I don't know what to do with this information, but:
Indiana Jones appears to kill Marion 42 minutes into Raiders, and realizes she's alive 13 minutes later, 55 minutes in.
Rey appears to kill Chewie 41 minutes into TRoS, and realizes he's alive 13 minutes later, 54 minutes in.
I dig this wider view of Luke’s duel with Vader on the “SP FX: The Empire Strikes Back” documentary, and the casual way the dudes toss things at Mark. The whole doc is wonderful; I love how much time they spend with kids’ stop motion projects. It inspired 8-year-old me.
This meme got (rightfully) dunked on on Star Wars Twitter a few days ago, but it taps into something that's been rolling around in my head for a while: the transition from pulp heroes to modern heroes.
It's long been my contention that the old Star Wars Expanded Universe was seen by many fans as a way to "fix" the perceived problems of the movies as they aged out of impressionable childhood and into nitpicky adolescence. Reactions to
#TheLastJedi
have cemented that impression.
@BuzzPatterson
@ChrisLu44
Obama declared a public health emergency 11 days after the 1st case was detected. There was a test a few days later, 40 states testing a few days after that. That’s why the death toll was as low as it was (.02%).
We’re 8 weeks into COVID-19, tests are scarce, & mortality is >1%.
Rian Johnson: "The bad stuff, the systematic trolling, the almost gamified abuse…honestly, once you’ve seen enough of it, you see the pattern of it. It just sort of gets boring after a while…. There’s going to be some degree of people where this is their hobby, basically." 🧹
FUN FACT: The audience score was 71% just before Star Wars called out racism on social media, after which the number of reviews suddenly tripled and the audience score dropped to 58%.
The most radical thing
@rianjohnson
did was take the rules of Star Wars seriously. Instead of treating "A Jedi uses the Force for knowledge and defense, never for attack" as ignorable Jedi flavor text, he took it as a given and built on it. That gave us Luke's triumph on Crait.
This has kicked off a little, and as a result I've gotten some responses along the line of "Okay great, but Rose's line was still stupid." I can tell you: not only was it not stupid, it's been a significant theme for all of Star Wars, and I've got the receipts. A THREAD.
As a couple of people have pointed out, there’s dramatic irony in TRoS (the audience knows Chewie is alive well before Rey does), and in Indy we’re allowed to believe she’s dead the whole time, but I was struck by the parallels.
@abstractjwl
@Lucasfilmgirl
I’ve been a fan since 1977 and TLJ is the best Star War since 1980. You’re welcome to your opinion, but don’t speak for others. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
What Luke did, what no other Jedi was able to do, was insist that he could save what he loved without giving in to hate. He suffered temptation, but then he threw away his lightsaber to save his father — and, incidentally, the Rebellion. Everything he loved.
And he took that rule that really only applied in the rarefied Jedi realm and brought it into the messy military actions of the Resistance. He said "Hey, if the Jedi are the good guys, those rules they have should apply to ALL the good guys." Rose was the one who realized that.
Luke Skywalker has been important to me for forty-four years, and his portrayal in TLJ was deeply meaningful to me, as someone who's getting older and is still trying to overcome flaws he had as a kid. But I get why seeing Luke in the pulp hero mold in Mando meant a lot to some.
P.P.S. And Obi-Wan, who, at the end, against all Jedi teaching, sacrificed himself to save what he loved. And Luke, who followed in his footsteps, and became more powerful than we can possibly imagine.
(Okay, NOW I'm done.)
Earnest is not bad. It has a place in romantic space pulp fantasy, even if it sometimes sounds tinny to our jaded ears. Star Wars consciously draws from an older, less cynical era of film, and that's one of the things I like about it.
That is all. May the Force be with you.
So Rose is summing up one of the deepest morals of Star Wars when she scolds Finn for giving in to hate instead of letting himself be guided by love. It's not about whether he would have succeeded; it was that he was letting anger drive him, which corrupts the result.
The idea that your actions can be corrupted by your motivation isn't a new concept in Star Wars. Hate corrupts. Anger corrupts. That's Jedi 101. If you are acting from a place of anger and hate, you're being reckless, with your own life and with others'. It colors every decision.
Whereas I am all "Give me more of that goofball humor and unjustifiable spaceship design, please! Sign me up for mysticism and porgs!" And I think most audiences are on that side of the line.
What some call the "Leia Poppins" scene is the crystallization of my aesthetic—bizarre, beautiful, improbable, unexpected. It's perfectly pulp, perfectly Carrie, a demonstration of the power held by the daughter of Vader—but it's like nails on a chalkboard to the EU aesthetic.
Finn was acting out of anger and hatred, which made him reckless, unable to hear that it was too late. He wasn't thinking about saving the people he loved, he was thinking about hurting the people he hated. That never pays off in Star Wars. Rose saved him from wasting his life.
Many of the complaints about
#TheLastJedi
appear to be coming from people who have conditioned and predicated their enjoyment of IV, V, VI with massive EU injections, as though inoculating themselves against pulp. It leaves them ill-equipped to enjoy movies in the mold of the OT.
