Post by 079 on May 22, 2023 2:53:31 GMT -5
I think I am right in saying there are quite a few Star Wars (SW) fans here, and well, and since most of my friends and family not caring as much about SW (or films in general) leaves me somewhat desperate for people to discuss it with, I figured I shall try my hand with you good people. And well, I am cannonballing right into the pool with none other than the Disney sequel trilogy! The Force Awakens (TFA) is widely (not universally, but widely) regarded as the best sequel, but especially after The Rise of Skywalker (TRoS), I find that being an apologist for this film (especially to the extent that I am) puts me at odds with a lot of people. But well, I genuinely think that this film has some severely overlooked traits that make it be a great SW film in spite of its undeniable flaws, and would like to share them with you all! And make no mistake, I am not here to preach feminist beliefs or say things that boils down to "it's fun to watch so that makes it good", so you can dispense with any such concerns. I am going to put my knowledge and love of SW on full display by breaking TFA down from both a film production angle and a SW mythos angle, using both to explain its under-recognized strengths. So without further ado, let us go!
So the crux of my defense is that I think many of the problems people have with TFA are not as bad as they say, or are not problems at all. These are the problems that I often seen people have with TFA that I think are overblown, which I will simply talk about in the order that they are presented here:
1. Similarities to A New Hope (ANH) & original trilogy in general
2. Over-reliance on nostalgia & other lazy storytelling
3. The character of Rey
While often not the first thing people bring up when criticizing TFA, I find that many peoples', particularly hardcore SW fans, issue with TFA is its story similarities with ANH and aesthetic similarities with the original trilogy in general. While it would be foolish of me to deny any similarities, I do think both points are overblown, especially the former. So, people understandably look at TFA and call it a copy of ANH because it shares the same "nobody on a desert planet joins the rebellion against and evil state and blows up a planet-killing super-weapon" plot, but I think this is a gross oversimplification. To start, I can point out Finn's struggle with defecting from the First Order, the dynamic between Kylo Ren and Han/Leia, Kylo Ren not fully turning to the dark side (which is different from Darth Vader because Vader fully turned and then was redeemed, while Kylo Ren always struggled to stay on the dark side), and how the First Order is only starting to reclaim the power of the Empire, all of which are plot points original to TFA and play significant roles in its story. Sure these are all wasted by the later two films, but that is not TFA's fault. As for the "nobody on a desert planet joins the rebellion against and evil state and blows up a planet-killing super-weapon" plot summary, I also believe this misses some of the nuance of TFA's story. Luke and Rey may have both grown up poor on desert planets, but destiny arrives to them in much different ways. Luke joins the rebel alliance because the Empire destroyed his home and because it aligned with his goal to become a jedi, while Rey joins the resistance because they offered her the family she never had and allowed her to follow her strong desire to do good. The shared backdrop of a sand planet, while annoying, ultimately does not matter. As the similarities between the Death Star and Starkiller Base, I concede that they play similar roles in the story and are quite similar in design, but this does not bother my because of how TFA handles Starkiller Base. Unlike the Death Star, which is central to ANH's story (R2-D2 carrying its schematics for three quarters of the runtime), Starkiller Base is just window dressing for what is really a character-driven narrative. It is introduced halfway into the film, blows up a solar system that was created by the writers for the purpose of being blown up, and then serves as a dynamic setting for the final battles. The main focus of the story is the struggles of the characters (Rey's struggle with her identity/purpose, and the aforementioned struggles with Finn, Han/Leia, and Kylo Ren), with Starkiller Base only contributing some classic blockbuster spectacle and shock value. So yeah, Starkiller Base is kinda lazy, but TFA knows this (I bet Disney told the writers they had to include it) and pushes it off to the side to focus on its characters, who it sets up as the building blocks for the trilogy. Speaking of which, I would like to touch on how the vehicle designs in general resemble original trilogy designs, which makes TFA as a whole feel visually repetitive. While I agree that wholly original vehicle designs would have been best, I nonetheless appreciate details like the more streamlined look of the new X-Wing (especially with its different engines) and A-Wing, the two-man TIE Fighters (mainly thanks to amazing Finn/Po scene), and the actually new designs, like the First Order and resistance dropships, the quad-jumper, and amazing First Order star destroyer. So yeah, as I said in the introduction, TFA does have some design problems, but they are definitely overblown and I find that taking the glass-half-full approach is far more fruitful than one would think.
