I still can’t believe it
 Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
 CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
I still can’t believe it
I still can’t believe it
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
>subvert expectations
>Does the opposite of what would happen in a decently told story
Whoa! What a giga-brain.
He looks like he votes democrat. Does that mean he actually subverted my expectations and voted republican after all?
Kinda. He's a massive authoritarian and obviously against democracy.
>THE AUDIENCE EXPECTED ONE THING BUT THEN I DID THE OPPOSITE.
OMFG EXPECTATIONS SUBVERTED.
The movie is actually incredibly predictable with this in mind.
I’d give Jonson accolades if I thought for a second it was intentional
>Luke threw away the weapon his father used to murder children
Do Star Wars fans have short memory?
You're right but fans just wanted Luke to swimg his wienersaber bathed in child blood and kill stormtroopers despite adopting a peaceful stand at the end of Episode 6.
did luke even know anything about that? I mean, as far as we know, especially from the movies, his dad used that saber as anakin the good guy jedi to do good guy jedi things. I think its fair for him to assume the evil shit was done with the evil red lightsaber he has personally seen darth vader using as a sith. I mean, why else keep and use that lightsaber for 2 movies?
Though really i think what rian was doing here, rather bluntly and without artistry, was the same thing they did with yoda on dagobah. They reject the laser sword weapon of derring do in favor of the true power that is the force.
Luke talks about the Jedi being responsible for the rise of Palpatine, so he was aware of what really happened.
>They reject the laser sword weapon of derring do in favor of the true power that is the force
No, he rejects it because he thinks the Jedi are faulty and the Force needs to 'self-balance' itself. He literally says that later to Rey.
knowing the jedi are responsible for the rise of palpatine doesn't equate to knowing darth personally used this lightsaber to murder people as a sith, including kiddies. It would make more since to think that hes used the red one for that all along.
But yeah you're right about the other one.
>watching israeli feminist fan fiction
NGMI
I don’t get the hate toward this moment specifically. A lightsaber is a weapon. Do you not remember him throwing his lightsaber on the floor and refusing to kill vader? Luke rejected violence and aggression in episode 6. This made total sense to me, it only became clear rian didn’t understand the character when he tried to murder a teenager in his sleep- then I saw that the lightsaber throw was just for shock. But in a vacuum it’s a perfectly fitting moment for luke. Being a jedi isn’t about killing people.
Cope,
I think it could have been a great moment. His arc in ep 6 was all about rejecting force and violence, listening to his feelings over yoda and obi wan and refusing to give in to the easy and forceful solution like his father did. That’s the moment he becomes a jedi, when he rejects the lightsaber and is prepared to die rather than kill a man he knows has good in him, who is a victim of evil as much as he is a cause of it. He breaks the cycle with compassion. I thought when he did this in TLJ he was going to tell her how weaponry is irrelevant to her training if she wants to be a jedi, that it’s an absolute last resort and the sabre nothing more than a tool, her training will be more spiritual and less combat focused like learning the actual mindset a jedi should have. That was all ruined as the film went on, but initially I was tricked into thinking rian understood star wars
autistic
Because luke isnt supposed to be a petulant child anymore hes a grown man and hero him flippantly chucking his birthright that he hasnt seen in 40 years is moronic.
he already threw it away infront of the emperor. he rejected it. he’s a jedi who isn’t meat to be attached to objects never mind objects used to kill people. him throwing it away like trash was an amazing and provocative first lesson in becoming a jedi the rest of the film failed to follow up on
Not the same saber, fricktard. That's the saber he lost that belonged to his father, whom he redeemed in the end.
which his father used to kill children
Shit I forgot the scene where Luke found the holovids of his father murdering younglings, and Luke swearing if he ever found that blade again he'd throw it in the ocean. Thanks for reminding me.
if we are going by moronic sequel trilogy logic the lightsaber can give him visions of everything it was used to do like it did with rey
But that was a story for another time, anon!
Thats a story for another time
I agree, especially when his mentors were Yoda and Obi-Wan
spot on
> Luke rejected violence and aggression in episode 6.
Full moron tier interpretation.
It was a rejection of hatred and anger.
There’s a reason he picked the fricking thing back up again, and it wasn’t to use as a novelty light fixture.
Context, homosexual. It's an entirely different situation
Except in this scene someone traveled a long way to respectfully give him back an important artifact that belongs to him, it's not the type of scene where throwing it away constitutes any rejection of violence.
A lightsaber can be used defensively though, it's not purely a murder weapon.
If a Jedi is attacked with a blaster, it's better for them to have their saber than not
the lightsaber throw could have been interesting if he had done interesting things with it, but he followed that scene directly with luke telling ray to go frick herself while he sucks blue milk out a giant sea cow titty.
but rian jonsons only trick is rugpulls. rug pull after rugpull. he dismantled every single plot point established in 7 without setting up any new ones, and just left them with a smouldering ruin of a series.
i mean yeah, 7 was a cynical cash grab rehash, but at least it start to set up a story, even if it was a story we've already heard. 8 destroyed the story and left nothing in its place
>he dismantled every single plot point established in 7 without setting up any new ones, and just left them with a smouldering ruin of a series.
I didn't even notice that until you just said. Literally all he set up was "the new republic is basically dead" which was almost immediately reversed in the next movie.
I guess, but its played off in a comical sense
correct, and as expected the hordes of moronic trump voting chuds have completely missed the point
rent free
ywnbaw
*slices you in half in front of the entire thread*
*everyone falls silent as i wipe your disgusting gore from my blade*
as i was saying - the chuds have missed the point.
What was the "point"?
I can't believe stupid people like you somehow manage to still be alive.
It would be one thing if Luke handed the lightsaber back to Rey or refused it entirely when offered to him, in a moment that showcased the fear and reticence to act that drove him into exile in the first place
It's another him to to pick it up then chuck it over his shoulder into the ocean as he flashes a look of contempt and disgust directly towards the camera, to the audience. It foreshadows the entire problem with Luke's characterization in the sequels, he just became an butthole hobo and doesn't feel like he's the same character from Episodes 4-6, he may as well have been a completely original character and honestly would have worked better for it
>A couple hints of nervous laughter around the cinema but otherwise cutting silence where you could feel the collective confusion in the audience
This movie just could not stop missing the mark.
>whole audience laughing when leia mary poppinsed her way back to the ship
Was that subversion?
I heard laughs in the theater I was in.
For me it was Rose kissing Finn. Everyone couldn't suppress a chuckle
There were just some chuckles during that. The whole cinema laughed when Kylo turned around shirtless though.
Lmao yes that too
>This movie just could not stop missing the mark
this. I liked TFA a lot but when i was watching Last Jedi it was just one confusing and cringy moment after the other. Stuff like in OP, milk scene, leia flying, the badly timed moronic jokes with gleeson's character etc all that shit. I couldn't even finish it. The confusion about this movie became so annoying i've just switched it off. I couldn't bear it. Literally almost nothing made sense. It's unironically among the worst movies this century.
>subvert expectations for 45 minutes
>go back to status quo before credits
Matrix troonys did the same thing with Reloaded. None of these directors have any true courage.
It's because they don't know how to write so they need to just find reasons to delay the plot until the last minute then snap back to the status quo or have a deux ex machina to wrap it up. They can't actually just write a story.
>Luke and Han never had a scene together
This is really the shocker that most people forget about. They knew they had Harrison Ford for only one movie and yet they decided to leave Hamill on the sidelines for TFA. Why?
I honestly don't give a shit about that shitty fan service stuff. I'm surprised Disney didn't do it though. They're usually into shallow shit like that.
There's nothing shitty about showing the contrast in their personalities. Not to mention especially now that Luke failed at training Han's son.
>Not to mention especially now that Luke failed at training Han's son
Don't you mean tried to murder him during his sleep because he *might* had turned dark side someday?
Zoomer moronic mentality of "good's responsibility is to kill evil no matter where it may be".
Yeah that part is gay. Based trips
Luke, Han, Leia, and Chewy should have all been together in a few scenes. And they shouldn't have been loser deadbeats who failed at everything and regressed to their previous arcs.
This is my problem with the sequels, what they did to the old heroes. They turned them all into losers and failed parents, that really pissed me off. They conpleyely reversed Han and Lukes character arcs too. I'll never forgive them for that. Han and Leia should have been good parents, Han would never have left them.
Han left Leia after Snoke seduced Ben away from Luke's academy.
And Luke tried to murder his own nephew because he had a bad dream, don't forget that part.
I had no problem with that. He had a vision of what Ben would become and tried to do the pragmatic thing and just cut him down there. Mace Windu suffered an unfortunate fate when he tried to engage in pragmatism.
>Risks literally everything to save his father, Darth Vader, murderer of hundreds/thousands, because he believes there's a slither of hope there's still some good within him.
>Tries to murder his nephew because a dream told him he might maybe turn to the dark side in the future at some point maybe.
He also tried to "murder" his father, whom he had come to to "save", because the latter dared to vaguely threaten his sister.
That was before he was presented with the choice of fully killing him. He didn't. It's like a character has obstacles, and struggles to overcome, and reversing them, especially when this is their first appearance after that arc where he overcame those issues, causes people to be confused, and angry.
>That was before he was presented with the choice of fully killing him. He didn't.
He also didn't kill his nephew.
But why would he even attempt to, or consider it, after overcoming a bigger moral challenge? You don't understand. This is the FIRST time we've seen Luke since Return of the Jedi, and his character arc gets reversed.
