Red Mosquito

E.H. Ruddock wrote:I think as far as introducing the stuff that is canon but only in books or animated series, the upcoming tv series are going to be a great way to introduce that to more casual fans.

aw huh

durdencommatyler wrote:

Strat wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:Speaking of Snoke... let's speculate. What do we think the odds are that:

1. He'll be mentioned at all
2. We'll find out where he came from
3. We'll find out his role in this story
4. He'll come back to life


???

Stay tuned for the books for your answers

Ha!

For sure, yeah. He'll absolutely be fleshed out and "explained" in books and comics. I just wonder if we hear/see/learn anything more in the films. I would THINK we will only because he's a JJ character and JJ is back and clearly making a sequel to his movie. JJ must have had something in mind for him.

I agree, and it really does feel like a sequel to TFA.

Anders wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:

Strat wrote:

wease wrote:

dimejinky99 wrote:

E.H. Ruddock wrote:

dimejinky99 wrote:

wease wrote:Where does it say any of that, other than the Plagueis stuff, in the movies?

Anders beat me to it. It’s all in the new canon books and comics.

But a large portion of people seeing these movies have no idea about the other canon stuff, so it could get confusing for the general public.

They’ve been great at keeping the films accessible without all that side knowledge. You can see th films without knowing any of it and still enjoy it.
Many complained that Th political landscape wasn’t explained enough in tfa but it’s sll outlined in bloodline. Many many more actually do read all that stuff than you’d think.

Your point is invalid. Ruddo is exactly right. The only people reading the books are hardline Star Wars fans. Hell, I consider myself a huge Star Wars fan and I’ve not even read Bloodline. You can’t blame people for not understanding something in the movie because they haven’t read a particular novel beforehand. Joe Q Public doesn’t give a shit about reading the books.

Yup. Im glad that stuff is out there but hard canon for me are the movies. That's it. The most they can do is give nods to clone wars/rebels but redeveloping story lines based off new canon books 30 years past return of the jedi is hard to swallow for me.

It is now and will always be the other way around. The books/comics/etc are there it fill in the canon. These movies, this saga, was never will not be in 9, about basing ideas/story around existing canon. The books serve these films, not the other way around.

I think that is more about how you look at it or define it, than an actual fact.

If we've learned anything from this goddamn franchise it's that many of the truths we cling to depend on a certain point of view.

Anders wrote:

wease wrote:

Anders wrote:

Monkey_Driven wrote:

wease wrote:Where does it say any of that, other than the Plagueis stuff, in the movies?

Right, the saga's conclusion is not going to be guided by something that happened off screen in a book or game. It will be something either introduced in this or the previous movies.

I think it's very difficult to see Palp coming back from the movies alone. But easy if you know the canon.

Depends on how it’s done in the movie.

There are different ways of doing it, but it shouldn't go against current canon from books/games etc, that has been introduced post-Disney as canon Star Wars. Hopefully it will work great either way.

They won't violate established canon. You don't have to worry about that.

durdencommatyler wrote:

Anders wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:

Strat wrote:

wease wrote:

dimejinky99 wrote:

E.H. Ruddock wrote:

dimejinky99 wrote:

wease wrote:Where does it say any of that, other than the Plagueis stuff, in the movies?

Anders beat me to it. It’s all in the new canon books and comics.

But a large portion of people seeing these movies have no idea about the other canon stuff, so it could get confusing for the general public.

They’ve been great at keeping the films accessible without all that side knowledge. You can see th films without knowing any of it and still enjoy it.
Many complained that Th political landscape wasn’t explained enough in tfa but it’s sll outlined in bloodline. Many many more actually do read all that stuff than you’d think.

Your point is invalid. Ruddo is exactly right. The only people reading the books are hardline Star Wars fans. Hell, I consider myself a huge Star Wars fan and I’ve not even read Bloodline. You can’t blame people for not understanding something in the movie because they haven’t read a particular novel beforehand. Joe Q Public doesn’t give a shit about reading the books.

Yup. Im glad that stuff is out there but hard canon for me are the movies. That's it. The most they can do is give nods to clone wars/rebels but redeveloping story lines based off new canon books 30 years past return of the jedi is hard to swallow for me.

It is now and will always be the other way around. The books/comics/etc are there it fill in the canon. These movies, this saga, was never will not be in 9, about basing ideas/story around existing canon. The books serve these films, not the other way around.

