The Last Jedi, The Rise of Skywalker, and What It Means to Be a Good Sequel

[happyninja42]

The Last Jedi really didn't leave anywhere for ROS to go. Yes, there were some big world changing consequences that could be explored, but they should have been saved for the final movie, to set up the next trilogy or a new TV series. They couldn't be wrapped up in a single movie in a satisfying way.

Rian Johnson prematurely ended the story arc.

ROS had plenty of places to go with the plot hooks left by TLJ. The struggle of Kylo Ren in the classic will he/won't he stay evil arc, that is pretty much standard issue Star Wars plot devices for villains. Whether or not Rey is capable of stopping the rising influence of the Dark Side in Kylo, and whether or not she can/should redeem him, again, a VERY common SW trope. Whether or not the Resistance can survive the increasing growth in power and scope of the First Order. Whether or not the Jedi (or some variant of them) will survive to try and continue to serve as protectors of the galaxy against the influence of the Dark Side. Will Poe rise to the occasion and be the leader of the Resistance that is needed to win the day. Will Finn find a place for himself in the galaxy, after he forcibly rejected his conditioning as a child soldier, and make a life where he can find satisfaction and peace. Will X ship with Y for multiple pairings.

Tons of things, most of which ROS ran with anyway.

As for my personal thoughts on the films, I enjoyed FA just fine, and really enjoyed TLJ. It didn't like blow me away, but it was fun. And they did a few visual storytelling details in certain scenes that I genuinely think were brilliant. I like the general thrust of the narrative. It's got some clunky bits, like I don't really care for the Canto Bite portion, but I don't have a problem with it being there, as it serves as much narrative purpose in the film as the Falcon B plot in Empire strikes back. Namely that it's a side plot to the more emotionally weighty and mystical Force narrative/training sequence, follows the rest of the supporting cast, is mostly for comic relief and tension breaking, and ultimately doesn't actually accomplish the goal set out by the group initially.

Rise of Skywalker just annoyed me, on so many levels. I don't hate it, as frankly I just can't bring myself to be that invested in any of this pop culture stuff anymore. I didn't think it was a very good film. It had a few good parts, but was mostly frustrating and disjointed for me. But it's not the end of the world, it's just a movie.

The Solo film, I really enjoyed, like a lot. I found it very enjoyable in almost every way, and aside from the times it tried to forcibly remind us "HEY! THIS IS PART OF STAR WARS!! SEE! THIS CHARACTER IS MAKING A CAMEO!" I have no issues with it.

 

[Breakdown]

ROS had plenty of places to go with the plot hooks left by TLJ. The struggle of Kylo Ren in the classic will he/won't he stay evil arc, that is pretty much standard issue Star Wars plot devices for villains. Whether or not Rey is capable of stopping the rising influence of the Dark Side in Kylo, and whether or not she can/should redeem him, again, a VERY common SW trope. Whether or not the Resistance can survive the increasing growth in power and scope of the First Order. Whether or not the Jedi (or some variant of them) will survive to try and continue to serve as protectors of the galaxy against the influence of the Dark Side. Will Poe rise to the occasion and be the leader of the Resistance that is needed to win the day. Will Finn find a place for himself in the galaxy, after he forcibly rejected his conditioning as a child soldier, and make a life where he can find satisfaction and peace. Will X ship with Y for multiple pairings.

Tons of things, most of which ROS ran with anyway.

Alright, so say you have to deliver a conclusion to the trilogy, with about 2 and half hours of screen time available. The resistance was effectively wiped out in the Last Jedi. You can show Poe and Finn rebuilding and leading a new rebel alliance to the point where it can challenge and then defeat the First Order fleet. It would probably take these characters years to achieve, and could you show all of that in one movie? Would it leave any time for any other subplots? Would the lengthy time frame interfere with other subplots?

You've also got to wrap up the story line with Kylo Ren and Rey. The problem is that both characters faced their moments of temptation in TLJ, and emerged fully committed to their own paths. Kylo Ren was committed to the pursuit of power, and Rey was committed to becoming a Jedi. So if you try to do the same temptation story line again, it will be a case of diminishing returns. Especially since Kylo Ren was also offered to chance to turn away from the dark side in the Force Awakens. How many chances is this guy going to get? If Kylo Ren is redeemed, that would mean the only evil character left to defeat is Hux, an idiot generally used for comic relief in the Last Jedi.

And where would the new generation of force users inspired by Luke Skywalker fit in? Just another element that can't really go anywhere in the current trilogy.

Johnson used up most of the dramatic potential of the trilogy in the middle movie, and then left the plot in a position where it could not be wrapped up in a single movie.