>after overcoming a bigger moral challenge?
I really hope you don't actually think that overcoming a challenge once in your life means that you'll never again struggle when facing another such challenge. That would be a reather naive view of the human mind, and not one that anyone with more than 20 years of life experience would ever entertain.
Luke is not a person. He's a fictional character. The last time we saw Luke say a single word in Star Wars was Return of the Jedi. Then in The Last Jedi, he's backsliding on his immediate prior character arc.
>Luke is not a person.
Ah, see, here we have the problem: You didn't want credible character arcs, you wanted hero worship. And TLJ did not give you that.
No, I WANT credible character arcs! Holy cow. It's just The Last Jedi reversed Luke's arc, and gave us nothing to imply why it should be reversed, other than "dude, people change as time passes."
>It's just The Last Jedi reversed Luke's arc, and gave us nothing to imply why it should be reversed
Again: Being tempted by a character weakness more than once is nothing that demands an explanation. It's simple: If you take Luke as a character seriously, you have to keep his character strength and weaknesses consistent, which means he has to fall for the same things again. You cannot just rewrite him and give him new weaknesses. Johnson understood how Luke worked, this is why you now scream on and on about "reversed arcs".
>nothing that demands an explanation
It does when the character overcame a much greater challenge than this previously. DIRECTLY previously. Luke faced a bigger moral conundrum when we last saw him. So why would he flinch here?
>which means he has to fall for the same things again.
Why? He dealt with worse, and here he was faced with less.
>when the character overcame a much greater challenge
Again: Overcoming a challenge once does not make you safe from ever again being challenged. Overcoming a weakness once does not mean that weakness disappears forever. Such things are ongoing struggles. That's a very basic truth of human life, anon, and you'll do much better once you accept it's true for yourself and the people around you.
>Overcoming a challenge once does not make you safe from ever again being challenged.
But this was a much lesser challenge. When we saw Luke last, in Return of the Jedi, he overcame insurmountable odds, and came out on top. Then in The Last Jedi, something much lesser made him spooked. I'm sorry, are these movies not direct sequels? I'm seeing VII, VIII, and IX on them. Should character arcs regress for no reason?
This is writing, dude. Luke is not a physical person. He's a character, where every action is calculated. You have to justify decisions.
>this was a much lesser challenge.
That doesn't mean anything. If you are a sex addict and resist the temptation to cheat on your wife with a supermodel once, that doesn't mean that the next time you could frick that average looking girl from next door, you won't be tempted at all.
You need to let go of that idea that once you've "conquered" your weaknesses, you cannot face a challenge anymore.
>When a character changes, you have to show and explain the change.
That's the point: His character didn't "change" signioficantly. That's why he did act fully in character and followed his instinct, before correcting himself. Something that's so inherent to him that he's done it multiple times in the OT.
>You need to let go of that idea that once you've "conquered" your weaknesses, you cannot face a challenge anymore.
From a writing perspective, why would you have a character face a greater challenge, and then be wracked by a lesser one? This one failing is the reason Luke became a hermit.
>That's the point: His character didn't "change" signioficantly.
This is retroactive. Rian wrote him to have not changed significantly. Episode VI had him facing a massive challenge, with him overcoming his dark thoughts. In the process of this, he surpassed Yoda and Obi-Wan even, by proving Vader could be saved. This was a pivotal moment for him. Rian is the one who decided this wasn't a big deal. Someone who didn't create the character, and was just hired to write a middle film in a trilogy.
>From a writing perspective, why would you have a character face a greater challenge, and then be wracked by a lesser one?
Why wouldn't you? Wait, you don't think that writing a story, or character arc, or whatever, is only ever rising tension, do you? You are aware of Freytag's model of drama theory, right?
>Rian wrote him to have not changed significantly.
Yes. And that's a good thing. You guys usually scream "not my Luke" and such things, but now you suggest that Luke should have been a significantly different character?
>Rian is the one who decided this wasn't a big deal.
But it was. Why wouldn't it be a big deal just because he kept his characteristic weakness of being rash, quick to anger and quick to judge? That weakness is what makes Luke Luke! (You know, the guy who wanted to go to Tosche Station for power converters, not the infallible legend from people's headcanons.)
>Why wouldn't you?
Because Luke's arc in The Last Jedi was reiterating his arc in Return of the Jedi, so it was repetitive and pointless.
>now you suggest that Luke should have been a significantly different character?
Luke faced positive growth at the end of Return of the Jedi. The Last Jedi had him losing that positive growth, and needing to relearn the exact same lesson he learned in the previous movie he was in. This is not good writing.
>(You know, the guy who wanted to go to Tosche Station for power converters, not the infallible legend from people's headcanons.)
This is your issue, dude. Holy cow. You think A New Hope, Empire, and Jedi all happened at the same time, and Luke faced zero growth and change throughout those movies. He's just a static figure to you, and then randomly, decades later, Rian Johnson was the one who decided to make Luke a character. No. Watch those movies. Watch them in a linear fashion, and see Luke change. Now go watch the sequel trilogy, which is Luke's next DIRECT appearance. His personality, his character, it's completely regressed from the positive changes he received, only get that same arc he had in a truncated, worse form.
Holy frick you’re an autistic, pathetic baby. have a nice day
Glad you admit you lost, babe. It's real big of you.
>Glad you admit you lost
Not me, obviously, fricktard.
I was writing this whole reply here in the meantime:
But with how you talk and act in here, I fear all and any of that effort truly is wasted on you, because you simply won't "grow".
Ah, going for “fricktard” now. Glad to know you can’t win an argument without pathetic ad hominem. You defenders are honestly pathetic
Well, you are a fricktard. Just look at your behaviour right now. You're not even trying to make a proper argument anymore. You are not here to have a honest debate. You are here to "win", and "winning" for you does not mean learning from someone else's perspective, but to repeat your same old bullshit over and over until your opponent gives up trying to talk sense into you, at which point you'll try to turn it into a victory by gloating, as you demonstrated already.
My response is right here.
Others were just disagreeing with you, because you're wrong.
rian gayboy is mad lol
not him, but you got owned and you know it
Luke's arc in The Last Jedi was reiterating his arc in Return of the Jedi,
No, it was not. Luke's faux pas was not his arc IN TLJ, it was an arc shown in a flashback, explaining why he is where he is in TLJ. It was a setup FOR the film.
Luke's actual arc WITHIN the film is about getting over his (as perceived by himself) failure and shame, and finding a way to reconcile the "legend of Luke Skywalker" with the person Luke Skywalker.
>Luke faced positive growth at the end of Return of the Jedi. The Last Jedi had him losing that positive growth
You really need to stop acting as if "growth" and "overcoming" something makes a person perfect and infallible. Again, this is not the case and if you live long enough, you'll witness this countless times in yourself and others.
>You think A New Hope, Empire, and Jedi all happened at the same time, and Luke faced zero growth and change throughout those movies.
No, I do not, and you repeating that lie of yours another dozen times won't make it true.
You need to accept that no amount of growth makes a character shed his most characteristic traits. Ever.
Nice try. homosexuals are groomed, they aren't born that way
The Last Jedi had Luke obsessed with following the Jedi ways and texts. This is counter-intuitive to the way Luke acted within Return of the Jedi, where he went against Obi-Wan and Yoda, by actually saving his father. He had overcome the old Jedi traditions, and was beginning to forge new ones. This is the completion of Luke as a character. He is the new generation who will do better than the old. You can critique the entire Sequel Trilogy by not getting this, and having OT characters be failures, but Luke is a microcosm of it all, and it shows it wasn't intentional. The Last Jedi had Yoda berating Luke for caring about "The sacred Jedi texts," which tells me Rian didn't get Return of the Jedi at all.
You say it yourself. The entire movie hinges on Luke getting over his perceived failures, And what is his failure here? Falling into fear and anger. Which is something he previously overcame in just his prior movie appearance to a greater extent. It doesn't make sense from a writing perspective. Characters aren't human. Every decision they make is the result of a writer choosing to make them, so you have to criticize each of those decisions in relation to their prior actions. When you have a character arc, and reverse it with the argument "people just do that sometimes," it's weak as hell writing. Especially when that's the character's entire arc and motivation for their now last movie appearance.
It could have been such an easy fix too. Instead of trying to murder his Nephew in his sleep, Luke 'allows' Kylo to fall to the darkside by being too passive, too much of a helicoptor parent, too "good" that he was blind to the dark. He could realize that even though you should be good and forgiving and all of that, there's a limit to that too. I mean I'm just spitballing here because I feel like Luke allowing bad things to happen because he was too naïve or believing in the good of others or whatever, works way better than "I will now kill my nephew in his sleep because of a bad feeling"
>He had overcome the old Jedi traditions
I've never thought of Luke in RotJ overcoming old Jedi traditions. He just had a connection to/insight into Vader nobody else did or ever could have. Vader even says outright that Obi-Wan once had the same mindset Luke did (RotS doesn't exactly line up with this, but whatever). It wasn't a matter of Jedi orthodoxy.
Maybe traditions isn't the exact correct word, but Luke, as a character, didn't follow the standard Jedi training presented in the prequel trilogy. He wasn't young. He had emotions. He did things entirely differently, and not by the book, and in the process, succeeded where his predecessors fell short.
>The Last Jedi had Luke obsessed with following the Jedi ways and texts.
No. It had Luke do the opposite. Again, you confuse what came before TLJ and what was in TLJ itself.
>He had overcome the old Jedi traditions, and was beginning to forge new ones.