I think that is more about how you look at it or define it, than an actual fact.

If we've learned anything from this goddamn franchise it's that many of the truths we cling to depend on a certain point of view.

Yes.

durdencommatyler wrote:

wease wrote:

dimejinky99 wrote:

wease wrote:Where does it say any of that, other than the Plagueis stuff, in the movies?

Anders beat me to it. It’s all in the new canon books and comics.

Exactly. As much as I enjoy the different mediums, as a film series, these last movies totally fail on that point. If you have to go out and do research to know why something happens in a movie, that’s bad writing.

But forget all of this stuff we're talking about and future speculation. We don't know what 9 is going to do/cover/reveal. Forget that.

Do you think TFA and TLJ are confusing? Do you think you need more stuff explained just from those texts? Do you think they are more cryptic and/or less fleshed out than the OT?

No. I’m talking specifically about the jump from ROTJ to TFA. When last we knew, the Rebels won and the Empire was defeated. For almost 40 years, this was common knowledge. Then TFA comes along and our heroes are Rebels again fighting the Empire again. Why? What happened that these guys are some sort of freedom force again? We see what’s happened with Han. That’s explained in the movie. We see what’s happened with Luke. That’s explained. What happened to/in the galaxy that’s forced our heroes to become the same Rebels again. And to find that out, you have to read books that tie into it. It’s sloppy. Just a couple of lines thrown in, and it would’ve been fine but they appeared to count on everyone doing homework to get the full grasp of the story. And that makes for bad moviemaking.

wease wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:

wease wrote:

dimejinky99 wrote:

wease wrote:Where does it say any of that, other than the Plagueis stuff, in the movies?

Anders beat me to it. It’s all in the new canon books and comics.

Exactly. As much as I enjoy the different mediums, as a film series, these last movies totally fail on that point. If you have to go out and do research to know why something happens in a movie, that’s bad writing.

But forget all of this stuff we're talking about and future speculation. We don't know what 9 is going to do/cover/reveal. Forget that.

Do you think TFA and TLJ are confusing? Do you think you need more stuff explained just from those texts? Do you think they are more cryptic and/or less fleshed out than the OT?

No. I’m talking specifically about the jump from ROTJ to TFA. When last we knew, the Rebels won and the Empire was defeated. For almost 40 years, this was common knowledge. Then TFA comes along and our heroes are Rebels again fighting the Empire again. Why? What happened that these guys are some sort of freedom force again? We see what’s happened with Han. That’s explained in the movie. We see what’s happened with Luke. That’s explained. What happened to/in the galaxy that’s forced our heroes to become the same Rebels again. And to find that out, you have to read books that tie into it. It’s sloppy. Just a couple of lines thrown in, and it would’ve been fine but they appeared to count on everyone doing homework to get the full grasp of the story. And that makes for bad moviemaking.

This is the new trilogy's largest problem. I believe we have discussed it previously, but it will only become more magnified with this new film.

Why did the New Republic fail?
How did they allow the New Order to become so powerful?

Questions like this are barely addressed in the films.

E.H. Ruddock wrote:

Strat wrote:

E.H. Ruddock wrote:I think as far as introducing the stuff that is canon but only in books or animated series, the upcoming tv series are going to be a great way to introduce that to more casual fans.

Yea. Fuck reading.

You know what I mean. Many adults don't watch the animated series either, because they are "cartoons". But live action will without a doubt draw more people than animated series, books, or comics.

But at the same time, we shouldn’t have to read comic series A and novel B to understand what’s going on in the series.

Wease, go back to the OT, though. It's the same with the Empire in that trilogy. So little is actually explained about them. I understand it's a little different in the ST because we have a prior context that we're working from (the OT already exists and there was no PT when ANH was made). But that's really beside the point.

We get little nuggets, vague and intriguing hints at what happened in the ST -- just like in the OT ("You fought in The Clone Wars?"). We know there is a new republic and that it doesn't see The First Order as a real threat. We know Leia, having seen this before, forms a new Resistance force to combat what she fears is a real threat.

That's a great set up. And honestly the books/comics/etc haven't really dug much more deeply into that stuff. A bit, but not much. JJ said (I think in the Vanity Fair interview?) that the formation of The First Order will be explained more in TROS. That's really the piece we're most missing, I think. And I'm looking forward to more about it.