 

[happyninja42]

Alright, so say you have to deliver a conclusion to the trilogy, with about 2 and half hours of screen time available. The resistance was effectively wiped out in the Last Jedi. You can show Poe and Finn rebuilding and leading a new rebel alliance to the point where it can challenge and then defeat the First Order fleet. It would probably take these characters years to achieve, and could you show all of that in one movie? Would it leave any time for any other subplots? Would the lengthy time frame interfere with other subplots?

You can do a time jump, which is what they did, it's also what Return of the Jedi did. The Rebellion was not doing well at the end of Empire, they were constantly on the run, and using whatever ships they could conscript from the Republic. I would add, that the Resistance was already screwed before TLJ, seeing as JJ decided to blow up all the planets of significance in the Republic at that time, effectively crippling them. So it's hardly like they were sitting pretty at the start of TLJ. You explain that stuff in the opening story crawl, that's the whole point of that as a narrative device. To explain things that happened off screen. this is hardly something new for Star Wars. It's pretty simple, you can say that Poe, (with the help of his loyal buddy Finn!), has been contacting various factions scattered across the galaxy, in an effort to rebuild a fleet to challenge the First Order. Poe has convinced several factions to come to the negotiation table, but they are still reluctant to fully commit. Boom, done. You have them give Poe some ultimatum/objective to convince them to come on board. "We won't join your fleet unless you can prove to us X" whatever that is. That they can cripple the First Order's hold in a certain system perhaps, proving they aren't unstoppable. That becomes the fleet related subplot, that they work towards. And no it wouldn't interfere with other subplots, as they would be off doing their own thing elsewhere.

You've also got to wrap up the story line with Kylo Ren and Rey. The problem is that both characters faced their moments of temptation in TLJ, and emerged fully committed to their own paths. Kylo Ren was committed to the pursuit of power, and Rey was committed to becoming a Jedi. So if you try to do the same temptation story line again, it will be a case of diminishing returns. Especially since Kylo Ren was also offered to chance to turn away from the dark side in the Force Awakens. How many chances is this guy going to get? If Kylo Ren is redeemed, that would mean the only evil character left to defeat is Hux, an idiot generally used for comic relief in the Last Jedi.

Except they weren't "totally committed" It was very clear that Kylo was still conflicted, on EVERY level at the conclusion of TLJ. His final conflict with Luke left him shaken and doubting, the way he reached for the ghost dice of Han's on the ground, clearly implying mixed feelings. The way Rey and Kylo looked at each other as she closed the door left it wide open (metaphorically of course) for further conflict between them. The redemption of Kylo is an obvious plot element from start to finish. that's not even a surprise. I mean it's Star Wars story structure 101. A Big Bad Force Villain, with a tortured past, and familial ties to the protagonists, struggles over the course of an entire trilogy as to whether they will/won't turn from the Dark Side. Despite what Kylo says in TLJ, it's clear he isn't sure about his "let the past die, kill it if you have to" mantra. He's dealing with all of this in the moment, making it up as he goes along. But at every turn, he's shown that he is probably wrong about stuff, but he's too stubborn to change (yet).

And where would the new generation of force users inspired by Luke Skywalker fit in? Just another element that can't really go anywhere in the current trilogy.

What do you mean? Did you expect there to be an army of freshly trained Jedi children used in the theoretical JJ trilogy by the end? I seriously don't know what you mean by where would the new generation fit in? They would fit in AFTER the one trained protagonist has resolved the immediate conflict. That's just Expanded Universe baiting, nothing more. You cut to Rey, now deciding to find others to train, going out and looking for others sensitive like her, and teaching them. Perhaps cutting to a shot of that kid on Canto Bite, looking up from sweeping, a few years later, a little older, to see a ship landing, that we as the audience know is Rey's .

Seriously, what does this point have to do with the trilogy? That was just a bit of "Hope isn't Dead, the Force lives on in others in the galaxy, new heroes will rise later." foreshadowing. Why would you think it was going to directly relate to the following film?