No, he had not. That's what the EU (or rather, parts of it) claimed, but it's not what RotJ said.
>You can critique the entire Sequel Trilogy by not getting this, and having OT characters be failures
No, because that is the most realistic outcome. I get that your headcanon dictates that things should continuously get better and no generation will ever repeat the mistakes of the ones before. But that's not how human beings work. And it makes for a rather pathetic setup for a conflict.
>The entire movie hinges on Luke getting over his perceived failures
No. It doesn't "hinge" on it. It's the path Johnson chose for Luke's character arc: A positive outcome where he actually DOES get over his crisis. The "entire movie" could as well have worked by going the other direction and Luke could have made his failure complete. But Johnson saw that that's not a good story to tell.
>When you have a character arc, and reverse it with the argument "people just do that sometimes," it's weak as hell writing.
You know nothing about character writing and even less about human psychology.
I'm not that anon but you're a total gay. Seriously, the movie is garbage and you're probably a homosexual
Kek. You're the epitome of a TLJ-hating prequel fanboy.
>prequel
I'm 48 and the prequels suck but are much better movies than TFA, TLJ, and RoS
>I'm 48
That doesn't make you any less pathetic. If anything, if makes you more pathetic.
If you’re 48 and still on Cinemaphile you should unironically have a nice day. Your life is a pathetic failure
>No. It had Luke do the opposite. Again, you confuse what came before TLJ and what was in TLJ itself.
TLJ had Luke be obsessed with the Jedi texts until the ending. He was obsessed with the rigidity of the system, which is something he never was in the OT.
>No, he had not. That's what the EU (or rather, parts of it) claimed, but it's not what RotJ said.
No. Return of the Jedi had him doing just that, by saving Vader. he surpassed the Jedi ways of old.
>No, because that is the most realistic outcome.
These are films. Films do no rely necessarily on "realism." It's a "pathetic setup for a conflict"? Sure, but why do these movies exist at all? They just reiterate the OT. And Luke's character is a microcosm of it all. Luke learns the same thing, just like how the new Empire rises up and falls, and Palpatine gets brought down again. These movies are pointless, and bring nothing to the table. Rian's offerings included.
>A positive outcome where he actually DOES get over his crisis.
It was a crisis made up by Rian himself. Luke had no major issues like these at the end of RotJ. It's like purposefully breaking down your door, and then bringing a repairman over, and telling me to be grateful that you fixed my door. You're the one who broke it.
>You know nothing about character writing and even less about human psychology.
So you're just going for "no u" now. Okay.
>>TLJ had Luke be obsessed with the Jedi texts until the ending.
No. It had him being torn between keeping the tradition and throwing it out altogether. Not some "rigid system", but rather respect for what came before and fear of repeating the errors of the past. Yoda's entire point was to offer a third way, a way out of that false dichotomy.
>he surpassed the Jedi ways of old.
No, he did not. He found a way out of a situation that they considered unsolvable, but that does not mean "surpassing" anyone. Again, you seem fixated on permanently "growing" and "overcoming" and "surpassing", as if those meant completely leaving any and all weaknesses and failures behind for good. That's not how anything ever works. Not in real life and not in fiction. If it did, it'd make all of fiction pretty bland and one-directional.
>Films do no rely necessarily on "realism."
Well, I do appreciate when they do, as far as character arcs are concerned. Otherwise you get a complete incohesive mess like episode 9.
>They just reiterate the OT.
Again: Luke's arc IN TLJ is not the same as his arc in the OT. Luke's arc BEFORE TLJ is vaguely resembling the OT in that he repeats an error he made in the OT.
>Luke had no major issues like these at the end of RotJ.
Yes, he did. Luke was always insecure - again, go back to Tatooine in the original film, where Luke doesn't want to go on an adventure with old Ben. And he's always been stubborn. All of TESB is about him being stubborn.
>So you're just going for "no u" now.
That's not a "no u" simply because you never made such an argment. But you do not really know anything about writing, I can tell that much. And you lack an understanding of how "real" people work. Or maybe you really just hate "realism" so much you want nothing to to with it?
>No. It had him being torn between keeping the tradition and throwing it out altogether. Not some "rigid system", but rather respect for what came before and fear of repeating the errors of the past.
Luke didn't have a false dichotomy whatsoever in the original trilogy. That's something the sequels made up. That's something Rian made up. That's inserting conflict that previously wasn't there for the sake of manufacturing a character arc.
>If it did, it'd make all of fiction pretty bland and one-directional.
Fiction is generally one directional. It's not real life. You dictate how these characters change and grow. If I make a character named "Bob," you shouldn't critique Bob's action as a person. He's not real. You critique me, and my writing. Star Wars was finished at Episode VI. Luke's arc was complete. Disney, and in this case, Rian, who had to write Luke, had to come up with drama that didn't need to exist.
>Luke's arc BEFORE TLJ is vaguely resembling the OT in that he repeats an error he made in the OT.
What arc before TLJ? Luke's error was IN TLJ. It's in the movie! Rian made it! That scene is INSIDE TLJ! Holy cow, man!
>Yes, he did. Luke was always insecure - again, go back to Tatooine in the original film
Holy. Cow. Man! You are literally acting like Luke is the same in IV as he is in VI. Like he has no growth, and arc. People, and characters, change. He changed. We SAW his change. This is good writing!
>didn't have a false dichotomy whatsoever in the original trilogy.
True. In the OT, he completely bought into the jedi teachings that Yoda and Obi-Wan gave him. Him doubting those only came with his own failure towards Ben. TLJ explains that in detail. You'd know if you had paid proper attention to his own words in the film.
>That's inserting conflict that previously wasn't there
So, first you complain that the character still has the same weaknesses instead of completely new ones, now you complain that the conflict isn't the same old one but new? Really? Let me explain: The conflicts of the OT had been resolved. Completely. The Empire's gone. Vader's dead. The sequels needed new conflicts. You apparently wanted completely changed characters reliving the same old conflicts, for some reason, and think that would have been "good writing", rather than new conflicts forming from the same consistent character traits ...
>What arc before TLJ? Luke's error was IN TLJ.
You really need to learn to recognize what a flashback is and when it takes place compared to the narrative. Remember earlier in this thread when you rambled on about linear storytelling? Yeah, try to understand non-linear storytelling for once.
>That scene is INSIDE TLJ!
As a flashback, yes. It's not part of Lukes character arc throug TLJ, it's the fricking setup for that arc.
>You are literally acting like Luke is the same in IV as he is in VI. Like he has no growth, and arc.
Again: Growing and having an arc does not mean that you change who you are. That is character writing 101: Never abandon character traits!
>Growing and having an arc does not mean that you change who you are.
That is not character writing 101, that is moronic.
And even if it were true, Luke was never "Guy who would kill someone in their sleep". Not even if they were pure evil. He tried to chat with palpatine, negotiate with jabba. And this was his obviously conflicted nephew. That's not a familiar failure, that's a complete and nonsensical departure from any semblance of the character as established for no reason other than the hubris of subversion.
>That is not character writing 101, that is moronic.
You may think so in theory, but if you ever witnessed an actual inherently inconsistent character, you'd immediately know that things have gone wrong. Dunno ... have your read or seen Twilight? That Jacob guy is a pretty glaring example of a character just changing traits as the plot demands. (Bella and Edward to a lesser extent.)
>Luke was never "Guy who would kill someone in their sleep"
And again, you're acting as if Luke had actually killed Ben. No, Luke is not the "guy who would kill". Luke is the "guy who would be tempted to kill to prevent something bad happening to people he loves, but then quickly reconsider before going through with it because he knows better". And that description involves multiple traits of his: His rashness, his stubbornness and his fear, but also his goodhearted nature, his love for others and his determination. All of that is Luke, and all of this has to be Luke.
>Dunno ... have your read or seen Twilight?
You're a Reylogay. It all makes sense now.
No, I'm not. And if you were actually able to read, you'd notice that I used Twilight as a negative example for character writing: How NOT to do it. It is indeed horribly written, for the reasons I named and for others.
>you can read such depth into places
You don't read depth INTO anything, anon. You analyze things and get things OUT of them. That's the difference between me and you. You think you need to insert your own ideas into characters, whereas I just take what's already there and go with it.
>And if no one outside that country of mine takes the hero's journey seriously, which is also an idiotic idea, then that still leaves some pretty great storytellers doing some pretty great work that the rest of the world watches. Including Lucas.
Sorry, anon, but the Hero's Journey is literally just a US thing. Invented in the US (based on Carl Jung's ideas, ironically), taught in the US, propagated in the US and employed in the US.
But even in the US, it's generally ridiculed for its inorganic nature and hard template structure. You only use it in the first place if you cannot write without a strict template.
And Lucas is not a great storyteller. He just had great ideas. He needs others to (re)write and edit them for him.
>We've witnessed an actual inherently inconsistent character: Luke in TLJ.
You are completely moronic. We have literally people in this thread complaining that he didn't change from the OT.
>is also not "guy whos first thought is to kill to protect those he loves"
This is not what I said. I said he'd be tempted, not that he'd conciously consider it. Which he didn't in TLJ. You'Re again being dishonest.
>We have literally people in this thread complaining that he didn't change from the OT.
You keep on trying to strawman me saying this. It's proof you're disingenuous. You present the argument that Luke was the same throughout the OT (he isn't, he has an arc, and grows), and that TLJ is just the same old Luke, but now given a 'proper' arc, because you are trumpeting Rian Johnson, and mocking Lucas, the original creator of this series.