But I don't think it's bad writing or bad filmmaking to suggest at causes without making them explicit in one movie of a planned trilogy. Now, that's not to say that I think the movie handled it flawlessly, either. I do think some things could have been clearer. But I wasn't lost at all watching the thing for the first time. The general layout of the power structure and what's happening makes perfect narrative sense.

I think the biggest issue is that we live in an age of constant conversation and content saturation. Everyone needs to have constant traffic to their site/channel/twitter/etc. And we are all able to communicate with each other at will. That creates these pockets of speculation and rabbit-hole-ing that I think becomes distracting and divisive. The fact of "branding" and "marketing" and merchandising for this franchise is a blessing and curse.

Im guessing we will learn more about Snoke´s role in this one.

It makes perfect sense to me that a new threat arose from the ashes of mother love bone.

We had obama and now we have trump

life, man. life.

Monkey_Driven wrote:This is the new trilogy's largest problem. I believe we have discussed it previously, but it will only become more magnified with this new film.

Why did the New Republic fail?
How did they allow the New Order to become so powerful?

Questions like this are barely addressed in the films.

But again, you could ask those same questions of the Old Republic in the OT and I'm not sure the answers you get from the text of the films (ANH and ESB) are much better. Based on ANH and ESB alone (because we only have two ST films, so far)

Why did the Old Republic fail?
How did they allow the Empire to become so powerful?

Those questions are talked about in hushed tones and ideas and the OT. We had an entire PT to explain them.

Strat wrote:It makes perfect sense to me that a new threat arose from the ashes of mother love bone.

We had obama and now we have trump

life, man. life.

aw huh

Countless real life examples.

wease wrote:

dimejinky99 wrote:

wease wrote:

dimejinky99 wrote:

E.H. Ruddock wrote:

dimejinky99 wrote:

wease wrote:Where does it say any of that, other than the Plagueis stuff, in the movies?

Anders beat me to it. It’s all in the new canon books and comics.

But a large portion of people seeing these movies have no idea about the other canon stuff, so it could get confusing for the general public.

They’ve been great at keeping the films accessible without all that side knowledge. You can see th films without knowing any of it and still enjoy it.
Many complained that Th political landscape wasn’t explained enough in tfa but it’s sll outlined in bloodline. Many many more actually do read all that stuff than you’d think.

Your point is invalid. Ruddo is exactly right. The only people reading the books are hardline Star Wars fans. Hell, I consider myself a huge Star Wars fan and I’ve not even read Bloodline. You can’t blame people for not understanding something in the movie because they haven’t read a particular novel beforehand. Joe Q Public doesn’t give a shit about reading the books.

That’s up to you. Your loss by the way.
A majority of the new canon books have topped the nyt bestsellers list.

I agree you shouldn’t have to but that ignores world building across many platforms. Which is what’s been happening.

I never said I didn’t like the aspect of the different platforms being used. I actually do. But these movies shouldn’t be made expecting people to have to go into all of it. All information needed to understand the movies should be presented in the movies. All ancillary materials just need to enhance what’s presented. Sorry if you’re offended by this.

Then you’re missing the point of what has been happening with the new Star Wars which is to get people to engage with the other mediums books comics games as it all ties in.
Even the effing battlefront game ties in story wise. I agree again. You shouldn’t have to consume all that stuff for the full picture. But capitalism is gonna be what it is.

durdencommatyler wrote:Wease, go back to the OT, though. It's the same with the Empire in that trilogy. I understand it's a little different because we have a prior context. But that's really beside the point. We get little nuggets, vague and intriguing hints at what happened -- just like in the OT ("You fought in The Clone Wars?"). We know there is a new republic and that it doesn't see The First Order as a real threat. We know Leia, having seen this before, forms a new Resistance force to combat what she fears is a real threat.

That's a great set up. And honestly the books/comics/etc haven't really dug much more deeply into that stuff. A bit, but not much. JJ said (I think in the Vanity Fair interview?) that the formation of The First Order will be explained more in TROS. That's really the piece we're most missing, I think. And I'm looking forward to more about it.

But I don't think it's bad writing or bad filmmaking to suggest at causes without making them explicit in one movie of a planned trilogy. Now, that's not to say that I think the movie handled it flawlessly, either. I do think some things could have been clearer. But I wasn't lost at all watching the thing for the first time. The general layout of the power structure and what's happening makes perfect narrative sense.

