.
I mean, it would be sloppy writing to have Han Solo be this fully realized character with no arc in the movie on the grounds that he already had a character arc in the first three films when, in between all of that, he had a son and lost him to the Dark Side, and lost Leia as well. Right?
Did you read my full post?
He doesn't need any of the things you described as being a part of his new arc because he comes into this film with all that we already know about him. There's no reason for him to be apart from Leia and back to no good. Even if his son had turned to the Dark Side there's no real reason that he had to be written back into being a scoundrel except that's what they wanted to do. The story, IMO, would have been much stronger if he'd just been the guide/Obi-wan character for Rey and Finn while trying to win back his son from the Dark Side. All that other junk about him goofing off with smuggling giant monsters and getting into scuffles with random outlaws was pointless and, as I said, diminishes his arc from the original story. It is possible for people to learn from their past while simultaneously experiencing tragedy. He's a stronger character if he retains the lessons learned from the original trilogy while still having to deal with the loss of his son to the dark side. Having him just go back to being a selfish goofball makes him less of a tragic character and more of a stupid character.
EDIT: In all honesty, there's no need for him to have a story arc in this film at all, especially one as weak as the one he's given. Give more screen time to one of those other characters instead. Whatever, it's not like JJ Abrhams makes well written films.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The artist formerly known as Dimir Impersonator.
Follow me on Twitter @VapidPodcast and listen to my podcast "Vapid Existentialism" on iTunes!
There is quite a bit of time that has transpired from ep6 to ep7. If anything, this merely shows that he kept developing as a character in the meantime, although perhaps not for the better, which is ok; not all character development has to be progressive.
As for the First Order, the film barely even hinted at what happened, and even then mainly in the opening crawl. Reading the book with the Rey/Finn/Poe stories helps quite a bit which is indeed a failing of the film, or perhaps done to make the additional material more interesting. The Empire, while defeated, still had too many people inside the New Republic. When Leia tried to convince the Senate that there was a threat from the remaining Star Destroyers and personnel that went into the uncharted regions of space, the corrupted politicians were able to sway the vote to provide no funding or assistance to her plight.
The reason I think it negates his growth in the original trilogy is because we didn't need it for the story to work. Han doesn't need a character arc in this film because we already got a solid one for him in the original films.
A solid character arc? In the original trilogy his character was one of the most underdeveloped ever for such a popular character in cinema. He basically went from bad-ass to loyal friend in the first film, then stayed that way in the next two films. There was really no deviation at all from what was developed in ep4. It is even one of the reasons Ford wanted the character killed off, because almost no time was devoted to doing anything interesting to develop Han. At least in ep7 he becomes something more than just a generic hero (albeit charming one by virtue of Ford's on-screen presence) and we get hints of a true human being beneath the veneer of his smooth persona.
He doesn't need any of the things you described as being a part of his new arc because he comes into this film with all that we already know about him.
Again, I don't see how it isn't sloppy writing to have a major character in the Star Wars universe come back and just be a background character.
There's no reason for him to be apart from Leia and back to no good. Even if his son had turned to the Dark Side there's no real reason that he had to be written back into being a scoundrel except that's what they wanted to do.
First of all, Han was never not a scoundrel. Let's be real here.
Second, there's no reason he's in the movie period aside from that's what they wanted to do. The question is, did the choice work? And I would say yes. Couples do tend to fall apart at the loss of a child, and Ben turned to the Dark Side.
The story, IMO, would have been much stronger if he'd just been the guide/Obi-wan character for Rey and Finn while trying to win back his son from the Dark Side.
I don't see how this makes sense. He's Han Solo. How would it make sense for him to be Obi-Wan? He's a cocksure space cowboy/pirate with a heart of gold. He can't not be that and still be Han Solo. And if you want him to be the wise mentor, you damn sure have to show the character journey it took to get him there, because that is nothing like who he was at the end of Jedi.
All that other junk about him goofing off with smuggling giant monsters and getting into scuffles with random outlaws was pointless and, as I said, diminishes his arc from the original story.
Giant monster sequence was stupid, I'll agree there.
Having him just go back to being a selfish goofball makes him less of a tragic character and more of a stupid character.
I don't see that.
EDIT: In all honesty, there's no need for him to have a story arc in this film at all, especially one as weak as the one he's given. Give more screen time to one of those other characters instead. Whatever, it's not like JJ Abrhams makes well written films.
He doesn't, it's true.
But again, I'm not sure how you're going to get away with having the three original heroes in this film and not give them a substantial presence. That's just wasting them.
