-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Star Wars |OT2| This is getting out of hand. Now there are two of them! [OPEN TROS SPOILERS | TAG MANDO SPOILERS]
- Thread starter WadiumArcadium
- Start date
- Status
Did we already know offworld Jawas would be in The Mandalorian? That's an interesting canon development.
Disney Movie Rewards is listing the TLJ theatrical poster for a mere 240 points.
It's not the teaser poster, but still enough of a bargain point-wise that I couldn't resist snatching it up.
It's not the teaser poster, but still enough of a bargain point-wise that I couldn't resist snatching it up.
So is it canon that Rey and Ben are force-bonded ... and it was just Snoke that bridged their minds? That's what I'm reading on Wookpedia anyway. I always though that it was Snoke who connected them but it appears their force bond exists outside of that
He began the bond but it continued after his death, which we see in TLJ when Rey closes the door of the Falcon on Kylo despite them not being near each other.
I know but I don't think he did create the bond.
Snoke did say that Rey's awakening was in response to Kylo.
"Darkness rises, and light to meet it."
I think that's where the bond first began but them being able to talk to each other was, at least at first, was because of Snoke. It'd be interesting to know if Snoke would've even been able to do that if Rey and Kylo weren't already connected in a way.
"Darkness rises, and light to meet it."
I think that's where the bond first began but them being able to talk to each other was, at least at first, was because of Snoke. It'd be interesting to know if Snoke would've even been able to do that if Rey and Kylo weren't already connected in a way.
Pretty much but man was I glad I read Catalyst before I saw Rogue One. Made the movie more enjoyable for me.
Soft goods Jawa! Will need a new clan of the little buggers for my shelf : )
Nice one!Got a picture of Adam yesterday. He's always fantastic with the fans.
I kinda wanna see Evans play a bad guy.
Get Ana De Armas in the next SW trilogy.
She was great in blade runner and in knives too apparently,
So there seems to be a big anti-RJ bias at TheForce.net forums. Mainly because of how he wrote Rey and her befriending Kylo and his attempt to "humanize" Kylo by showing him to be a victim of Luke's error. They actually think he's a misogynist and is only capable of writing alienated white male protagonists. Do you think there's an undercurrent of misogyny in the Rey/Kylo dynamic?
I feel like this line of criticism leaves out the entire dang ending of the film, where Kylo is pretty throughly humiliated (in a way that frames him more as a villain than a victim) and is outright rejected by Rey, who has just experienced her most empowering moment in terms of saving the Resistance, in addition to Luke solidifying her role as "the last Jedi."
Have the TFN folks brought that up at all?
Last edited:
They are pissed that she was written to open up to him at all, let alone turn him .. considering what he did to Han, Finn and her. They also think she's just stupid to act on a force vision. Basically they think RJ just wanted to get them together but didn't do the necessary work to get them there
I think it was a bit messy to have The Last Jedi's story primarily be Kylo Ren and Luke's instead of giving Rey that focus (she does get her own moments, primarily with her coming to terms with her parents, but most of the movie is her reacting to the relationship Kylo and Luke have with each other) so I can see how that might frustrate people. At the same time, I understand wanting to make the most use of Adam Driver as you can as a director lol.
She wasn't just reacting IMO. Most of what Kylo and Luke did in the film was caused, even on-screen, by Rey to begin with.
let's be real. those dudes at theforce.net forums are claiming that TLJ is misogynist not because they think it actually is, it's because they didn't like the film. and are using that excuse as a scapegoat criticism.
It's actually not just the dudes, it's the women too. Members and moderation staff
It's not misogyny at all, but I'm still not a fan of Rey's sudden switch from "I hate you enough to attempt to murder you you twice with my blaster, you're a monster" to "He's our last hope". It borderlines on the "woman foolishly thinks she can save a 'love interest' who is clearly beyond saving" trope. I think it would have made a lot more sense for Rey to see the vision and be MUUUUCH more conflicted about actually thinking Kylo can be saved. However her failure is crucial to her entire development in TLJ so you really can't remove it.