>(he isn't, he has an arc, and grows)
Holy shit, this is getting repetitive. One last time: Characters do not change who they are at their core. Ever. They keep their traits. They change their perspectives, outlooks, conflicts and so on. Not their personality.
Characters who change their personality are inconsistent and might as well be two different ones.
What are Luke's "traits"?
I named a few pivotal ones here:
>His rashness, his stubbornness and his fear, but also his goodhearted nature, his love for others and his determination.
So by your logic, is TLJ Luke inconsistent? He's jaded, grumpy, and hopeless. Mark Hamil actually thinks he's inconsistent! He's "Jake" Skywalker. He "might as well be two different ones!"
>TLJ Luke inconsistent?
No.
>He's jaded, grumpy, and hopeless.
He's jaded, grumpy and hopeless eactly BECAUSE he still is the same stubborn guy from years before. He's talked himself into his own guilt and he's fully bought into not being able to rectify what he did. That is 100% in-character for somone who is well-meaning and who's failed. It's the darker side of all his positive traits: He now thinks that since he can't do the right thing, the best thing for him to do it to do nothing at all.
>Mark Hamil actually thinks he's inconsistent! He's "Jake" Skywalker. He "might as well be two different ones!"
Mark Hamill is not a writer, and Mark Hamill also tends to use hyperbole a lot. Have you ever heard him talk about his disagreements with George Lucas? Try watching his interviews from the late 70s and 80s.
It really shouldn't surprise you that he's since come out and publicly spoken out against people using his words against Johnson like you are doing now.
>BECAUSE he still is the same stubborn guy from years before.
No. The same stubborn guy from years before would've gone and rushed to his friends the moment they were in trouble. If you think he's the same Luke, then he would have done the same thing he did in ESB, and flew away from Yoda, to rescue his friends: to his own detriment. Now he's jaded, and doesn't care. Luke, the real Luke, is supposed to be full of hope, which TLJ Luke isn't.
>The same stubborn guy from years before would've gone and rushed to his friends the moment they were in trouble.
That's why him being disconnected from the force is important. He didn't even know Han died.
>and doesn't care.
Untrue, as evidenced by how he reacted when he heard that Han had died.
> He now thinks that since he can't do the right thing, the best thing for him to do it to do nothing at all.
Well there goes that stubborness and determination, and good heartedness since he knows whats going on out there and how it is actually his fault and hes just gonna give up and let it happen. How is this not core trait inconsistency?
In real life, and in stories, people do change personalities. This is a pretty basic thing. Does that make them a different character? Sometimes. Does that make them inconsistent? Only if the change is not backed up by reasoning and plot. Which it wasn't here.
>since he knows whats going on out there
He doesn't.
After he learns of it, he eventually finds motivation to get out of his crisis and help them out. That is part of his actual arc in TLJ. The new conflict that you complained about.
>he eventually finds motivation to get out of his crisis and help them out.
>eventually
If he was the same Luke, he would've rushed right off.
>Being this humorless
You are a woman.
>You don't read depth INTO anything, anon. You analyze things and get things OUT of them.
Pedantry. And you are absolutely putting your ideas into that character. Because those ideas are not in the movie, any of the movies.
> I said he'd be tempted, not that he'd conciously consider it. Which he didn't in TLJ.
He pulled out and ignited his lightsaber. Then looked at it for a bit, consciously considering He has lines in vo over this scene saying that directly. If you think that's not conscious consideration then you really are disconnected from the basics of reality.
>We have literally people in this thread complaining that he didn't change from the OT.
What does that have to do with you being a dum dum?
And all that about the heros journey being employed in the US is pretty dumb. Yes theres criticism of it, but its used all over the place. Its a structure used as much for analysis as construction. the template works when looking at stories from long before it was cambell's thing.
But I guess you just disqualified yourself by saying Lucas is not a great storyteller in a Star Wars thread. Like really? Whats a great storyteller who doesn't need some editing? He made great stories, even when left to his own devices so his shortcomings with dialogue etc. came to the front, the man still made great stories. I feel like if you can't see that then how are you judging any of this other stuff?
>Pedantry.
No. Because reading shit INTO stuff can indeed be done with everything. But reading stuff FROM things can only be done when those things already contain something worthwhile.
>Because those ideas are not in the movie, any of the movies.
Yes, they demonstrably are.
>Then looked at it for a bit
You're reaching for straws here. Listen to his voiceover.
>And all that about the heros journey being employed in the US is pretty dumb.
No, it's a fact. No one teaches it in Europe. Not even in obscure literary analysis courses in academia, other than maybe as some esotheric oddity.
>the template works when looking at stories from long before it was cambell's thing.
The template works for exactly one work ever: The Odyssey. For everything else, it fails at one point or another and requires heavy shuffling-around to even loosely fit the formula. Sorry, anon. That whole template is an edge-case. You can indeed construct a very formulaic heroic story from it, but it is in no way a consistently applicable framework.
>No. Because reading shit INTO stuff can indeed be done with everything. But reading stuff FROM things can only be done when those things already contain something worthwhile.
Not pedantry then, semantics because it depends on your extremely subjective definition of something being worthwhile. Which this characterization of luke attempts and fails at.
I've listened to the VO. And his actions, I.E. reaching and igniting and looking at while thinking, are not reaching for a straw. How would any of that not count as conscious thought?
>You can indeed construct a very formulaic heroic story from it, but it is in no way a consistently applicable framework.
Except tons of formulaic hero stories apply the framework. Consistently. If you think its not considered in the creation of those stories all across the world, even now, then you are obviously not a part of any of these creative mediums professionally or otherwise.
We've witnessed an actual inherently inconsistent character: Luke in TLJ.
And luke is also not "guy whos first thought is to kill to protect those he loves" He tends to talk first. He negotiated with jabba, he tried to talk it through with palpatine. you think anything established in his character, rashness, stubborness, et all, would lead him to think hey maybe kill this kid? My blood nephew, child of my sister and one of my best friends? Who I've helped raise?
You're making excuses that are more thought out than the people who wrote the thing. You're flailing at something that is inherently inconsistent and trying to make sense of it.
Don't leave out "He'll be careful" when confronted at the cantina. He isn't a brash chest thumping character like Han.
>In the OT, he completely bought into the jedi teachings that Yoda and Obi-Wan gave him.
...No, because Obi-Wan and Yoda both told him Vader was a lost cause. Luke disproved that, and in the process, went from the student, to the master. He taught them.
>So, first you complain that the character still has the same weaknesses instead of completely new ones
He was given weaknesses he overcame. Don't put words in my mouth. Strawmen aren't charming. The entire rest of your paragraph is you falling apart at the seams. Luke did not show signs if complete rigidity to the Jedi code in the old films. Now in the new ones, he does. This is a new problem that he previously didn't have, and it came from nowhere. Like how in Back to the Future Parts 2 and 3, Marty suddenly hates being called "chicken," when that wasn't a thing in the first one.
>The conflicts of the OT had been resolved. Completely. The Empire's gone. Vader's dead. The sequels needed new conflicts.
Yeah. They could've gone anywhere, but instead, they wrote the old characters as being has-beens and losers for no reason. I didn't want them reliving old conflicts. That's just what they did anyway.
>You really need to learn to recognize what a flashback is and when it takes place compared to the narrative.
Luke's arc before TLJ was complete. It ended in RotJ. A flashback in TLJ is still in TLJ. He is given an entire new arc in a single movie. He has fabricated conflicted that previously wasn't there. That's the issue.
>Again: Growing and having an arc does not mean that you change who you are.
Yes it does! Luke went from a scruffy nerfherder to a Jedi Master that was forging a new way for the religion. This is his arc in the OT!
>.No, because Obi-Wan and Yoda both told him Vader was a lost cause.
That's NOT a teaching of the jedi. In fact, according to Anakin himself, the jedi did not consider killing Dooku justifyable in the prequels.
It was just Obi-Wan's and Yoda's personal opinion, and Luke disagreed. If you disagree with your maths teacher about a problem and you turn out to be right, that doesn't mean you've disproved mathematics and grwon beyond them. It just means you've disproven your teacher.
>He was given weaknesses he overcame.
You really need to let go of that moronic notion that weaknesses go away once you overcome them once.
>Luke did not show signs if complete rigidity to the Jedi code in the old films.
There was no jedi code yet in the old films.
>it came from nowhere.
Nope. It came from being taught be the jedi of old, during the OT and afterwards.
>they wrote the old characters as being has-beens and losers for no reason.
They wrote them as human beings, anon. You wanted them to be perfect and god-like.
>Luke's arc before TLJ was complete.
Yes. That doesn't mean the character cannot ever have another arc again.
>A flashback in TLJ is still in TLJ.
And not part of the character arc other than for its setup. Sorry, anon, but that's how flashbacks work.
>He has fabricated conflicted
It's not fabricated, it's a natural result of his character traits. By your standard, every conflict ever is "fabricated".
>Yes it does!
No, it does not. What you describe is a change in the ROLE of the character, not a change in PERSONALITY.
>It just means you've disproven your teacher.
Right. So the student becomes the master. He didn't buy into their word as gospel. He does something Obi-Wan and Yoda couldn't.
>You really need to let go of that moronic notion that weaknesses go away once you overcome them once.
So you have no argument. Just "get over it, bro." No. This is writing. You have to justify regression.
>There was no jedi code yet in the old films.
The code were his teachers, whom he eventually managed to outdo in a move that saved the galaxy.