I think the biggest issue is that we live in an age of constant conversation and content saturation. Everyone needs to have constant traffic to their site/channel/twitter/etc. And we are all able to communicate with each other at will. That creates these pockets of speculation and rabbit-hole-ing that I think becomes distracting and divisive. The fact of "branding" and "marketing" and merchandising for this franchise is a blessing and curse.

Good post. And there is a way to introduce things from the books/shows/etc. They aren't just going to say "here's Ezra, he's another Jedi" and expect people to say "ok". They will explain to a point in the movie or show that it makes sense. But, with this movie, being the last in the whole saga, I doubt they do much of the lesser known canon introduction at this point.

They only introduce new characters and then give them untimely deaths without explanation. Snoke, Phasma, etc. But they didn't really have a history anywhere else in the canon universe.

E.H. Ruddock wrote:And there is a way to introduce things from the books/shows/etc. They aren't just going to say "here's Ezra, he's another Jedi" and expect people to say "ok". They will explain to a point in the movie or show that it makes sense. But, with this movie, being the last in the whole saga, I doubt they do much of the lesser known canon introduction at this point.

Totally agree.

And introducing this stuff is as simple as a few lines.

It’s a rare day that the Star Wars threads are so busy you can’t keep up with them just cos you went to the shops
Love your enthusiasm and all takes team.

durdencommatyler wrote:

Monkey_Driven wrote:This is the new trilogy's largest problem. I believe we have discussed it previously, but it will only become more magnified with this new film.

Why did the New Republic fail?
How did they allow the New Order to become so powerful?

Questions like this are barely addressed in the films.

But again, you could ask those same questions of the Old Republic in the OT and I'm not sure the answers you get from the text of the films (ANH and ESB) are much better. Based on ANH and ESB alone (because we only have two ST films, so far)

Why did the Old Republic fail?
How did they allow the Empire to become so powerful?

Those questions are talked about in hushed tones and ideas and the OT. We had an entire PT to explain them.

If both trilogies existed in a vacuum you are (mostly) right. But, they don't. This trilogy comes after, includes characters from the original, and is largely influenced by the OT. The audience doesn't need an hour long, Marvel-esque, exposition dump, but it would be nice to know more earlier in the trilogy.

Monkey_Driven wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:

Monkey_Driven wrote:This is the new trilogy's largest problem. I believe we have discussed it previously, but it will only become more magnified with this new film.

Why did the New Republic fail?
How did they allow the New Order to become so powerful?

Questions like this are barely addressed in the films.

But again, you could ask those same questions of the Old Republic in the OT and I'm not sure the answers you get from the text of the films (ANH and ESB) are much better. Based on ANH and ESB alone (because we only have two ST films, so far)

Why did the Old Republic fail?
How did they allow the Empire to become so powerful?

Those questions are talked about in hushed tones and ideas and the OT. We had an entire PT to explain them.

If both trilogies existed in a vacuum you are (mostly) right. But, they don't. This trilogy comes after, includes characters from the original, and is largely influenced by the OT. The audience doesn't need an hour long, Marvel-esque, exposition dump, but it would be nice to know more earlier in the trilogy.

Yeah, that's why I made that point already in my response to wease. It's a little different. I'm aware. But it's really a non-issue and beside the larger point.

durdencommatyler wrote:

Monkey_Driven wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:

Monkey_Driven wrote:This is the new trilogy's largest problem. I believe we have discussed it previously, but it will only become more magnified with this new film.

Why did the New Republic fail?
How did they allow the New Order to become so powerful?

Questions like this are barely addressed in the films.

But again, you could ask those same questions of the Old Republic in the OT and I'm not sure the answers you get from the text of the films (ANH and ESB) are much better. Based on ANH and ESB alone (because we only have two ST films, so far)

Why did the Old Republic fail?
How did they allow the Empire to become so powerful?

Those questions are talked about in hushed tones and ideas and the OT. We had an entire PT to explain them.

If both trilogies existed in a vacuum you are (mostly) right. But, they don't. This trilogy comes after, includes characters from the original, and is largely influenced by the OT. The audience doesn't need an hour long, Marvel-esque, exposition dump, but it would be nice to know more earlier in the trilogy.

Yeah, that's why I made that point already in my response to wease. It's a little different. I'm aware. But it's really a non-issue and beside the larger point.

*For you