Two, none of this justification matters if you found the line goofy or cringey or cheesy. That's a valid reaction, and you're welcome to it. I would just ask you to remember that Star Wars is fundamentally earnest, and that can read as cheese in a cynical entertainment market.
The prequel Jedi were solid on that half of the equation. Where they fell down was the other half: SAVE WHAT YOU LOVE. They counseled cutting yourself off from attachment instead. That left Anakin vulnerable to manipulation: to save what he loved, he had to turn to Palpatine.
The idea of the hero rejecting anger to win is a little radical. It's the opposite of the usual trope: the bad guys are REALLY in trouble when the good guy finally gets mad. The gloves come off, boy howdy, and it's extremely satisfying for the audience. Star Wars inverts that.
(I know genderfluid ≠ pansexual, but these lads got so upset at the mere suggestion that I’m having to restrain myself from replying to 18-month-old tweets with an Esquire link like a weirdo.)
P.S. It's instructive to look at Holdo's sacrifice in this context, too. She didn't say "Grr, I hate Snoke, he's going down." Leia would've stopped her if that were her mindset. She sacrificed herself to save what she loved. (The actions of Poe and Paige are left as an exercise.)
This prompted his father to make exactly the same choice: to save his son, whom he loved, instead of fighting what he hated. This was a 180° turn from what happened last time he fought someone he loved: he had to embrace hate to do it.
We don't get a backstory (or a name) for Palpatine in the originals (see: Snoke), but someone said today "that was a different time. Storytelling has changed." No—storytelling's the same; you've just internalized a zillion EU books and three prequels to allow yourself to like it.
This remained true in the original trilogy. Luke insisted on rushing off to save his friends, he insisted he was going to save his father, but Yoda and Obi-Wan kept telling him to cut those attachments. Don't give in to hate, but hey dude don't save what you love either.
(It's maybe interesting that the audience also has trouble hearing that it was too late, despite all the cues in dialogue and visuals that Finn would have been a mosquito on the windshield. We also want to see the First Order given a black eye; we're in the cockpit with Finn.)
And of course the Luke of the EU was canonized, put on a shelf where he was never allowed to make mistakes, and we've seen how difficult it's been for some hardcore fans to accept a flawed elder Luke. Han shoves Luke into a tauntaun's guts, but milking a critter is "undignified".
The people making the new movies are studying the way George made movies, what he was trying to say, and they're being so faithful to his anti-fanservice pulp aesthetic that they're running into friction with fans of the EU, which was all fanservice and "fixing" George's ideas.
This was the genesis of a Top Secret gag. Hitch wanted a phone in a foreground closeup while the background was still in focus. He couldn’t make it work, so he shot a giant phone and put a regular phone in Ruth Roman’s hand as the camera tilted up. Top Secret removed the switch.
When we meet Luke again in TLJ, he's again in a position where he has to grow, to learn the lessons of an older man — which from my POV means he gets a better story, but in the modern sense. He's not filling that pulp competent-hero serial fantasy the ending of RotJ invited.
Two addenda:
One, character dialogue, even from protagonists, is never gospel truth. Rose might have been wrong. She's expressing a theme, but just because somebody says something it doesn't mean they're uttering a truth about the universe.
That's why it's a bit frustrating for some people. They're denied that moment of catharsis, of righteous anger. I felt robbed when I was eleven, watching RotJ, and didn't get it 'til later. But that was long enough ago that people aren't primed for it in the new Star Wars movies.
I hope fans rally around
#TheLastJedi
, the way most of us grew to appreciate The Empire Strikes Back. Time and home video and Episode IX will help. But I suspect that a lot of folks will need to unlearn what they have learned.
The original trilogy was "cool" a lot of the time, but it was also goofy, cutesy, jokey, silly, kiddie—a lot of things that it's hard for a 14-year-old to admit to liking. The EU leaned heavily on the cool—bounty hunters, dark side Force users, brooding—and dropped the goofy.
George Lucas, Lawrence Kasdan, and Richard Marquand, July 1981:
Kasdan: The Force was available to anyone who could hook into it?
Lucas: Yes, everybody can do it.
Kasdan: Not just the Jedi?
Lucas: It's just the Jedi who take the time to do it.
(From Rinzler's Making of RotJ.)
I love the original trilogy in large part _because_ of what some people are calling flaws—improbable pulp technology, goofy humor, a Force that resists RPG-style rules, rubber puppets. The new movies going to that well is my jam, but I kinda get why some fans have a hard time.
What little Force training George showed us was pretty woo-woo stuff, all about trusting your feelings and reaching out. What teenage boy wants to think about that? The EU gave them lightsaber forms, Jedi academies, plenty of formal training. (See: Rey is a Mary Sue.)
My wife, a big LotR fan, had trouble enjoying the Jackson films because all of the romantic heroes were turned into modern heroes — they all had arcs, character issues to overcome. Book-Faramir is the perfectly noble knight; movie-Faramir is flawed, suspicious, harsh.