>Nope. It came from being taught be the jedi of old, during the OT and afterwards.
The jedi of old of whom he would disagree with, and outdo?
>They wrote them as human beings, anon. You wanted them to be perfect and god-like.
No. They wrote his character just retreading what he previously went through.
>Yes. That doesn't mean the character cannot ever have another arc again.
Sure! But instead of having an arc that was three movies long, and gave satisfying development, they retreaded old material in a truncated fashion that ended in his character not being able to be a part of the plot further down the road, thus salting the earth for potential future writers.
>It's not fabricated, it's a natural result of his character traits.
Traits that he overcame and grew from. Just cause you keep saying that doesn't count, doesn't mean anything. Characters grow and change. This is writing!
>No, it does not. What you describe is a change in the ROLE of the character, not a change in PERSONALITY.
He was rash, and obstinate in those old movies. In Return of the Jedi, he becomes calmer, and more focused. More reserved, and able to control himself. His personality changes as he GROWS into his ROLE. Gosh darn it, man! You really don't know writing.
>So the student becomes the master.
No. You do not become a "master" of mathematics just because you corrected your teacher on the slope of a function of something. You can do that and still not know shit about linear algebra.
>No. This is writing. You have to justify regression.
Yes. And you still don't know much about writing. Weaknesses do not go away. Period. That is indeed writing as much as it is real life. And, no, it's not regression that someone faces and old conflict again. You need to accept that as a reality of human life. This is all I can say to you: There empirically is no 100% overcoming weaknesses forever.
>whom he eventually managed to outdo
He did not outdo them. He disproved them on one opinionated point.
>whom he would disagree with
Disagree with on what? Celibacy? No. Lightsaber training? No. Force use? No. Adherence to democracy? No. The light side of the force? No.
Again, the only thing he disagreed with was whether or not one specific sith in one specific case could be redeemed. That's not a matter of teachings. That's a matter of opinion.
>just retreading what he previously went through.
That's wrong. TLJ's conflict is new, as you already admitted.
>treaded old material in a truncated fashion that ended in his character not being able to be a part of the plot further down the road
None of this is true.
>thus salting the earth for potential future writers.
TLJ literally teased that ghost Luke would haunt Kylo in episode 9, and Trevorrow wanted to do that in his version. That Abrams didn't is not TLJ's fault.
>Traits that he overcame
Please stop with this shit already. A character does not overcome his traits. That's not how it works.
>His personality changes
Hell no. You really need to learn to distinguish between roles nad personalities.
>You really don't know writing.
Oh, the irony!
>No. You do not become a "master" of mathematics just because you corrected your teacher on the slope of a function of something. You can do that and still not know shit about linear algebra.
You do if your math correction saves the galaxy, man! Wow! Context, brother! Luke's actions saved Anakin, and fulfilled the prophesy of the Chosen One by bringing balance to The Force! Yoda and Obi are buying drinks tonight, man!
>Weaknesses do not go away.
I used to have social anxiety. Now I don't. I go to trade shows, and conferences, and interact with tons and tons of people in my field. I am not weak in that regard. If a human can overcome their weakness, a fictional character, who can do ANYTHING, sure as heck can!
>He did not outdo them. He disproved them on one opinionated point.
No. He saved the galaxy, and helped fulfill a generation spanning prophesy.
>That's not a matter of teachings. That's a matter of opinion.
He showed emotions. He showed loved. Caring. He wasn't a brainwashed nine year old, like all Jedi are supposed to be. He broke the mold completely.
>That's wrong. TLJ's conflict is new, as you already admitted.
His "new" conflict is being obsessed with Jedi tradition. What he "retreads" is going beyond the Jedi traditions. He didn't have an obsession with it in the original films. He just went beyond them naturally.
None of this is true.
Yes it is.
>TLJ literally teased that ghost Luke would haunt Kylo in episode 9, and Trevorrow wanted to do that in his version. That Abrams didn't is not TLJ's fault.
If a character is dead, they have little to no agency on the plot. What character arc are you gonna have as a ghost? Nothing.
>Please stop with this shit already. A character does not overcome his traits. That's not how it works.
You keep on talking about "realism." Are you the same as you were when you were nine? Gosh. Maybe! If so, I am very sorry for you.
>Hell no. You really need to learn to distinguish between roles nad personalities.
He went from whiny, and brash, to calm, and collected. Wizened. He was still hopeful, and full of care and passion, though.
>Characters do not change who they are at their core. Ever. They keep their traits.
I do not have social anxiety. I am not an introvert. I was. I needed to change, and I did. I am a real human being. If a real human being can change, why can't a fictional character?
>He went from whiny, and brash, to calm, and collected.
He never stopped being brash: RotJ saw him almost kill Vader, against all of his own well-laid-out plans. He also never completely stopped being whiny, but that's more of a result of other traits of his rather than a trait of its own.
>I do not have social anxiety. I am not an introvert. I was.
That's a nice story, but you now being able to do something you weren't able to do prior does not mean you've changed your personality. It either means you've learnt to consistently deal with some trait that compells you to to the opposite, or whatever kept you from doing what you do now was just some outside influence to begin with. You are still yourself.
>RotJ saw him almost kill Vader, against all of his own well-laid-out plans.
While being pressured by the greatest evils of the galaxy. And he overcame their temptation. Hence his arc completing.
>you now being able to do something you weren't able to do prior does not mean you've changed your personality.
Uh, no. I am basically a completely different person from who I was 10 years ago. I would hope so! Most people change and grow as they age, and adapt to their circumstances. You gonna disagree? Pretty sure I know me. And if I can change, you can change!
?t=66
>While being pressured by the greatest evils of the galaxy.
That's wrong. He almost killed Vader because Vader threatend to go after Leia. Palpatine's "pressure" is what actually snapped Luke out of his rage.
>I am basically a completely different person from who I was 10 years ago.
No, you are not. At least I would hope so. If you were, how could the people around you even love you for who you are?
>Which this characterization of luke attempts and fails at.
Nope. You love pretending that, but it does not.
>I've listened to the VO.
So. A fleeting moment it is then. Not conscious thoughts. But, hey, keep lying.
>Except tons of formulaic hero stories apply the framework. Consistently.
Yes, after the fact. I said as much: Stories that use it as a template work. But they are kinda shit for doing so. Or at least worse than they could be.
What you cannot do, consistently, is go becak to before the template was drafted, and apply it to all stories before then. Because stories that aren't written with that template in mind most often don't conform to it. That's a simple fact.
>all across the world
It's not.
>are obviously not a part of any of these creative mediums
MEDIA. The plural is MEDIA.
Why are you Americans unable to get the basics of your own language ... or Latin ... in your heads?
>That's wrong. He almost killed Vader because Vader threatend to go after Leia. Palpatine's "pressure" is what actually snapped Luke out of his rage.
The greatest evils in the galaxy include both Vader and Palpatine. They pressured him, and he overcame them.
>No, you are not. At least I would hope so. If you were, how could the people around you even love you for who you are?
Because actions, and reactions change who you are over the years. I would hope they love me more, cause I'm in a pretty good place! Better than I was.
> fixated on permanently "growing" and "overcoming" and "surpassing", as if those meant completely leaving any and all weaknesses and failures behind for good. That's not how anything ever works. Not in real life and not in fiction. If it did, it'd make all of fiction pretty bland and one-directional.
Hahaaaa this dude tellin people they don't know about writing and can't even get the basics of a hero's journey down. This ain't In Treatment this is Star Wars. Characters are often bland and one dimensional. It's ok.
>the basics of a hero's journey
Let me guess, you're American and took an introductory course on creative writing in your community college, right?
Let me tell you a secret: No one outside that country of yours takes the "Hero's Journey" template seriously due to its reductionist nature and overly rigid corset. Of course, it's well known that Lucas used it as a guideline for the OT, but that says more about Lucas and his shortcomings as a writer than it does about Campbell's concept.
>this is Star Wars. Characters are often bland and one dimensional. It's ok.
See, you are welcome to think like that. But bland and overly simplistic (main) characters are one of the downfalls of the prequels. And TFA.
And I hope you can see that Johnson wasn't in the mood for bland characters. It's his right to give them more complexity.
>hat Lucas used it as a guideline for the OT, but that says more about Lucas and his shortcomings as a writer than it does about Campbell's concept.
Ah. So Lucas is the failure here! Not Rian Johnson, who wrote a middle movie in Disney's fanfiction sequel to Lucas' work. HE'S the real genius! The uh. Also American director.
It seems telling to me that you can read such depth into places where it isn't in Luke's character in TLJ but don't do the same for the prequels or TFA. You can read just as much into those characters, and with many of them, those readings may actually make sense.
And if no one outside that country of mine takes the hero's journey seriously, which is also an idiotic idea, then that still leaves some pretty great storytellers doing some pretty great work that the rest of the world watches. Including Lucas.
wrong. luke was a better jedi than yoda and obi who had lost their way. this doesn’t mean the jedi’s principles (which luke embodied) were wrong and that actually the jedi are as bad as the sith and it’s all ambivalent moral gray sludge
Luke embodied the good things about the Jedi. Not the bureaucratic elements which were the main thing the prequels were critiquing. The Jedi in the prequels were more or less an organization, and not a religion.
Yes they were hypocrites against their own creed. TLJ attacks the jedi creed
>a moment of weakness after being beaten to a pulp for a half hour and taunted by the most evil being in the galaxy while your entire fleet and friends allegedly being murdered right outside the window with no chance of winning is somehow the same as killing your nephew who's sleeping in his bed because of a bad dream.
