The Last Jedi - Full Spoilers

Can't say I've seen them but I can certainly imagine...

YOu can say that again

In a recent interview with James Cameron, he said something like he wanted the next trilogy to be set in the “microbial world”, and it would be revealed that the Whills are some kind of cosmic entities that the midchlorians channel.

Which makes it sounds like a lot of pot was smoked during the interview.

What a stupid fucking idea.

I’m sure he’s joking

Michael Barnes wrote: Which makes it sounds like a lot of pot was smoked during the interview.

And a couple of tabs of LSD. Not the good stuff.

Michael Barnes wrote: What a stupid fucking idea.

It's still better than the "fan remake" ideas that have been circulating among internet crybabies this past couple of weeks.

Seriously, I have never seen a better demonstration of the feeble, fragile little worlds these edgelords live in. The whole "movement" boils down to "please regress Star Wars to the mental level of a 12 year old, because that's where I've been stuck for 30 years".

Michael Barnes wrote: In a recent interview with James Cameron, he said something like he wanted the next trilogy to be set in the “microbial world”, and it would be revealed that the Whills are some kind of cosmic entities that the midchlorians channel.

Which makes it sounds like a lot of pot was smoked during the interview.

What a stupid fucking idea.

Now I've only seen the same tiny tidbits that everyone else has that Lucas mentioned, but here's how I interpreted his idea:
What I think he was hinting at is something like the Lensman pulp series from the 50's. Basically the gist of that story is that there are two diametrically opposed alien forces of good and evil that are behind the battles between the goodies and baddies. While in that series, the first novel introduces the concept (going back millions of years) right away, what I'm imagining is Lucas was planning to reveal the source of the light side and dark side struggle are the microscopic "whills". So a silly idea, but not without precedent in the kind of pulp adventure serial Lucas was going for. I have no idea how the "microbial world" would play out that wouldn't be insanely dumb however.

As for the Last Jedi, I didn't really like it. 6/10, maybe. I know a lot of people were caught up in how brave it was for breaking with the past and all that, but doesn't the film basically undercut all of that with Rey saving the Jedi books? It seemed like it dipped its toes in ideas but the ending didn't really stick to them. I think it's hard for me to judge it too well until we see episode ix. I really like the Force Awakens, but think that the Last Jedi actually diminishes it quite a bit. We'll see if the same is true for ix.

Count Orlok wrote: Now I've only seen the same tiny tidbits that everyone else has that Lucas mentioned, but here's how I interpreted his idea:
What I think he was hinting at is something like the Lensman pulp series from the 50's. Basically the gist of that story is that there are two diametrically opposed alien forces of good and evil that are behind the battles between the goodies and baddies. While in that series, the first novel introduces the concept (going back millions of years) right away, what I'm imagining is Lucas was planning to reveal the source of the light side and dark side struggle are the microscopic "whills". So a silly idea, but not without precedent in the kind of pulp adventure serial Lucas was going for. I have no idea how the "microbial world" would play out that wouldn't be insanely dumb however.

Presupposing there's a way to implement his idea that isn't crap, I have zero faith in Lucas to implement it well. His idea for The Emperor using the Clone Wars as an enormous false flag operation to seize control of the Republic is really, really good. The execution? Eh, not so much.

Absolutely. More often than not, the prequels were failures of execution (pacing, acting, directing, editing) than the ideas themselves. People get hung up on details like the trade disputes, but not of that would matter if they were put together coherently.

With that, The Last Jedi seemed very similar. The ideas were compelling but the execution was botched. I know people are willing to give it credit for the ideas, but I'm not willing to overlook the flabbiness. Above all else, I just didn't enjoy watching it that much. To be fair, I have only seen it once in the theater, but I'm also not really eager to see it again.

It's weird to think that George Lucas wrote and directed a great movie in the '70s that ended up having a big cultural impact in the U.S.:

American Graffiti. Cruising. Drive-in restaurants. Going steady. Poodle skirts. Slow dancing. Drag racing.

There was all this great rock in 1973. Free love, dope smoking, long hair for everybody thing going on, and then all of the sudden people went crazy for the late '50s and the early '60s again. It was like a counter-counter-revolution. Happy Days. Laverne & Shirley. Joanie Loves Chachi. By the end of the decade, we got preppies and President Reagan.

He's just not a talented director. That's it guys. It's okay to say this. He's just not very good. He got lucky and cut an (in hindsight) INSANELY good contract on the toys. We don't have to worship and hang on every word of some rando that got lucky. Cf. Elon Musk.

What y’all are saying about the execution being the problem is totally proven in Clone Wars. I always tell folks that Clone Wars takes all of the prequel stuff and makes it awesome- even Jar Jar is good in The show. The show runners, I think, honed the better ideas and really let them expand like Palpatine’s masterplan, the moral culpability of the Jedi, and the notion of two factions basically throwing disposable armies at each other. I mean, Darth Maul goes from being a flash-in-the-pan heavy with one good scene to a compelling, diabolical character that stands with the best SW villains. Grievous too. And Dooku for that matter.

It's also easy to forget that Star Wars was only Lucas' third film. Despite all the mythologizing after its success, he wasn't that experienced with the director's chair and even then hadn't directed a film in twenty years by the time the prequels rolled around.

It's tempting to imagine an alternate universe where he handed off the role of directing and was more open to collaboration on the scripts. Lucas could have pursued his technical interests while getting more outside input. Although from what I've heard, even by the time of Return of the Jedi, he was just looking for a director who was compliant, quick, and cheap.

Not to double post, but I was initially impressed with Disney looking for up and coming talent for their new Star Wars movies. However, after the firings and the financial under-performance of Solo it seems like that might be out of the window. I can't really fault Johnson for at least trying some new things, even if I felt they were underwhelming. Can't say I'm eager for Abrams to return.

Shellhead wrote: It's weird to think that George Lucas wrote and directed a great movie in the '70s that ended up having a big cultural impact in the U.S.:

American Graffiti. Cruising. Drive-in restaurants. Going steady. Poodle skirts. Slow dancing. Drag racing.

There was all this great rock in 1973. Free love, dope smoking, long hair for everybody thing going on, and then all of the sudden people went crazy for the late '50s and the early '60s again. It was like a counter-counter-revolution. Happy Days. Laverne & Shirley. Joanie Loves Chachi. By the end of the decade, we got preppies and President Reagan.

You can't hang all of that on Lucas. Sha Na Na played Woodstock, after all.

Let's agree to just blame him for Attack of the Clones, not Reaganomics.