D1 - Vanguard (Tower; Hall of Guardians):

wooooooh, I completely forgot about that war room!! It's like it got blown up and I was sapped of all my power. That causes memory loss right?

We haven't heard of Jason Jones' side of the story of Destiny 1's development, and until that happens I will reserve judgement hearing only one side of the story.

You won't ever hear from Jason or anyone else about Destiny 1.

D2 - Prophecy (Dungeon):

https://destiny.bungie.org/galleries/gdc2013_concept_art/d/54

When will the ManKitten make an appearance?

Tiger Man.

https://youtu.be/XxJVDZpUEHI

Pimps at Sea was a joke too...until Crimson: Steam Pirates.

jussayin.

Well I suppose since your whole shtick is "I'm a joke" it all balances out, eh. :P

jussayin.

(This post looks so mean if you don't know the context OMG. XD)

https://destiny.bungie.org/galleries/gdc2013_concept_art/d/54

When will the ManKitten make an appearance?

Tiger Man.

Pimps at Sea was a joke too...until Crimson: Steam Pirates.

jussayin.

https://destiny.bungie.org/galleries/gdc2013_concept_art/d/54

When will the ManKitten make an appearance?

Tiger Man.

When will the ManKitten make an appearance?

Luke’s part of the story only makes sense if we ignore who Luke Skywalker is in the original trilogy. If he were a new character invented for this movie, I wouldn’t have a problem with it. Mathew Stover nails post-RotJ Luke better than anyone in his novel “Luke Skywalker and the Shadows of Mindor”. (Tiny spoilers incoming). At the end of the novel, after Luke stops the antagonist without fighting him, the antagonist says “I knew the Jedi of old, and you are greater than any of them. Unlike them, you do not fear the dark.” That is not the Luke of TLJ. I’m all in for a story than shows the original hero continuing to grow or overcome his existing weaknesses. But TLJ didn’t do that. It invented a whole new character and called it Luke Skywalker.

Similar problem with Poe. His character in TLJ just isn’t the character that was introduced in TFA. He was already one of the most competent, capable, and trusted leaders of the resistance. RJ changed him into a hot-headed firebrand for the purposes of his plot. Finn just repeats his arch from the first film. He’s already shown that he was willing to dedicate himself and even sacrifice himself for the greater good of need be. Rey’s arch is horrible from any perspective. She starts the movie already knowing better than anyone else, and that’s her position by the end as well. She develops her skills a bit with Luke, but that’s all. There’s a reason JJ felt the need to show Rey training with Leia early in TRoS, even though she should have been well past all that by that point in the series. It’s because RJ totally skipped that part of her story. Similar issue with Kylo. He decides that he knows enough. In his own words, “forget the past... kill it if you have to”. That line is a great line to come from the villain in a Star Wars film, because it’s so anti-Star Wars. But Kylo isn’t exactly a villain, and the film itself seems to embody that message, rather than counter it.

Basically, I think TLJ is a great movie if I watch it as a stand-alone film. But as soon as I try to fit it into the larger Star Wars story, it becomes a train wreck. And I think that’s on purpose. RJ has basically said that he wanted to tell a story that flips a lot of expectations on their heads. The problem with subverting expectations are all costs is that sometimes expectations exist because we have an idea of who these characters are: RJ’s story is one where the heroes and villains of the past are discarded or tossed aside, with the exception of Leia and Holdo, while Holdo specifically displays very poor leadership while preaching about leadership. Still, at least that part of the plot shows the older generation trying to teach a lesson of real significance to the younger generation. Most of the film is about the youth deciding that they’re already better than their elders, and dismissing them (I didn’t even get into Rose lecturing Finn on how to be a hero, even though he’s already shown he has what it takes multiple times, including the very act he was about to commit before she interrupted him and told him that they need to win by protecting what they love, which is literally the exact thing he was about to do... ugh). It’s actually quite anti-Star Wars.

There it is. There it is. Have I mentioned how much I respectably envy your capacity to textually articulate? Quite a feat, as "envy" in any capacity is not really my modus operandi. I know what I see, but describing what I see in few words can be often... challenging. This above was what I was trying to describe in the past when I mentioned "middle of an arc".