Why is nuance so fricking hard for you kids these days, who the frick raised you?
>Why is nuance so fricking hard for you kids these days
Nuance. Aha. Is that why you "kids" act as if Luke had actually killed ... sorry, "murdered" Ben, instead of immediately going back on an instictive reaction?
Why would he even be in a place where he'd have that instinctive reaction?
Because he was trying to be pragmatic, that's the difficulty when heroes become leaders.
Luke is literally an idealist. He saved the most evil person in the galaxy. So by that definition, he's just out of character.
He was able to control not killing the most evil person around, while every horrible thing possible was happening to him.
>He was able to control not killing the most evil person around
Yes, and he was also able to control himself to not kill his nephew who was shaping up to become the most evil person around. Not much of a difference.
If he was able to control himself in the most antagonizing of situations, why would he even flinch when it came to Ben?
>why would he even flinch
Because that's part of his character. He's always been rash and quick to overreact. When he rushed to Bespin in episode 5 and when he alsways killed Vader in a fit of anger. In fact, he had himself under control in those episode 8 flashback more than ever before, because this time he did not strike or act out on his insticts. This time he stopped himself after just ignioting his weapon.
>When he rushed to Bespin in episode 5 and when he alsways killed Vader in a fit of anger.
You are thinking non-linearly, dude. Luke was younger and less experienced then, and as time passed, he overcame those challenges and emotions. He overcame them in Episode VI! That's his character arc! He GREW AND IMPROVED. Then, decades later, he somehow regressed? Why?
>He overcame them in Episode VI!
>the whole arc of 6 is him gaining control of his rash temper and mastering his emotions
>This dude thinks Luke is some static character
See
.
You guys are incredibly naive and need more life experience.
See
When a character changes, you have to show and explain the change. Otherwise it feels alien, and wrong. Mark Hamil himself doesn't see this as Luke. It's Jake."
except the whole arc of 6 is him gaining control of his rash temper and mastering his emotions
This dude thinks Luke is some static character, where events from IV-VI happen at the same time.
Why would he not? He's a jedi. He always had a weapon with him, and he cannot fully control when outside triggers happen.
Your generation is inherently fricked.
>Your generation
40 year olds?
Sorry, child. Go protest against climate change or something.
Basically the only reasonable way through this is to take the high road and embrace the spirit of the law. Sure Lucas sold Star Wars to Disney so they own the license (letter of the law) but you can’t buy soul (spirit of the law.)
So it’s best to chalk Disney Star Wars as incredibly expensive fan fic and consume soulful star wars media.
I never cared that much about Han so it bothers me less, but his character was raped even more than Luke
His Arc is that he's a selfish smuggler, a wienery dick who puts himself first, but by the end he gets it together, learns to sacrifice and fight for his friends
But then he becomes a divorced loser who's still smuggling like a wagie at 70 years old
The sequels were meant to destroy the originals.
They didn't want to overshadow Rey and the new cast
The old cast returning was just a trick to get people in seats
I saw a guy leave the theater when this happened kek
I really don't get this. Why is fun such a bad thing?
imagine being such a dumb Black person that you watched this shit. people thought the first trailer for the first movie was a fricking Saturday night live commercial with Tracy morgan
>theater silent besides one or two titters
that’s how you know a joke landed
Seethe nerds lol
people who say they love this movie never expands on why
After TROS it’s hard because this movie really never got to expand on what it was trying to say but I can maybe go into it a little.
I don’t think it’s a perfect movie, the casino part sucks, Leia floating through the air looks dumb. But killing Snoke, having Rey be nobody, having Luke be a hermit in exile. These are all really incredible ideas that made for some of the best Star Wars ever. The scene with Luke and Yoda really sums up the story Rian was trying to tell, but was unable to see to completion.
I understand why people hate this movie, but to me TFA and TROS are far worse, just rehashing a movie made 40 years ago so man children can see le good guys destroy ebil Nazis again.
>But killing Snoke, having Rey be nobody, having Luke be a hermit in exile. These are all really incredible ideas that made for some of the best Star Wars ever.
Idk man, just my opinion.
Snoke was a no name villain that I didn’t care about, Kylo was always far more interesting. Rey being a nobody was better than some contrived idea making her be a Skywalker, Kenobi, Palpatine or any dumb ass connection to the EU that most Star Wars fans give 0 shits about.
Luke failed his sister and her son, turning him evil, you expect him to just be the macho Gary Stu we saw in Return of the Jedi?
>Luke failed his sister and her son, turning him evil, you expect him to just be the macho Gary Stu we saw in Return of the Jedi?
Yes Luke would try to murder his nephew in his sleep because of a dream. Then sit around drinking titty milk while he abandons his sister and Han to die to the first order kek
Why do you braindead morons say Luke tried to murder Ben, rather than say the truth that he had a vision of Ben doing a heinous act and just instinctively reacted in a defensive way (yet didn’t actually go through with any act of violence)?
Kylo had to fricking parry the blade homie, that's murder intent.
Or are you telling me you believe Luke "I can't spend a minute not lying through my teeth" backpaddling version over Kylo's, who hasn't been dishonest once in either movie up until that point?
Yeah, I know how to follow basic cinematic language and understand that the last version of the scene we see (where there’s no parrying at all) is what actually happened. Thanks for confirming you’re an actual moron that can’t follow a basic story
Brainelt take holy shit. Are you that easy to manipulate?
You’re the one that’s autistically sperging out about a fricking sci fi series for children, and you don’t even understand the story of this one at that
You're embarrassing yourself, mate.
Nice argument
If you actually watch the scene Kylo freaks out and just hits Luke’s lightsaber, it’s not a “parry” because Luke wasn’t swinging it
>I only loaded and wienered my gun after sneaking into my nephew's room at night, officer, I swear I wasn't going to use it!
Yeah he only walked into his room at night with his saber
>macho Gary Stu we saw in Return of the Jedi?
Luke was the opposite of a macho Gary Stu in RotJ.
If there was podracing on the casino planet I would have forgave the sequel trilogy for most of its sins. But it was gay horses that were freed (instead of the slave stable children lmao) and captured the next day.
Canto Bight is inexcusable and sucks, no disagreement from me there. Should’ve been left on the cutting room floor.
I really disliked all the “jedi needs to end destroy the texts” stuff. Felt like midwit moral gray atheist shit being crowbarred into a space fantasy
That's exactly what it was.
>can't handle nuance
>can't handle nuanced movie
checks out
eh, it’s forced pseud nuance. genuine nuance is when yoda and obi wan are so blinded by their own fear that they try to manipulate luke into killing vader, only for luke’s trust in his feelings and the will of the force to the point of total resignation and fearlessness (being willing to die) to bring about the ultimate good. the old masters in their narrowed perspective forgot to trust the good in people and their instincts, instead they schemed like palpatine would. that’s a subtle and interesting parallel. just saying “religion bad, good and bad the same” isn’t interesting or nuanced, it’s just a political statement
>see le good guys destroy ebil Nazis again
the common thing I notice about most people who like TLJ is they all fundamentally hate Star Wars or think very little of it
They're now playing up the same "bitter grumpy old man rejects the Jedi until he's shown the error of his ways and comes back" angle with Kenobi now too.
based rj
Some anon put it very well years ago
"Subverting expectations" had been done in SW previously, because it always took an existing idea and replaced it with a more interesting idea.
Lukes father was killed by Darth Vader? Actually, Darth Vader IS Lukes father.
This little green midget who lives on a swamp planet and is likely insane? He's the greatest Jedi Master alive.
The coward Han runs off? Actually, he has a heart of gold and shows up just at the last moment to help save the day
Meanwhile, Rians idea of subverting expectations is ringing a doorbell and running away. Snoke? Lmao who cares. This long ship chase that makes no sense? Lightspeed kamikaze hurr. Not-Hoth? Dude its salt
People love to harp on the notion that JJ somehow forced painted Rian into a corner but frankly there were fricking innummerable ways you could had written episode 8 and Rian managed to somehow take the least satisfying out of them all; Vapid Nihilism.
Frick Rian, Frick Disney, and Frick Star Wars
based post.
Great post
TFA was shit but redeemable. It had an ambiguous, open ending with potential. Rian Johnson came along and shot Disney's cash cow twice in the face, then set fire to it. The fact that so much creative control of one of the biggest entertainment IPs on the planet was handed over to an unproven guy is baffling. After TLJ, there was nowhere for the series to go but TV.
Not that anon, but to be fair, and as far as I'm aware, Rian had to write Episode 8 while Episode 7 wasn't finished yet, *and* Disney/JJ didn't have any plan/outline for the sequels, *and* filming on Episode 8 started relatively early. So how much time did Rian have to basically:
>Have Episode 7 retroactively make sense and answer all of JJ's mystery boxes?
>Provide a proper movie by itself?
>Set up a sequel?
I mean, Star Wars was fricked from the start. Hiring the dude that made Looper (a movie where the main characters tell you to turn off your brain) was just another bad decision made by that botox prostitute. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if Rian got hired because Breaking Bad was such a success and Rian directed the best episode (even though he didn't wrote it, the actors all knew how to perform their parts, the show's creater was micro-managing the shit out of it, and the action scenes were shot by someone else... oh, and Rian also directed the worst episode).
>Dude its salt
Nice try, Skeet
Based: the post
I still can’t believe it
>What is context?
>throwing away his weapon in a sign of defiance, that'll he'll stand on the side of Good no matter what, and that he'll never stop trying to redeem his father even if it means his death.