In a similar vein to the first point, I also see criticism towards TFA's usage of nostalgia and its very by-the-books narrative. To be honest, I do not have a lot to say on this because it is down to subjective film tastes, but I want to cover it nonetheless. I think it is really important to consider the state of SW when TFA was released. Fans were still put off by the jarringly corny prequel trilogy and (wrongly in my opinion) skipped over the animated Clone Wars and Rebels shows, meaning they were desperate for some good old original trilogy-style movies. And well, TFA took that literally, taking the route that, while arguably too safe, guaranteed a good first impression for this new era of SW. This approach may not have aged the best, best as someone who likes to watch films with the mindset of someone watching it for the first time on opening night, it does not bother me. While it would have been great to see Disney take SW in a wholly new, but still faithful, aesthetic direction in TFA, I think the sequel trilogy ultimately being visually similar to the original trilogy is more the fault of the latter two films (especially TRoS) than TFA. As for the stereotypical hero's journey narrative, I see no problem in using a more basic narrative structure if it works. I have said a few times in the past that I think originality is overrated, and I definitely think that for this! SW has always been about simple yet enduring character arcs and stories, so using the most tried-and-true of them all is quite fitting for the grand return to the big screen.
And with that stuff out of the way, I have saved the best for last so to say, that being the character of Rey! To say Rey has been controversial would be quite the understatement. To recap, people take issue with how people consider Rey to be a "mary sue":
well, I am going to do the unthinkable and say Google/Wikipedia (in addition to fans) is wrong with this one! Starting off simple, I think people do not realize how much Rey being a scavenger actually plays into her character in TFA. With her crawling around ships her whole life to gather (presumably very specific) parts from them, it makes since that she would quickly know how to repair the Millennium Falcon, reset the fuses in Han's freighter, and traverse Starkiller Base's mechanical guts to avoid detection. Sure these are ships she may have never seen before, but like with anyone getting good at something, Rey has probably been inside enough ships to have a good baseline of how any ship would work. But as for the two more egregious examples, those being Rey piloting the Millennium Falcon unreasonably well (even given her knowledge of ships) and besting Kylo Ren in a duel (without training, while Kylo Ren had been trained), I feel I need to explain how the force works in SW, or my interpretation of it anyway. In the original trilogy, Obi-Wan Kenobi and Yoda both describe the force as an all-powerful, mystical energy that surrounds and permeates the galaxy, and that surrendering to its will is what grants the jedi their power. There is the will of the force, which constitutes the light side, and then there are the sith, who exploit their ability to use the force to bend the force to their own will, which creates the dark side. Thus, it stands to reason that the jedi are destined to triumph over the sith, as the force seeks to achieve balance through the destruction of the dark side. With this in mind, it makes complete sense that Rey beat Kylo Ren, especially since she really began winning after she embraced the force. And if that was not enough, it was also established earlier in the film that Luke was calling to Rey through his lightsaber, which Rey also embraced for the duel. As for Rey piloting the Falcon, I think that her baseline talent with ships is just getting a small, subconscious boost from the force to help her in a bad situation, akin to Anakin winning the pod race against all odds. As for the criticism that my approach to the force basically turns it a plot device or deus ex machina, I would like to point out that the original trilogy exemplifies how this caveat can be avoided. Luke Skywalker has struggles when he is too brash and acts against the force's wishes, like prematurely leaving Yoda to face Vader in the cloud city or trying to violently kill the emperor, but then is victorious when he embraces the force, like having the force guide his shot on the Death Star or trusting his father to kill the emperor. Rey is similar in that she struggles when not embracing the force, like her initial encounter with Kylo Ren in the forest or the begging of their duel on Starkiller base. It could be argued that Rey's character is still weaker than Luke, but that does not automatically mean she is bad. It also should be mentioned that she has nuance outside of her journey to becoming a jedi too, as she struggles with her identity, which is most exemplified through her fixation on meeting her parents. Rey may not be satisfying to everyone depending on their interpretation of the force, and if I am being honest, her character really only works for me in TFA, but since I am dealing only with TFA, that it is fine enough.