I would like to note; I think your description details well why "The Last Jedi" has proven to be so decisive. It's, among its flaws, a good movie that also happens to be a LOUSY Starwars movie by fundamentally disrespecting everything Starwars while using aspects of Starwars. It's TWO THINGS! The Schrödinger's cat of Movies! Yet, that call on its quality we both just made doesn't matter. We could explain why again and again, and it won't mean a thing in the end, I think. All that matters is what a person brings with them when they watch. Since it's STARWARS, many will watch regardless how much they care for the franchise.

That's the trap. (Or at least one of them.)

In the past I asked (in an unsuccessful thread), "What Starwars meant to [fellow DBOers]". I've observed a spectrum in responses and I wondered if there were recognizable variables between those who speak of the movie in the spectrum of (to keep it simple) "bad", such as yours truly, or "good" such as Ragashingo. Is it Age? Or even the age a person is when introduced to the galaxy of Starwars? Is it the depth of Starwars Fandom? A Casual Starwars Fan Vs a Hardcore Starwars fan? Is it a literacy or stance towards Movies? Again serious or casual. Is the person there for the action, or for the story? ... so on. Variables.

I don't have an answer to my question, nor do I expect to due to a lack of a solid sample size (among other things). Yet, I can't help but say thanks for the help in streamlining the thoughts of this ol' hypothesis of mine.

I think they understand the heart and spirit if the franchise far better than Kennedy, RJ, or JJ ever did.

Rian Johnson understood the spirit of star wars better than just about anybody man. At least in my opinion.

I think that’s a tough argument to sell based on how TLJ handles character growth so atrociously. I’m not a hater of TLJ... there’s a lot I love about that movie. But the character development is handled terribly. At its core, SW is a hero’s journey, and TLJ fails to deliver on that front in any way, IMO.

Did we watch the same movie? Every character had a very clear arc of growth that made sense both logically and thematically. The movie was messy, but at the end of the day the character growth was completely nailed. And if you think Luke's story in Last Jedi was incompatible with the heroes journey… I just don't know what to say.

Luke’s part of the story only makes sense if we ignore who Luke Skywalker is in the original trilogy. If he were a new character invented for this movie, I wouldn’t have a problem with it. Mathew Stover nails post-RotJ Luke better than anyone in his novel “Luke Skywalker and the Shadows of Mindor”. (Tiny spoilers incoming). At the end of the novel, after Luke stops the antagonist without fighting him, the antagonist says “I knew the Jedi of old, and you are greater than any of them. Unlike them, you do not fear the dark.” That is not the Luke of TLJ. I’m all in for a story than shows the original hero continuing to grow or overcome his existing weaknesses. But TLJ didn’t do that. It invented a whole new character and called it Luke Skywalker.

Similar problem with Poe. His character in TLJ just isn’t the character that was introduced in TFA. He was already one of the most competent, capable, and trusted leaders of the resistance. RJ changed him into a hot-headed firebrand for the purposes of his plot. Finn just repeats his arch from the first film. He’s already shown that he was willing to dedicate himself and even sacrifice himself for the greater good of need be. Rey’s arch is horrible from any perspective. She starts the movie already knowing better than anyone else, and that’s her position by the end as well. She develops her skills a bit with Luke, but that’s all. There’s a reason JJ felt the need to show Rey training with Leia early in TRoS, even though she should have been well past all that by that point in the series. It’s because RJ totally skipped that part of her story. Similar issue with Kylo. He decides that he knows enough. In his own words, “forget the past... kill it if you have to”. That line is a great line to come from the villain in a Star Wars film, because it’s so anti-Star Wars. But Kylo isn’t exactly a villain, and the film itself seems to embody that message, rather than counter it.