George killed off Boba Fett, the emblem of "cool" Star Wars, with an accidental death and a burp joke. The EU resurrected him and gave him all the bad boy adventures and backstory an adolescent kid could want. (See: Phasma.)
Shocking no one, Star Wars Theory is jumping on the "deliberately misinterpret Kathleen Kennedy" train as well. It's obvious that SHE PERSONALLY is not questioning the value of the Jedi, right? It's about the Jedi proving to the galaxy they're necessary after decades of absence.
George gave us Ewoks; the EU killed them off with the wreckage of the second Death Star. (See: porgs.) George gave us pulpy, overconfident bad guys with questionable tactics; the EU gave us Thrawn. (See: Hux and the First Order chase.)
(I don't want to paint with too broad a brush here. Plenty of people, including
@pablohidalgo
, love both the EU and the new movies. I'm talking about the fans who let the EU nudge them away from what they loved in the OT in the first place.)
And Luke in the Mandalorian is the same. He's the "Luke in his prime" that RotJ teased and Rian Johnson jumped past. In the modern sense, he's not as interesting a character, because he doesn't move or grow, but for people who'd been waiting since 1983 for the drop it hit hard.
George Lucas turned this on its head by welding the Hero's Journey to Flash Gordon. The Hero's Journey is all about changing, growing, starting out callow and naïve and ending up as a hero. It's a *journey*. Luke Skywalker isn't a hero when he starts out; he's barely competent.
The movies were filled with pulp SF notions, which is to say technology that's gosh-whiz stuff that doesn't need to be poked at too hard. The EU gave us a backup hyperdrive on the Falcon to explain the trip to Bespin. (See: the "terrible" physics of bombers in space.)
The EU, and to some degree the prequels, affected the way hardcore Star Wars fans received the movies, allowing them to continue liking Star Wars while growing beyond the pulpy, goofy, fairy-tale parts of the movies. The EU either retconned them outright or let fans elide them.
Because the story is the journey, it ends just as the hero attains pulp hero status. Luke turns off his lightsaber and the story ends. We didn't get weekly serial episodes of Luke being a master Jedi, that base-level satisfaction of competence and success Flash Gordon gave us.
It's like the EU set a new set of (pretty limiting) rules about what Star Wars is, and the things that violated them in the OT were only grudgingly grandfathered in. They're acceptable as historical curiosities, but no more of that, please; we've grown up.
Enter the Mandalorian. Din is a classic, pre-Star Wars pulp hero, a guy who starts out competent and stays that way. His evolution is below the surface, as he learns to be nurturing; if you just look at his actions, he's badass throughout. Not very Star Wars, but 100% pulp.
This isn't limited to Star Wars; it's a sea change in how pulp heroes are presented. Craig's Bond goes directly from getting 00 status before Quantum of Solace to dealing with aging & obsolescence in Skyfall. The ramps up and down are the story rather than the competence plateau.
@FoxNews
Monty Python showed men in drag all the time, and I thought it was pretty funny when I was a kid. Benny Hill, too. Seems like conservatives are a bit delicate.
The pulp heroes of the serials that inspired Star Wars start out heroic and don't change much over the course of their stories. We don't see Flash Gordon or the Lone Ranger learning to be heroes. George Reeves' Superman and pre-Craig James Bond start and end as paragons.
The pleasure in these stories comes from watching an ultracompetent hero go through their paces; we don't want to see them learn or stumble, we want to see them steadily overcome the odds with style and grace. It's satisfying, though sometimes dismissed as juvenile or simple.
Anyone else find it odd that Luke was headed to the tree to destroy the Jedi texts and the tree, and then Yoda shows up and does it for him but the texts somehow weren’t burned up and were in a drawer in the falcon?
@trish_regan
Ma’am, the Secret Service is outside the room much of the time. Once they’ve secured a room they just need to guard the entrance. Jumping into a tiny, sealed space like a car increases their risk significantly.
Doug Chiang was exploring some very proto-stormtroopery helmets for the clone troopers before he and George independently came to the conclusion Boba Fett could be involved somehow. (From Art of Episode II.)
@Snoopy
If anyone is confused about why Charlie Brown telling Franklin he’s “one of the good ones” struck a wrong note with a lot of people, this is a great explanation:
I'm probably going to show my comic history ignorance, but I think Spider-Man marked the same transition in comics — Stan Lee created a hero who was figuring things out, who in the beginning wanted to be part of the Fantastic Four but wasn't good enough. He wasn't an uberhero.
So modern fans of pulp heroes keep seeing them brought to the verge of what they want to see, then jumping past it to their decline. In Star Wars, the Expanded Universe satisfied that hunger, giving them endless stories of Master Luke being powerful and competent. In canon? TLJ.
It's not a need I feel strongly, but there are times when I just want a simple story of someone awesome doing what they do well, and I get frustrated when stories skip past that part. The MCU Hulk bugs me — they gave Hulk a phobia in IW, then jumped to Professor Hulk. More smash!