>Throwing it over his shoulder for no reason other than subverting the expectations of the audience.
Zoomers really can't understand nuance and context at all. That, or this board is filled with 12 year olds.
You’re talking about the same morons that use the word “nuance” when describing something that is factually incorrect but they want it to be correct. “Black people don’t commit 50% of crimes, it’s nuanced”
>bravely throws away his only means of fighting back in front of sith Hitler
Vs
>throws his fathers saber away and storms off like a baby instead of heading off to fight for his friends
I too remember how tlj shills were using that different scene to defend rj frickery back then
What's the context of this expression?
See:
Nice fanfiction. Hamil said he ended up loving what Rian did at the end
Here's the bluray behind the scenes, frickface.
This is fricking heart breaking. Hamill has been playing Luke for decades at this point, I remember stories of him going to see sick children dressed as Luke pro bono just because he wanted to make them happy.
I don't see your point. He says that it is not his character, and that is true. Why does it matter if he was happy about Luke's role in TLJ?
>"Hamil said he ended up loving what Rian did at the end"
>show proof of Hamill literally saying the opposite, the crew saying he didn't like it, and footage of him breaking down crying on set.
>"I don't see your point"
I hate disingenuous homosexuals like you more than anything.
Subtext, body language, intonation, etc. are alien concepts for brainlets. As long as Hamill didn't flat out say the words "I don't like the Star Wars sequels" he's obviously happy with the results. This is why modern movies need to *tell*, serveral times, what the characters are feeling, because otherwise how are we supposed to know? Lowest common denominator, fall of Rome, etc.
Most actors have clauses in their contact to promote the movie, and if they give any negative press there will be monetary/legal consequences
lol, are you daft? I didn't say he liked it, I said it does not matter if he did.
Seems like with some people, even saying something directly is not enough
>I didn't say he liked it,
>"Hamil said he ended up loving what Rian did at the end"
>"ended up loving"
>"loving"
As I said. Disingenuous homosexuals like you.
as we all know, there are only two people on this page, you and me, so anything that you didn't say must have been me
did you figure that out all by yourself?
>Reply in "I said/I didn't say" at every quote in the chain
>Hurr it wasn't me
DIS
IN
GE
NU
OUS
homosexual
no u
DIE IN A FIRE homosexual
>that vocal fry
How do frick do people tolerate Rian?
Damn, just listen to the set as he's breaking down. You can feel how shitty it was. Frick Rian and frick his fanboys and apologists
Rian Johnson destroyed Luke Skywalker. Mark Hamill had that as his shining achievement for decades. People would look at him and see Luke Skywalker and be happy because of how much of a hero and shining beacon of hope Luke was. He taught us to never give up. Now if you look at Mark Hamill you'll just get depressed after seeing TLJ and think of weird alien mammal breasts. He took away that positive influence from Mark and everyone else.
What a little shit c**t.
>HE DESTROYED LUUUUUUKE
HAHAHAHHHAHA
Dude I fricking can’t it’s comedy gold at this point
He did. Before, everyone wanted to meet "Luke Skywalker". Now? Not so much. Everyone's like "nah that shit is depressing, his presence is nothing to be celebrated"
Dude Luke is almost 70, get real he is not Superman anymore. Sorry to burst your bubble but dying like Luke is the perfect way to leave planet earth
Staying a man child for eternity is not healthy
Luckily my favorite Star Wars character besides Kyle Katarn is Tycho Celchu, and modern SW has no idea who those characters are, so they'll never get ruined.
>Now if you look at Mark Hamill you'll just get depressed after seeing TLJ and think of weird alien mammal breasts.
Nope. I actually think of one of the best and most sincere performances I've ever seen from an actor. And that in a Star Wars film no less!
That's because he (Mark) finally realized what he was being paid for. He complained for months after the release of Episode 7. Then his character got killed off in Episode 8 and suddenly he's completly fine with the enitre production? Right. And JJ planned everything out from the beginning, as was claimed by the "actress" who played Rey, right? Which is also why the book about Episode 7's production process was never released. Mark's remark about him being old and he has to have a new generation have a go at Star Wars tells you everything you need to know.
Yeah, he definitely looks really happy here.
?t=1402
I unironically agree with Rian in theory. Making a good story is more important than making fan service. Problem is he did neither.
TLJ isn't a fan service movie, but it's just as preoccupied with audience perception of Star Wars (in its own way) as TFA was and the prequels before it, and the parts that don't revolve around that preoccupation feel like a lazy afterthought.
if only you knew ho bas things really are
some interview with him and rian after tlj early premiere, first clip here
It wasn't the shills. It was the official Star Wars Facebook page that started it, unironically. I can't find the screenshot online but here is another one of their defence comments. I'm sure someone here has the pic.
The culturally and psychological damage this caused to America was incredible
Why is he wearing jedi robes if he is disconnected from the force and doesn't exactly be jedi a anymore?
he gets changed next scene kek
The pissing contest between JJ and Rian was the desecration of Star Wars’ corpse (which was what was in JJ’s mystery box all along)
This is the funniest part about the whole situation. Abrams and Johnson just having zero respect for each other’s ideas and rendering the events of the previous film pointless, all while destroying the brand as a whole and saying “frick you” to the fans. Really is kind of amazing when you think about it.
The ugly space nuns were washing his turtleneck from episode 6
>Goes from covered in white, like Gandalf the White, pure white sage Jedi
>lmao nvm, goes back to grimdark, I only wear these robes to jerk off lol the world suck lmao.
Did the movie really have this HDR glow on it?
This is when I stopped trusting critics
yes, I also think bot farms are much more reliable
Did Mark Hamill know about the ending (Luke's death)? Was it in the script or was it edited in later?
He didn’t know till the first screening I believe. There’s a video of him basically shell shocked with a thousand yard stare after he watched the movie
>There’s a video of him basically shell shocked with a thousand yard stare after he watched the movie
Which means it wasn't in the script or otherwise Mark would've know. So far for the "Rian" is based theory. Fricking over Disney is one thing. Fricking over the actor who's been playing this role for decades is another.
It's kinda sad how Mark didn't realize he was being used. He said in interviews he had to shave his beard and exercise, so he expected Luke to do some action stuff. But Mark wasn't hired to play Luke. The character of Luke was never a part of the "writing" process. Mark was hired for press events to market a product based on nostalgia. Ford was probably the only one who knew exactly what was going on and who was happy about it. I'm also convinced Luke was killed because Mark was too critical during press events after TFA came out.
You're mixing a few things up. When he was told to get fit and groomed, he was genuinely being brought back as Luke by JJ. Issue is, JJ stopped there and left Rian do his own thing, and that's where things went south, for TLJ specifically. Mark was hyped as frick to be back for TFA.
And yes, he didn't know about his offscreen death, but you can see in the behind the scenes him breaking down and crying while filming a scene with R2 around a fire because of how shit his character was being treated. They put it on the fricking Bluray extra ffs.
>because of how shit his character was being treated
nah, he cried because of how much of a gay you are
>When he was told to get fit and groomed, he was genuinely being brought back as Luke by JJ.
He was being brought back to do ads and Disney didn't want him to look like a hobo. There's no reason to have him shave or to get him fit other then public appearances.
Did he miss it during filming of his death scene?
No. The guy you're replying to is just parrotting some Youtube conspiracy theories from complete and utter morons trying to put words into Hamill's mouth.
Is this the most disastrous movie in cinema history? Is there anything else that even compares?
rise of the skywalker is worse in every way. even the people who defend this movie acknowledge its followup is an even bigger mess
Yeah but Rise of Skywalker didn't crash the hype train like TLJ did. People already didn't care by that point.
You idiot. It still made millions, you cant classify it as "disastrous" even if it did suck. God youre dramatic.
NTA, but while it made money, it genuinely fricking destroyed the Star Wars brand. TFA was awful, but look at the PR before TLJ. Nothing too insane. But afterward? Star Wars became a culture war that has been poison to the brand. not to mention TLJ completely derailed the trilogy, and made The Rise of Skywalker a flop.
That's a funny opinion. No matter how unhappy you are with TLJ, it is the one time Disney tried to take SW somewhere new. And it was a commercial and critical success, but it lead to their property getting into the focus of nasty alt-right guys, which was too dicey for Disney. So they ended the experiment and decided to rely on repetition, fan service and barely coherent stories from there.
I blame those rotten culture warriors and the cowards at Disney, but TLJ? For trying something different? No, not at all.
TLJ didn't try something different. It reiterated Return of the Jedi. Return of the Jedi was Luke moving beyond the old teachings of Yoda, and Obi-Wan, and surpassing them. Yoda and Obi-Wan claimed Vader was impossible to save, but Luke proved them wrong. Becoming superior to them for the first time. Disney, and TLJ backtracked on this, and made Luke obsessed with the old teachings.
You genuinely don't know what you're talking about.
Are you kidding me? Breaking with the two-family formula, breaking with the clichee of absolute good vs absolute bad, introducing a narrative theme beyond "do the right thing" and giving the characters an actual arc around that topic.
Did you even watch the movie? When people complain how the movie "subverted expectations", that's what they mean. It did not comply with the formula.
>two-family formula
What are you referring to here?
>introducing a narrative theme beyond "do the right thing" and giving the characters an actual arc around that topic.
This is not new for Star Wars.
Honestly, I am pretty sure by now that you are either too young or too stupid to really understand the movie, let alone formulate a clear point. First it is nothing new, then it is new things you didn't like, and how much it deviates from Lucas' vision.