He doesn't need any of the things you described as being a part of his new arc because he comes into this film with all that we already know about him.
Again, I don't see how it isn't sloppy writing to have a major character in the Star Wars universe come back and just be a background character.
Was Obi-wan Kenobi a "background character" in Episode 4?
There's no reason for him to be apart from Leia and back to no good. Even if his son had turned to the Dark Side there's no real reason that he had to be written back into being a scoundrel except that's what they wanted to do.
First of all, Han was never not a scoundrel. Let's be real here.
???!?!??!?!?!?!?!??!?!??!
HAN SHOT FIRST! How is that not a "scoundrel?"
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The artist formerly known as Dimir Impersonator.
Follow me on Twitter @VapidPodcast and listen to my podcast "Vapid Existentialism" on iTunes!
There's no reason for him to be apart from Leia and back to no good. Even if his son had turned to the Dark Side there's no real reason that he had to be written back into being a scoundrel except that's what they wanted to do.
First of all, Han was never not a scoundrel. Let's be real here.
???!?!??!?!?!?!?!??!?!??!
HAN SHOT FIRST! How is that not a "scoundrel?"
That's his point. He always was a scoundrel.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My thoughts are with the friends and family of the Orlando Shooting victims and with the rest of the LGBTQA+ community.
Check out my Newborder Peasant Cube here! http://www.cubetutor.com/draft/37467
Necarg, please don't acknowledge this in any way whatsoever.
True Name Mafia (Win),Clan Contest IX Mafia (Win), Bravely Default Mafia (Loss), BOTAS (loss), BfV (Loss), Ace Attourney (loss)
Rules Advisor before they were eradicated
There's no reason for him to be apart from Leia and back to no good. Even if his son had turned to the Dark Side there's no real reason that he had to be written back into being a scoundrel except that's what they wanted to do.
First of all, Han was never not a scoundrel. Let's be real here.
???!?!??!?!?!?!?!??!?!??!
HAN SHOT FIRST! How is that not a "scoundrel?"
That's his point. He always was a scoundrel.
LOL! I misased the word "not" in there!
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The artist formerly known as Dimir Impersonator.
Follow me on Twitter @VapidPodcast and listen to my podcast "Vapid Existentialism" on iTunes!
They are not political statements but some of their scenes are kind of minor statements. Maybe not political but they are social commentaries of sort.
Like the multiple scenes were Rey is annoyed by Finn holding her. That would ressonate a lot less if genders were reversed, don't you agree? Finn's background and his skin color is also another example.
Overall I think the movie is improved by those. It's not like theres any grounds for dispute for whether underestimating someone for being a woman is wrong.
Like the multiple scenes were Rey is annoyed by Finn holding her. That would ressonate a lot less if genders were reversed, don't you agree? Finn's background and his skin color is also another example.
I'll give you the hand-holding, but Finn's skin color is a complete nonissue in the movie. You can't even say his background as a stormtrooper is an allegory for being black or something (the way in Zootopia Judy Hopp's being a rabbit is an allegory for her gender) because nobody knows he was a stormtrooper, whereas being black is something you literally wear on your face. No, Finn just looks like that. And nobody cares. And that's great.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vive, vale. Siquid novisti rectius istis,
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Follow me on Twitter @VapidPodcast and listen to my podcast "Vapid Existentialism" on iTunes!
This is not the place to discuss that. If you want to discuss this, either PM myself or another Senior Staff member, or talk to me at my Helpdesk: http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/community-forums/community-discussion/staff-helpdesks/403742-global-rais-scarlet-devil-mansions-helpdesk
When they want to start going against film conventions and focus on female and minority leads, we should talk about that. It's important and relevant.
I don't care that you wear a "moderator" badge, this is exactly the perfect place to discuss sexism in the media. I apologize by starting my part of that discussion in a sarcastic fashion, but, despite your authority, I disagree with your opinion. This is the only place it should be discussed in this context.
Follow me on Twitter @VapidPodcast and listen to my podcast "Vapid Existentialism" on iTunes!
That said, I do look forward to this movie and hope it is not too...forced.
Also my god is the new Mon Mothma ever a dead ringer for the old one.
TerribleBad at Magic since 1998.A Vorthos Guide to Magic Story | Twitter | Tumblr
[Primer] Krenko | Azor | Kess | Zacama | Kumena | Sram | The Ur-Dragon | Edgar Markov | Daretti | Marath
This movie takes place right around when Dark Forces would have. Katarn was already a mercenary, and the first level of the game is him stealing the plans.