Basically, I think TLJ is a great movie if I watch it as a stand-alone film. But as soon as I try to fit it into the larger Star Wars story, it becomes a train wreck. And I think that’s on purpose. RJ has basically said that he wanted to tell a story that flips a lot of expectations on their heads. The problem with subverting expectations are all costs is that sometimes expectations exist because we have an idea of who these characters are: RJ’s story is one where the heroes and villains of the past are discarded or tossed aside, with the exception of Leia and Holdo, while Holdo specifically displays very poor leadership while preaching about leadership. Still, at least that part of the plot shows the older generation trying to teach a lesson of real significance to the younger generation. Most of the film is about the youth deciding that they’re already better than their elders, and dismissing them (I didn’t even get into Rose lecturing Finn on how to be a hero, even though he’s already shown he has what it takes multiple times, including the very act he was about to commit before she interrupted him and told him that they need to win by protecting what they love, which is literally the exact thing he was about to do... ugh). It’s actually quite anti-Star Wars.

I think they understand the heart and spirit if the franchise far better than Kennedy, RJ, or JJ ever did.

Rian Johnson understood the spirit of star wars better than just about anybody man. At least in my opinion.

I think that’s a tough argument to sell based on how TLJ handles character growth so atrociously. I’m not a hater of TLJ... there’s a lot I love about that movie. But the character development is handled terribly. At its core, SW is a hero’s journey, and TLJ fails to deliver on that front in any way, IMO.

Did we watch the same movie? Every character had a very clear arc of growth that made sense both logically and thematically. The movie was messy, but at the end of the day the character growth was completely nailed. And if you think Luke's story in Last Jedi was incompatible with the heroes journey… I just don't know what to say.

I think they understand the heart and spirit if the franchise far better than Kennedy, RJ, or JJ ever did.

Rian Johnson understood the spirit of star wars better than just about anybody man. At least in my opinion.

I think that’s a tough argument to sell based on how TLJ handles character growth so atrociously. I’m not a hater of TLJ... there’s a lot I love about that movie. But the character development is handled terribly. At its core, SW is a hero’s journey, and TLJ fails to deliver on that front in any way, IMO.

I like the new Thrawn trilogy a lot better.

I liked him in TIE Fighter.

Yeah, I was like oh a Star Wars book. So I picked up The Truce at Bakura, started reading it and was like… this is shit. So I never read a Star Wars book ever again. The end.

A lot of them are quite bad. But the very best of them are actually quite good. Mathew Stover’s “Traitor” is one of my favourite books, period... it just so happens to be a Star Wars novel, which is icing on the cake for me :)

Everyone raves about the Thrawn trilogy.

It’s very overrated. They’re fun reads, and Thrawn is an interesting character, but they’re not some masterpieces of storytelling that a lot of people hold them up to be.

I like the new Thrawn trilogy a lot better.

Yeah, I was like oh a Star Wars book. So I picked up The Truce at Bakura, started reading it and was like… this is shit. So I never read a Star Wars book ever again. The end.

A lot of them are quite bad. But the very best of them are actually quite good. Mathew Stover’s “Traitor” is one of my favourite books, period... it just so happens to be a Star Wars novel, which is icing on the cake for me :)

Everyone raves about the Thrawn trilogy.

I’m fairly certain that’s from the novelization of Revenge of the Sith. It’s actually a really good read and does a really great job at depicting Anakin’s turn to the dark side, which is something I think those movies failed spectacularly at, despite ostensibly being the entire point of their existence.

Is it?! I never bothered to read the novelization of the movies, but hmm, maybe I should. Thank you.

The RotS novelization is by Mathew Stover. ALL of his SW novels are top notch. I’d consider them “must reads” for any fans. Most of the other movie novelizations are merely ok, but his RotS novel is spectacular. In addition to that, there are a pair of books that sandwich RotS that are very good. They tell the story of what happens immediately before and after RotS. So all together, they form a great trilogy. Check out:

Labyrinth of Evil
Revenge of the Sith
Dark Lord: The Rise of Darth Vader

Yeah, I was like oh a Star Wars book. So I picked up The Truce at Bakura, started reading it and was like… this is shit. So I never read a Star Wars book ever again. The end.

A lot of them are quite bad. But the very best of them are actually quite good. Mathew Stover’s “Traitor” is one of my favourite books, period... it just so happens to be a Star Wars novel, which is icing on the cake for me :)