 

[Breakdown]

You can do a time jump, which is what they did, it's also what Return of the Jedi did. The Rebellion was not doing well at the end of Empire, they were constantly on the run, and using whatever ships they could conscript from the Republic. I would add, that the Resistance was already screwed before TLJ, seeing as JJ decided to blow up all the planets of significance in the Republic at that time, effectively crippling them. So it's hardly like they were sitting pretty at the start of TLJ. You explain that stuff in the opening story crawl, that's the whole point of that as a narrative device. To explain things that happened off screen. this is hardly something new for Star Wars. It's pretty simple, you can say that Poe, (with the help of his loyal buddy Finn!), has been contacting various factions scattered across the galaxy, in an effort to rebuild a fleet to challenge the First Order. Poe has convinced several factions to come to the negotiation table, but they are still reluctant to fully commit. Boom, done. You have them give Poe some ultimatum/objective to convince them to come on board. "We won't join your fleet unless you can prove to us X" whatever that is. That they can cripple the First Order's hold in a certain system perhaps, proving they aren't unstoppable. That becomes the fleet related subplot, that they work towards. And no it wouldn't interfere with other subplots, as they would be off doing their own thing elsewhere.

You could do that, but it's ignoring the consequences of the ending of the Last Jedi. What's the point in showing the Rebellion being wiped out at the end of one movie and then explaining that they're back to normal in the opening text crawl of the next movie?

Except they weren't "totally committed" It was very clear that Kylo was still conflicted, on EVERY level at the conclusion of TLJ. His final conflict with Luke left him shaken and doubting, the way he reached for the ghost dice of Han's on the ground, clearly implying mixed feelings. The way Rey and Kylo looked at each other as she closed the door left it wide open (metaphorically of course) for further conflict between them. The redemption of Kylo is an obvious plot element from start to finish. that's not even a surprise. I mean it's Star Wars story structure 101. A Big Bad Force Villain, with a tortured past, and familial ties to the protagonists, struggles over the course of an entire trilogy as to whether they will/won't turn from the Dark Side. Despite what Kylo says in TLJ, it's clear he isn't sure about his "let the past die, kill it if you have to" mantra. He's dealing with all of this in the moment, making it up as he goes along. But at every turn, he's shown that he is probably wrong about stuff, but he's too stubborn to change (yet).

It's a case of diminishing returns. There's already been two movies showing Kylo Ren whining about being conflicted, there's only so much an audience will sit through before apathy sets in. At least Darth Vader kept it internal.

What do you mean? Did you expect there to be an army of freshly trained Jedi children used in the theoretical JJ trilogy by the end? I seriously don't know what you mean by where would the new generation fit in? They would fit in AFTER the one trained protagonist has resolved the immediate conflict. That's just Expanded Universe baiting, nothing more. You cut to Rey, now deciding to find others to train, going out and looking for others sensitive like her, and teaching them. Perhaps cutting to a shot of that kid on Canto Bite, looking up from sweeping, a few years later, a little older, to see a ship landing, that we as the audience know is Rey's .

Seriously, what does this point have to do with the trilogy? That was just a bit of "Hope isn't Dead, the Force lives on in others in the galaxy, new heroes will rise later." foreshadowing. Why would you think it was going to directly relate to the following film?

The end of the Last Jedi clearly implied that these kids were the new hope. Why would you have that scene in the middle movie, rather than the last movie?

Your suggestions seem to be pretty similar to what JJ Abrams produced in Rise of Skywalker. This is my point, the Last Jedi didn't leave any real room to manoeuvre in terms of the plot. Just a basic Kylo Ren gets redeemed story line, the rebels have some more ships and then get more allies out of nowhere to beat the First Order. The only extra thing he did was bring back Palpatine to make up for the lack of a villain, since Kylo Renn turned good.

 

[happyninja42]

The end of the Last Jedi clearly implied that these kids were the new hope. Why would you have that scene in the middle movie, rather than the last movie?

Because they wanted a hopeful counterpoint to the "All is Lost" tone of the rest of the film at that point. Just like in Empire, how they ended with Luke and Leia hugging, while their friends went off to go find Han. It's a positive note to end on, so that the audience doesn't feel completely bummed. Hell the framing is even the same. A back angle on a person looking out into a starscape, while uplifting music plays. It's a hopeful exiting note for the film. Again, just like Empire. And why have it in the middle film? Aside from the obvious reason I mentioned above? Is because of the other reason I mentioned, to be a callback (at least potentially) in the later film. Where you have Rey show up, a year or two later in the epilogue, and have her land, ostensibly to find that child since she knew he was Force sensitive, or at least suspected it. Thus connecting the end of this trilogy, to possible new material later. With a Jedi Academy.

 

[Asita]

You know, this feels very topical:


It's not strictly about Star Wars, though hot damn are there a lot of "that's what the sequel trilogy did!" moments in there, really taking off around 8:21. It starts going in depth on Star Wars at about 11:50. I'd say it's a pretty easy watch, but then I really like OSP's stuff anyways, so *shrug*.

 

[Dalisclock]

So I'm going to be that guy and ask what feels like a stupid question here.