I think it just needed more time to grow and feel believable. Because as it stands, it looks Rey look far more naive than who she was in TFA.
Archer, if you're still stalking me in this thread, there's your criticism for the day
I think it just needed more time to grow and feel believable. Because as it stands, it looks Rey look far more naive than who she was in TFA.
Archer, if you're still stalking me in this thread, there's your criticism for the day
it makes sense there's a bit of naivete on her part since she just got exposed to this larger world, after living an incredibly small one on jakku. not to mention the dark side is all about deception and trickery, so that also makes sense she got roped into it all (not to mention kylo as well with snoke bridging their minds or whatever). but after all that, she stood up to kylo after he asked her to join him, and shut the door on his ass in his mind or whatever at the end.
Yeah, I think conceptually it makes a lot of sense. I just think we needed another 10-15 minutes to bake it in and give Rey more motivation to 180, because in the film itself it has always felt way too abrupt to me.
When Bobby was still posting, he said something like "Rey survived by fixing broken things", which I always found intriguing in the context of Ben.
Oh my god the thought of Rey and The Senate on screen together is giving me fucking chills
It is not sexist or misogynistic for a female character to open up or reach out emotionally to a male one.
There's this weird strain of thought (and it's not just re: Star Wars) of thinking feminism means writing women leads like the 'ideal' male leads: unabashedly flawless paragons of virtue, physical champions, who say and do and think and feel all the right things at the right times. They have all the best lines, all the coolest moves, and knock down anyone and everyone in their way because fuck them. But this is a super limiting way to write women! Writing a female character the same way you would write a male character doesn't make you feminist, it's actually kind of anti-feminist because it's still predicated on this idea of viewing protagonists through the lens of the traditional male stereotype lead.
It's a stupid attempt at a gotcha, as if a female character daring to tap into an emotional side is sexist while missing the whole point about feminism being about an equality of options for how you write female characters. This is what also irked me about James Cameron's argument about how Ripley and Sarah Connor were more feminist than Wonder Woman because they weren't supermodel sexy like Gal Gadot, when the whole point is that women should not have to look or act in one particular way to count as a character!
There's this weird strain of thought (and it's not just re: Star Wars) of thinking feminism means writing women leads like the 'ideal' male leads: unabashedly flawless paragons of virtue, physical champions, who say and do and think and feel all the right things at the right times. They have all the best lines, all the coolest moves, and knock down anyone and everyone in their way because fuck them. But this is a super limiting way to write women! Writing a female character the same way you would write a male character doesn't make you feminist, it's actually kind of anti-feminist because it's still predicated on this idea of viewing protagonists through the lens of the traditional male stereotype lead.
It's a stupid attempt at a gotcha, as if a female character daring to tap into an emotional side is sexist while missing the whole point about feminism being about an equality of options for how you write female characters. This is what also irked me about James Cameron's argument about how Ripley and Sarah Connor were more feminist than Wonder Woman because they weren't supermodel sexy like Gal Gadot, when the whole point is that women should not have to look or act in one particular way to count as a character!
Why do all of these supposed Star Wars fans miss that grace and forgiveness are cornerstone concepts for the Jedi? Luke spent a whole movie trying (and succeeding) to redeem his mass-murdering father who we had previously seen kill his kindly old mentor, among many others.
Last edited:
They will say Luke was different because Vader is his father and he used to be a noble Jedi. Rey has no connection to Kylo, thus no reason to turn him.... except when she asserts that it could win the day. But they just handwave that aspect of it
Yep, this was heavily debated on GAF, that thread was a fucking mess. This right here, good post
That being said, I would have liked Rey to be more conflicted/her transition into "saving" Ben wasn't rushed.
lol, I think the bolded would have been an easier sell before the prequels revealed that Anakin was a whiny ass brat of a Jedi.
Rey's reason to turn Kylo is the same as Luke's to turn Vader: they can sense the conflict in them and with it an opportunity for saving them.
- Status