It's fine if you didn't like the movie, you don't need to break your brain trying to figure out why.
It is not a complicated movie, but if it is too hard, just move on.
My issues with TLJ have never been that it's too "subversive" or "too new" or even "deviates from Lucas's vision" (Lucas's vision was responsible for a lot of terrible ideas). You said TLJ was taking things in a new direction. I said that it didn't, beyond freeing IX from some entanglements (that TROS willingly tied itself back up in).
>Breaking with the two-family formula, breaking with the clichee of absolute good vs absolute bad
The "two-family formula" wasn't an issue until Rian tried to claim it was an issue. Star Wars, the original six movies, were about a family. That's just the narrative arc. The Star Wars universe at large ad plenty of stories beyond that. The idea of "absolute good vs absolute bad" is post-modernist garbage, too. Star Wars established a "light side," and a "dark side" from the beginning. That's a core component of the series, and everyone who tries to implement "gray" elements doesn't understand what Lucas was going for.
>When people complain how the movie "subverted expectations", that's what they mean.
No they weren't. They were complaining that they fricked up Luke's character, and had an admiral be a nagging Twitter user for no reason.
>breaking with the clichee of absolute good vs absolute bad
ROTJ did this already
>ROTJ did this already
No. KotOR did that. RotJ just had Vader stop being evil and become good.
>it is the one time Disney tried to take SW somewhere new.
TLJ doesn't really break new ground for Star Wars. It wiped the slate for IX to be new, but much of TLJ is a deliberate composite of TESB and ROTJ.
"TLJ tried to take Star Wars in a new direction" is a statement made by people who don't remember the original movies, and only remember Disney's oversaturated marketing. Were the prequels not a "new direction"? Lucas did something new with every film.
>The Rise of Skywalker a flop.
Was it really a flop?
It was a major blockbuster that made less than a billion dollars prior to the pandemic, with each prior movie breaking a billion. The first in the trilogy breaking two.
That’s like saying New Coke wasn’t disastrous because it had millions in sales
>zoom zoom can only come to conclusions by looking at short term box office numbers
As expected.
It was “successful” enough solely because of the remaining goodwill and hype from the older films. That is now gone. TLJ not only failed to generate more goodwill and hype, but actively destroyed or negated what was already there. Star Wars as a brand is barely hobbling along at this point.
The end of the trilogy made less than a billion dollars prior to the pandemic, and there have been zero (0) Star Wars movies in production since. Even if they started one right now, we wouldn't see it until 2025. That's six years without a movie thanks to the disaster that is the sequel trilogy.
TFA.
>chuds are still seething over this kino
Love to see it.
What bothers me about it is the tone. It's delivered as a kind of "ha-ha!" comedic deflation of the (overwrought, honestly) helicopter shot that concluded TFA. TLJ feels like it's directed by a jester that happens to have a wonderful eye for composition.
Luke looking pensively at the hilt and then dropping it as he tells Rey to go home would've had the same narrative purpose but felt a lot more appropriate.
I gotta give you your dream shot!
You two characters, are going to top gun!
TLJ will be a cult classic in 5 years.
>No scene with Han, Leia, and Luke reunited
>Not a single fight scene with Luke
>No grizzled old luke who has went super saiyan god ultra jedi form while preparing for a new threat
>Not even a scene with force ghost Luke patching things up with his nephew
On top of that, I still don't fricking understand exactly WHY he died. Was he just tired?
It's a long story for another time.
Kylo mentions earlier in the movie when long-distance Force Facetime is happening between him and Rey that
>you're not doing this, the effort would kill you
Apathy is the dark side and Luke fell for it
I used to be a huge star wars fan. I loved the originals, and I even liked the PT after a few years of contrarianism. I went to conventions and did cosplays and regular marathons and even met a lot of the cast. Now, after what they've done, that part of me has been destroyed. I think it's for the better, maybe, necessary to grow up, but it should be known that Disney have destroyed this feeling for not only myself but assumedly millions of people. Mark Hamill should be ashamed of himself for even agreeing to act out these scenes. His legacy is forever ruined by this.
>I even liked the PT after a few years of contrarianism
After? Liking the prequels is contrarianism.
Fair enough, but I think nowadays the general consensus is that any of the movies made by Lucas had soul. That, and almost every line from the movie is a comfy cheesy meme.
Morbius is also a meme machine. It's still garbage that people recognize is garbage. Most people just stopped caring about the prequels, or at least aren't interested in relitigating them. Memes are memes.
There have been prequel fans from the beginning, but there are more loud enthusiastic fans now because most of the detractors stopped giving a frick years ago, not because everyone changed their minds.
I still cant belive the entire movie was just a boring slow chase sequence where anyone on the ship could just come and go as they pleased
Its literally the dumbest part
He unironically would have saved it at the end if Disney weren't a bunch of morons who fired him because Book of Henry got bad reviews.
No, he wouldn't have. Jurassic World Dominion is terrible.
His screenplay was horrid.
Who throws things over their shoulder like a cartoon character? God Star Wars is so dead.
>NOOO NOT THE LIGHTSABERINO
Get shit on TLJ is kino keep up the cope and seeth
>Get shit on TLJ is kino keep up the cope and seeth
>wojak
I accept your defeat
And get a new pairings of taste
What concession did I make, moron?
I made an observation about you, not an argument. Keep up now.
why did he make it shit on purpose?
why did he get mad when people pointed out that he made a shit movie?
>why did he make it shit on purpose?
He did not, brainlet. He made the best Star Wars since 1980, and no matter how hard you pretend he didn't, it won't change that fact.
Are you braindamaged if I can ask ?
The real question that has been lost in all of this is why was Luke hanging around his nephews tent in the middle of the night with a lightsaber in the first place?
He probably went in there because he felt unease in him to begin with. That's what his narrartion implies.
And he went with his lightsaber because jedi usually keep their lightsabers on them at all times. Did he have a reason not to take it with him in that specific moment?
You never hung around your nieces tent in the middle of the night while playing with your lightsaber?
kek Luke was a groomer
>Luckily everyone in this thread praising TLJ is trolling and newbies are falling for it.
>The Chad Maverick vs The Virgin Luuuke
>chucks it forward in front of her
Problem solved.
this was rian's attempt at humour. Which failed repeatedly in last jedi. It's almost like he's doing it on purpose because he really can do humour. Just watch knives out. He made puking funny which is a big deal.
It failed because the humour you are used to from Star Wars is prequel-style slapstick and dad-jokes from Han in the OT.
It failed because it frequently suffered from terrible timing.
The worst part is, this piece of shit movie is probably the best of the three sequel trilogy movies despite being so iconoclastic to the old characters, as it at least has something to say and iconic scenes (though for the wrong reasons in most cases). If it wasn't a star wars movie, it would probably stand on its own more than TFA or TRoS, which are both bad as star wars movies and movies in general
Top Gun Maverick just made me even more pissed off because it showed me how satisfying things can be when you just give people what they want.
I can't believe I'm going to argue in favor of studios doing the safe thing, but when you produce DOGSHIT by taking risks and those risks are "let's not plan out this series at all and just wing it with random shitheads like Rian Johnson", then yeah. I'd must rather get what I'd want. I'd much rather have watched Luke being a cool badass good guy. I don't care if it's "what I want" or "expected", yeah because it'd be cool and fun. You aren't some turbogenius who's better than me because instead of giving me the expected, but fun, thing that I want, you give me Luke milking an aliens breasts and Yo Momma jokes
>let's just subvert the audience by making the characters do everything they wouldn't actually do
>making the characters do everything they wouldn't actually do
Luke was written perfectly in line with the OT Luke. So much that people ITT now complain that he didn't grow.
I can go along with fantasizing about killing Ben, it's dumb but I can just about do it. It's the running away and letting his family deal with the mess he made that I can't buy. It's pure cowardice and completely out of character.
>he wanted the Jedi to end
So seppuku yourself after you've dealt with your murderous nephew.
Still the best movie in the sequel trilogy lmao
I checked out of the movie after this
for me it was flying leia
Cringe
>and you're moronic Black person brain
Wow. So you're a /misc/tard as well. Who would have guessed?
>everyone who disagrees with me is a /misc/tard
You are mentally ill
>everyone who disagrees with me
No, everyone who resorts to /misc/tard buzzwords. As you did, /misc/tard. Now frick off.
>Black person
>/misc/ buzzword
Sorry sweaty, /misc/tard is the only buzzword that was used. As I said, you're mentally ill
Luke's characterization was one of the only good aspects of this movie
Do I even need to say it
1:50 in that video
>throws lightsaber over shoulder like a cartoon character throwing away a banana peel
>turns to the camera
>"Frick you and frick star wars"
>Luke should've kissed the weapon his father used to murder children
Reminder Star Wars fans think killing children is badass and heroic, saying otherwise means you hate Star Wars
They didn't even have to show what he did with the lightsaber. The movie could've begun with the training arc, and the 9th movie could've had a flashback to the lightsaber handoff scene if they wanted.
And is still canon frickers they will never retcon the Sequel deal with it
Sounds gay
I would love to learn what kind of internal logistical wienerery went on at Disney after TLJ tanked the property, along with all the reshoots TROS went through.
>what kind of internal logistical wienerery went on at Disney after TLJ tanked the property
None at all, because TLJ didn't "tank" anything.
Best box office of 2017 and best home video release of 2018.
How can Disney frick up so hard?