And with that, I have given my thoughts on my I think TFA is rather over-hated by SW fans. It stinks that the sequel trilogy turned out the way it did, because TFA really did a great job with setting up characters and plotlines for the succeeding two films to build upon. Now that I am done though, does anyone have any thoughts of their own to give? As I said, while I know there are SW fans on here, I am not sure if anyone cares about this like I do. I found this surprisingly cathartic to write, so even nobody cares, I still enjoyed this, but if I could finally talk some hardcore SW with some people, that would be great! So, I await any and all responses.
So the crux of my defense is that I think many of the problems people have with TFA are not as bad as they say, or are not problems at all. These are the problems that I often seen people have with TFA that I think are overblown, which I will simply talk about in the order that they are presented here:
1. Similarities to A New Hope (ANH) & original trilogy in general
2. Over-reliance on nostalgia & other lazy storytelling
3. The character of Rey
While often not the first thing people bring up when criticizing TFA, I find that many peoples', particularly hardcore SW fans, issue with TFA is its story similarities with ANH and aesthetic similarities with the original trilogy in general. While it would be foolish of me to deny any similarities, I do think both points are overblown, especially the former. So, people understandably look at TFA and call it a copy of ANH because it shares the same "nobody on a desert planet joins the rebellion against and evil state and blows up a planet-killing super-weapon" plot, but I think this is a gross oversimplification. To start, I can point out Finn's struggle with defecting from the First Order, the dynamic between Kylo Ren and Han/Leia, Kylo Ren not fully turning to the dark side (which is different from Darth Vader because Vader fully turned and then was redeemed, while Kylo Ren always struggled to stay on the dark side), and how the First Order is only starting to reclaim the power of the Empire, all of which are plot points original to TFA and play significant roles in its story. Sure these are all wasted by the later two films, but that is not TFA's fault. As for the "nobody on a desert planet joins the rebellion against and evil state and blows up a planet-killing super-weapon" plot summary, I also believe this misses some of the nuance of TFA's story. Luke and Rey may have both grown up poor on desert planets, but destiny arrives to them in much different ways. Luke joins the rebel alliance because the Empire destroyed his home and because it aligned with his goal to become a jedi, while Rey joins the resistance because they offered her the family she never had and allowed her to follow her strong desire to do good. The shared backdrop of a sand planet, while annoying, ultimately does not matter. As the similarities between the Death Star and Starkiller Base, I concede that they play similar roles in the story and are quite similar in design, but this does not bother my because of how TFA handles Starkiller Base. Unlike the Death Star, which is central to ANH's story (R2-D2 carrying its schematics for three quarters of the runtime), Starkiller Base is just window dressing for what is really a character-driven narrative. It is introduced halfway into the film, blows up a solar system that was created by the writers for the purpose of being blown up, and then serves as a dynamic setting for the final battles. The main focus of the story is the struggles of the characters (Rey's struggle with her identity/purpose, and the aforementioned struggles with Finn, Han/Leia, and Kylo Ren), with Starkiller Base only contributing some classic blockbuster spectacle and shock value. So yeah, Starkiller Base is kinda lazy, but TFA knows this (I bet Disney told the writers they had to include it) and pushes it off to the side to focus on its characters, who it sets up as the building blocks for the trilogy. Speaking of which, I would like to touch on how the vehicle designs in general resemble original trilogy designs, which makes TFA as a whole feel visually repetitive. While I agree that wholly original vehicle designs would have been best, I nonetheless appreciate details like the more streamlined look of the new X-Wing (especially with its different engines) and A-Wing, the two-man TIE Fighters (mainly thanks to amazing Finn/Po scene), and the actually new designs, like the First Order and resistance dropships, the quad-jumper, and amazing First Order star destroyer. So yeah, as I said in the introduction, TFA does have some design problems, but they are definitely overblown and I find that taking the glass-half-full approach is far more fruitful than one would think.