With all the talk of TJL "Screwing up the trilogy" by ending on such a low note for the resisty, leaving the last movie with a lot of ground to make up, why does it have to be one movie to clean up the mess?

Why are we so married to the idea that Star Wars arcs have to be told in Trilogies? Disney is gonna be making SW until the end of time or they cease to be profitable, so why not just say "Okay, it'll take another 1-3 whatever movies to bring this arc to a close"?

Yes, I realize way back in the day Lucas planned for 6 or 9 or 12 films, though how how much it was a plan and how much a (very) broad outline is questionable here, since there's plenty of evidence Lucas changed the plot/canon/story etc as he went along, starting with the famous "I am your father" reveal. However, Lucas has long since given up control of SW and even under Disney the new movies haven't shown there's much of an overarching plan in place for how the story continues after ROTJ. There were plenty of old post-ROTJ plots they could have used that would have been much more coherent then the new movies(The Thrawn books, for example), but if there's no concrete plans anyway, why keep limiting ourselves to "This arc must be told as a trilogy"?. The prequels were locked in because A New Hope was Episode 4 but there's no defined limiter in place for anything after ROTJ.

 

[happyninja42]

So I'm going to be that guy and ask what feels like a stupid question here.

With all the talk of TJL "Screwing up the trilogy" by ending on such a low note for the resisty, leaving the last movie with a lot of ground to make up, why does it have to be one movie to clean up the mess?

Why are we so married to the idea that Star Wars arcs have to be told in Trilogies? Disney is gonna be making SW until the end of time or they cease to be profitable, so why not just say "Okay, it'll take another 1-3 whatever movies to bring this arc to a close"?

Yes, I realize way back in the day Lucas planned for 6 or 9 or 12 films, though how how much it was a plan and how much a (very) broad outline is questionable here, since there's plenty of evidence Lucas changed the plot/canon/story etc as he went along, starting with the famous "I am your father" reveal. However, Lucas has long since given up control of SW and even under Disney the new movies haven't shown there's much of an overarching plan in place for how the story continues after ROTJ. There were plenty of old post-ROTJ plots they could have used that would have been much more coherent then the new movies(The Thrawn books, for example), but if there's no concrete plans anyway, why keep limiting ourselves to "This arc must be told as a trilogy"?. The prequels were locked in because A New Hope was Episode 4 but there's no defined limiter in place for anything after ROTJ.

I think it's something of a throwback to the typical 3 act structure in a single story? Or at least I've heard people postulate that. That a trilogy can easily segment the larger story, into the 3 segments of Introduction, Rising Tension, Climax/Resolution. And while each individual part also has all of those elements, the meta story arc, the threads that carry between all 3 films, would follow this pattern. It's what makes the most sense to me, and most trilogies do seem to follow that overall pattern. As the middle film is almost always where things are at their worst for the hero, and then 3rd film is the resolution of all that.

*shrugs* Might be BS, might be something else about human nature and buyin to a story investment, audience fatigue if it goes for more than 3 films, etc. Maybe a bit of all of it.

 

[Dalisclock]

I think it's something of a throwback to the typical 3 act structure in a single story? Or at least I've heard people postulate that. That a trilogy can easily segment the larger story, into the 3 segments of Introduction, Rising Tension, Climax/Resolution. And while each individual part also has all of those elements, the meta story arc, the threads that carry between all 3 films, would follow this pattern. It's what makes the most sense to me, and most trilogies do seem to follow that overall pattern. As the middle film is almost always where things are at their worst for the hero, and then 3rd film is the resolution of all that.

*shrugs* Might be BS, might be something else about human nature and buyin to a story investment, audience fatigue if it goes for more than 3 films, etc. Maybe a bit of all of it.

I get that, but it also implies all 3 acts are planned as part of the same whole. The new trilogy doesn't seem to bear that out, so why limit it to just 3 acts/movies in that case?

Actually, nevermind. I should be happy it's done so we can move onto something else for the next films.

 

[happyninja42]

I get that, but it also implies all 3 acts are planned as part of the same whole. The new trilogy doesn't seem to bear that out, so why limit it to just 3 acts/movies in that case?

Actually, nevermind. I should be happy it's done so we can move onto something else for the next films.

Well I didn't say the new trilogy was a good example of this, you simply asked why we, as a culture, adhere to the trilogy structure in our storytelling, and I gave you my theory as to why, in the broad sense, we do this. I personally agree that there is no real NEED to stick to a trilogy, as things like the Harry Potter series shows, and the MCU. But it's certainly familiar to us. So the idea that it's the default "plan" when in the initial stages of a story development doesn't surprise me. It of course should be reconsidered as things go on, especially if the story becomes too big for just 3 films, or shouldn't be 3 in the first place, like The Hobbit.