I'm okay with a specific Kyle Katarn reference, but I want themes from the game - like Dark Troopers - to be a thing. And there are a lot of very convenient similarities.
TerribleBad at Magic since 1998.A Vorthos Guide to Magic Story | Twitter | Tumblr
[Primer] Krenko | Azor | Kess | Zacama | Kumena | Sram | The Ur-Dragon | Edgar Markov | Daretti | Marath
Is there a book/comic this movie is based off of?
She almost got everyone killed on Han's ship because she made a mistake when trying to close the doors. Even after a vision of things past, she still refuses to let go of the idea that her parents are gone and she should look to the future (and only finally does so at the end of the film). She is definitely a flawed character as she is over-confident and in some ways still stubborn like a child.
For someone Force-sensitive, she is probably the best written character so far and the least "Mary-Sue"-ish. As a Force-sensitive who was raised learning ships inside and out, she is very good with technology, languages and fighting, and in a multi-cultural, futuristic, violent setting, she obviously seems well-suited for it and may come off as a bit too convenient. I read the prelude novella, though, and her obsession with not leaving Jakku plays out in that story as well, so perhaps my view of it is a bit different than most.
Everything combos with Tombstone Stairwell.
Follow me on Twitter @VapidPodcast and listen to my podcast "Vapid Existentialism" on iTunes!
How did they "erase" Han's story arc from the original trilogy? Especially considering the character had almost zero development in the earlier films? Or how did it erase the entire story of the original trilogy? Maybe it is just the wording that is confusing me, but most of what we saw in the first trilogy still works in a continuity sense.
Everything combos with Tombstone Stairwell.
Han's arc in the original trilogy is his journey from selfish anti-hero to selfless hero of the rebellion. When he is first introduced his only concern is money and his own self interest. By the end of the trilogy he is willing to volunteer for the most dangerous missions with no concern for self or no selfish motivations. He fights for others, not himself. In Episode 7 he's right back to being the smuggler outlaw abandoning his friends and family. It negates the entire growth of his character in the original trilogy... I thought this was obvious.
The story from the original trilogy was that the good guys won. For real. Finally. The end.
Except not really because when we pick things up in this film it's like the Empire wasn't really destroyed, they just re-branded. Did the rebels just stop fighting after the Death Star was destroyed a second time? How did the First Order become such a powerful force if the Rebels won? Why won't the republic outright fight the First Order instead of letting a tiny band of fighters take them on (at the very detriment of several planets, btw)? Episode 7 leaves us at a place where basically the same type of people that were in power at the beginning of Episode 4 are now in charge again. It's as if the entire first trilogy never actually happened because the good guys didn't finish the job after the credits rolled at the end of Episode 6. It's probably the laziest aspect of the story. Instead of writing a new and interesting evil force to deal with we're almost literally sent right back to the beginning of the original trilogy (complete with Darth Vader stand in and Stormtroopers). It's not a creative story in the slightest.
Follow me on Twitter @VapidPodcast and listen to my podcast "Vapid Existentialism" on iTunes!
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
The reason I think it negates his growth in the original trilogy is because we didn't need it for the story to work. Han doesn't need a character arc in this film because we already got a solid one for him in the original films. He should have been the Obi-wan in this film. The story focused too much on him when we had at least three far more interesting new characters to focus on.
That said, I think you're talking semantics. I can agree with everything you said about why they did what they did with his character and still say they negated his arc from the original trilogy. Just because "something went wrong" doesn't mean it's not taking away from his original arc.
Follow me on Twitter @VapidPodcast and listen to my podcast "Vapid Existentialism" on iTunes!
---
As for Rey, I found Rey to be the only interesting new character, and I'm not sure where the great objection to her comes from (aside from her having ovaries). Yes, she's underdeveloped and isn't well-written, but nothing in Episode 7 is well-written. Yes, she's got exceptional force abilities, but that's because she's THE CHOSEN ONE for this particular trilogy, and she might even be Luke Skywalker's descendant. Yes, she's great with machines, that's because she's a scavenger who works for scavengers. Yes, she's good at fighting and is resilient and can take care of herself because how the hell would she be alive otherwise? The girl lives on a desert planet on the Outer Rim that looks like a backwater by Tatooine standards.
Really the only unusual skill I can think of that Rey has is her gift with piloting, as it's not clear where she got that from, but it's possible she was taught that, as she does live near an outpost where people with ships go to trade, and she does ride around in a hoverbike-thing.
Did you read my full post?