In a similar vein to the first point, I also see criticism towards TFA's usage of nostalgia and its very by-the-books narrative. To be honest, I do not have a lot to say on this because it is down to subjective film tastes, but I want to cover it nonetheless. I think it is really important to consider the state of SW when TFA was released. Fans were still put off by the jarringly corny prequel trilogy and (wrongly in my opinion) skipped over the animated Clone Wars and Rebels shows, meaning they were desperate for some good old original trilogy-style movies. And well, TFA took that literally, taking the route that, while arguably too safe, guaranteed a good first impression for this new era of SW. This approach may not have aged the best, best as someone who likes to watch films with the mindset of someone watching it for the first time on opening night, it does not bother me. While it would have been great to see Disney take SW in a wholly new, but still faithful, aesthetic direction in TFA, I think the sequel trilogy ultimately being visually similar to the original trilogy is more the fault of the latter two films (especially TRoS) than TFA. As for the stereotypical hero's journey narrative, I see no problem in using a more basic narrative structure if it works. I have said a few times in the past that I think originality is overrated, and I definitely think that for this! SW has always been about simple yet enduring character arcs and stories, so using the most tried-and-true of them all is quite fitting for the grand return to the big screen.
And with that stuff out of the way, I have saved the best for last so to say, that being the character of Rey! To say Rey has been controversial would be quite the understatement. To recap, people take issue with how people consider Rey to be a "mary sue":
well, I am going to do the unthinkable and say Google/Wikipedia (in addition to fans) is wrong with this one! Starting off simple, I think people do not realize how much Rey being a scavenger actually plays into her character in TFA. With her crawling around ships her whole life to gather (presumably very specific) parts from them, it makes since that she would quickly know how to repair the Millennium Falcon, reset the fuses in Han's freighter, and traverse Starkiller Base's mechanical guts to avoid detection. Sure these are ships she may have never seen before, but like with anyone getting good at something, Rey has probably been inside enough ships to have a good baseline of how any ship would work. But as for the two more egregious examples, those being Rey piloting the Millennium Falcon unreasonably well (even given her knowledge of ships) and besting Kylo Ren in a duel (without training, while Kylo Ren had been trained), I feel I need to explain how the force works in SW, or my interpretation of it anyway. In the original trilogy, Obi-Wan Kenobi and Yoda both describe the force as an all-powerful, mystical energy that surrounds and permeates the galaxy, and that surrendering to its will is what grants the jedi their power. There is the will of the force, which constitutes the light side, and then there are the sith, who exploit their ability to use the force to bend the force to their own will, which creates the dark side. Thus, it stands to reason that the jedi are destined to triumph over the sith, as the force seeks to achieve balance through the destruction of the dark side. With this in mind, it makes complete sense that Rey beat Kylo Ren, especially since she really began winning after she embraced the force. And if that was not enough, it was also established earlier in the film that Luke was calling to Rey through his lightsaber, which Rey also embraced for the duel. As for Rey piloting the Falcon, I think that her baseline talent with ships is just getting a small, subconscious boost from the force to help her in a bad situation, akin to Anakin winning the pod race against all odds. As for the criticism that my approach to the force basically turns it a plot device or deus ex machina, I would like to point out that the original trilogy exemplifies how this caveat can be avoided. Luke Skywalker has struggles when he is too brash and acts against the force's wishes, like prematurely leaving Yoda to face Vader in the cloud city or trying to violently kill the emperor, but then is victorious when he embraces the force, like having the force guide his shot on the Death Star or trusting his father to kill the emperor. Rey is similar in that she struggles when not embracing the force, like her initial encounter with Kylo Ren in the forest or the begging of their duel on Starkiller base. It could be argued that Rey's character is still weaker than Luke, but that does not automatically mean she is bad. It also should be mentioned that she has nuance outside of her journey to becoming a jedi too, as she struggles with her identity, which is most exemplified through her fixation on meeting her parents. Rey may not be satisfying to everyone depending on their interpretation of the force, and if I am being honest, her character really only works for me in TFA, but since I am dealing only with TFA, that it is fine enough.
And with that, I have given my thoughts on my I think TFA is rather over-hated by SW fans. It stinks that the sequel trilogy turned out the way it did, because TFA really did a great job with setting up characters and plotlines for the succeeding two films to build upon. Now that I am done though, does anyone have any thoughts of their own to give? As I said, while I know there are SW fans on here, I am not sure if anyone cares about this like I do. I found this surprisingly cathartic to write, so even nobody cares, I still enjoyed this, but if I could finally talk some hardcore SW with some people, that would be great! So, I await any and all responses.