 

[sXeth]

Eh, I'd debate that characterization. The problem isn't the attempts at appealing to fans per se. The problem largely boils down to Abrams not knowing how to do so effectively. We can contrast Abrams' bringing in Palpatine for a last minute villain in Rise of Skywalker with Filoni bringing in Thrawn to serve as a central antagonist for seasons 3 and 4 of Rebels. Both decisions can adequately be described as "pandering" to the fans, but the executions were night and day. Palpatine came out of nowhere (and reeking of retcon and failure to respect the legacy of prior arcs in the franchise, artificially extending his tenure to compensate for the sequels' lack of a strong villain for its final act). By contrast, Thrawn was brought in as a natural escalation of the Empire acknowledging that the Rebel problem was more of an issue than they had believed and that they needed a more creative thinker to utterly crush it. And the way they used him managed to be a love letter to the source material without simply repeating the story beats (cough cough TFA). But that requires a delicate touch that I think Abrams has repeatedly shown that he lacks.

The essential difference there would that Rebels was a period piece, aligning directly with a point in which it would make sense for Thrawn to be there in the timeline. Thrawn is also drastically less over-exposed, he's in one (or two, if he's in Rogue One) movies, and some novels popular amongst the base.


Palpatine has been the antagonist of 5 (he never really comes up in New Hope) other movies in the main series, with a direct role as a primary antagonist in two of them. That would have a lot of burnout even with a well developed character... and Palapatine isn't developed particularly as more then a plot device. I'd actually take a Palpatine/sidious prequel movie with some level of interest, because by the time we see him in Phantom Menace he is stereotypical omniscient evil plotting dude barely afforded some scraps of scriptwriting to explain how he becomes Emperor and some attachment to Anakin.


There are obviously a host of other problems with RoSw Palps, but in general the character doesn't have the meat to sustain the run it already had, nevermind a "shock" comeback reveal.

 

[ralfy]

The point that the sequels "approach [the originals] from a fresh angle" shows that they offer nothing new.

The point that Aliens offers an "alternate take" on Alien is lacking. Aliens use the action genre because the horror genre employed by the first can no longer be used.

 

[Tsun Tzu]

Force Awakens - Attempting to create a sand castle by building over a previous one. Possibly with an "I made this!" flag on top.

Last Jedi - A toe-headed malcontent kicking over the "new" castle. Likely spitting on it as he walks away.

Rise of Skywalker - Desperately scrambling to pull it back together for a memorializing photo as the tide inexorably rolls in.

 

[Adam Jensen]

Still haven't seen Rise of Skywalker. I'm honestly surprised by how much I just don't care. And I owe it all to The Last Jedi. What a boring fuckin' movie that was.

 

[Palindromemordnilap]

The essential difference there would that Rebels was a period piece, aligning directly with a point in which it would make sense for Thrawn to be there in the timeline. Thrawn is also drastically less over-exposed, he's in one (or two, if he's in Rogue One) movies, and some novels popular amongst the base.

Thrawn isn't in any of the movies, he solely pops up in old EU books. Are you perhaps confusing him with Tarkin?

 

[Chimpzy]

Thrawn isn't in any of the movies, he solely pops up in old EU books. Are you perhaps confusing him with Tarkin?

He's the main antagonist in the Star Wars Rebels show from season 3 onwards.

 

[Palindromemordnilap]

He's the main antagonist in the Star Wars Rebels show from season 3 onwards.

Yes, I know, thats what originally got Thrawn brought up in Asita's post. But the post I quoted mentions him being in movies, which he is not. I thought sXeth might be getting the names confused between Grand Admiral Thrawn and Grand Moff Tarkin which, you know, fair

 

[sXeth]

Thrawn isn't in any of the movies, he solely pops up in old EU books. Are you perhaps confusing him with Tarkin?

oh yes.


which kind of furthers my point all in all.

 

[happyninja42]

Yes, I know, thats what originally got Thrawn brought up in Asita's post. But the post I quoted mentions him being in movies, which he is not. I thought sXeth might be getting the names confused between Grand Admiral Thrawn and Grand Moff Tarkin which, you know, fair

Yeah I confuse those two when talking all the time. Me and some friends play Star Wars Galaxy of Heroes, and I'll name swap them almost every time they come up in conversation about something.

 

[Fallen Soldier]

Last Jedi was crap, didn’t bother watching Rise of Skywalker because of it.