He doesn't need any of the things you described as being a part of his new arc because he comes into this film with all that we already know about him. There's no reason for him to be apart from Leia and back to no good. Even if his son had turned to the Dark Side there's no real reason that he had to be written back into being a scoundrel except that's what they wanted to do. The story, IMO, would have been much stronger if he'd just been the guide/Obi-wan character for Rey and Finn while trying to win back his son from the Dark Side. All that other junk about him goofing off with smuggling giant monsters and getting into scuffles with random outlaws was pointless and, as I said, diminishes his arc from the original story. It is possible for people to learn from their past while simultaneously experiencing tragedy. He's a stronger character if he retains the lessons learned from the original trilogy while still having to deal with the loss of his son to the dark side. Having him just go back to being a selfish goofball makes him less of a tragic character and more of a stupid character.
EDIT: In all honesty, there's no need for him to have a story arc in this film at all, especially one as weak as the one he's given. Give more screen time to one of those other characters instead. Whatever, it's not like JJ Abrhams makes well written films.
Follow me on Twitter @VapidPodcast and listen to my podcast "Vapid Existentialism" on iTunes!
There is quite a bit of time that has transpired from ep6 to ep7. If anything, this merely shows that he kept developing as a character in the meantime, although perhaps not for the better, which is ok; not all character development has to be progressive.
As for the First Order, the film barely even hinted at what happened, and even then mainly in the opening crawl. Reading the book with the Rey/Finn/Poe stories helps quite a bit which is indeed a failing of the film, or perhaps done to make the additional material more interesting. The Empire, while defeated, still had too many people inside the New Republic. When Leia tried to convince the Senate that there was a threat from the remaining Star Destroyers and personnel that went into the uncharted regions of space, the corrupted politicians were able to sway the vote to provide no funding or assistance to her plight.
A solid character arc? In the original trilogy his character was one of the most underdeveloped ever for such a popular character in cinema. He basically went from bad-ass to loyal friend in the first film, then stayed that way in the next two films. There was really no deviation at all from what was developed in ep4. It is even one of the reasons Ford wanted the character killed off, because almost no time was devoted to doing anything interesting to develop Han. At least in ep7 he becomes something more than just a generic hero (albeit charming one by virtue of Ford's on-screen presence) and we get hints of a true human being beneath the veneer of his smooth persona.
Everything combos with Tombstone Stairwell.
First of all, Han was never not a scoundrel. Let's be real here.
Second, there's no reason he's in the movie period aside from that's what they wanted to do. The question is, did the choice work? And I would say yes. Couples do tend to fall apart at the loss of a child, and Ben turned to the Dark Side.
I don't see how this makes sense. He's Han Solo. How would it make sense for him to be Obi-Wan? He's a cocksure space cowboy/pirate with a heart of gold. He can't not be that and still be Han Solo. And if you want him to be the wise mentor, you damn sure have to show the character journey it took to get him there, because that is nothing like who he was at the end of Jedi.
Giant monster sequence was stupid, I'll agree there.
I don't see that.
He doesn't, it's true.
But again, I'm not sure how you're going to get away with having the three original heroes in this film and not give them a substantial presence. That's just wasting them.
Was Obi-wan Kenobi a "background character" in Episode 4?
???!?!??!?!?!?!?!??!?!??!
HAN SHOT FIRST! How is that not a "scoundrel?"
Follow me on Twitter @VapidPodcast and listen to my podcast "Vapid Existentialism" on iTunes!
That's his point. He always was a scoundrel.
Check out my Newborder Peasant Cube here! http://www.cubetutor.com/draft/37467
True Name Mafia (Win),Clan Contest IX Mafia (Win), Bravely Default Mafia (Loss), BOTAS (loss), BfV (Loss), Ace Attourney (loss)
Rules Advisor before they were eradicated
LOL! I misased the word "not" in there!
Follow me on Twitter @VapidPodcast and listen to my podcast "Vapid Existentialism" on iTunes!
Like the multiple scenes were Rey is annoyed by Finn holding her. That would ressonate a lot less if genders were reversed, don't you agree? Finn's background and his skin color is also another example.
Overall I think the movie is improved by those. It's not like theres any grounds for dispute for whether underestimating someone for being a woman is wrong.
BGU Control
R Aggro
Standard - For Fun
BG Auras
I'll give you the hand-holding, but Finn's skin color is a complete nonissue in the movie. You can't even say his background as a stormtrooper is an allegory for being black or something (the way in Zootopia Judy Hopp's being a rabbit is an allegory for her gender) because nobody knows he was a stormtrooper, whereas being black is something you literally wear on your face. No, Finn just looks like that. And nobody cares. And that's great.
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.