Im just learning this as well. It is stupid. It's quite amazing how awful the screenplay to AOTC is. Especially considering that's the one that Lucas had "help" on.
Star Wars: The Last Jedi (2017) Pre-Release Discussion - Page 36
I'm sorry...I shouldn't be opening this can of worms again..
The fan service in TFA is eye rolling but they go by so quickly like that target ball thingy or the holographic chess game. Dumb fan service bits that could easily be cut out and there's nothing lost, unless you're the type of fan that shouts at the screen "HEY I KNOW THAT STUFF!!! I'VE SEEN IT BEFORE!" as RLM dramatized it.
No, the entire structure of TFA is fanservice. Fanservice can't be cut out of TFA because the film is fanservice down to its very marrow. Fanservice is TFA's very lifeblood. If you cut out the fanservice TFA is deader than K-2SO. It only goes by quickly if you consider the entire* movie to go by quickly.
And all of that is one million percent intentional. The whole deal is intentionally designed as a wall to wall fanservice comfort blanket. The creators don't even try to deny it. Unfortunately it also has the depth of a blanket.
* Actually, not the entire movie. Not the helicopter shot. That was Fresh and Bold.
Edit: Oh, of course Freeman already covered it and you guys already moved on, leaving me in a bunker like Saw left Jyn.
I dispute that kinda. Certain structural aspects play into fanservice and others move things forward into new territory.
"WE'RE GOING IN SUUH-CULLZ!!!"
The radical about-face towards THE FORCE AWAKENS in some segments of the fan community continues to amuse me.
Is it "fan service?" Absolutely. I don't know why that's now inherently a bad thing, though. And the idea that TFA brings nothing new to the table is, I think, an unfair characterization.
I dunno, TFA has always been a 6 out of 10 movie for me, but I think for a lot of people the "about face" has to do with how poorly the movie holds up to repeat viewings once you get past that pitch-perfect first act.
Rogue One might have a similar fall-out from some of its supporters, I'm not sure, I liked it about the same after a second viewing. A solid 7 out of 10.
A year later with the hype died down I give it a watch all the way through for the first time since theaters and... it's fine. Not all movies can be special like those first two films, so I shouldn't try to compare. But I can to JEDI, and this holds at least close to that, which is good. I've accepted this like I've accepted slightly above average Bond flicks over the years. It's a good space adventure with likable charismatic characters and a nice open end for hopefully more interesting stories.
I then bumped it up to a 7 out of 10. Perfectly fine.
I saw something interesting on the internet after Carrie Fisher's death: people policing what other people had to say about her. It feels like the next step in our internet-era mourning process for the famous - it used to be enough to just be the person who was mourning someone they never met but now we have to be the person telling others they're mourning wrong.
First I saw this in people scolding publications and individuals for associating Fisher mainly with the Princess Leia character. While it is true that Carrie Fisher had many more talents and gave us more creative gifts than just her roles in the STAR WARS films, it's hard to argue that the STAR WARS films aren't among the most popular things EVER. The only person who was involved with the original STAR WARS movies who MIGHT be spared "STAR WARS star" in his obituary headline is Harrison Ford, and that's only because a headline writer might be more fond of Indiana Jones. But really, who are we kidding? Harrison Ford's obit headline has "STAR WARS" in it.
It seems to me that people are reacting this way out of fear and pain. They're not acknowledging the realities of communication - you lead with the deceased's most famous credit because that is how the largest number readers will recognize the dead person - and are instead coming from a fear of having their own accomplishments ignored or forgotten, often because of gender bias. I get where they're coming from although, as so often happens on the internet, I don't know if they're thinking out their reaction or if they're just reacting and hitting send.
The other way people policed mourning of Carrie Fisher was personified in what happened to Steve Martin, who deleted a tweet after it caused a ragestorm. In his tweet Martin called Fisher "a beautiful creature" before saying "she turned out to be witty and bright as well." People said this was sexist.
It seems to me that his tweet is actually about how Carrie Fisher went up against sexism. As a young woman she was "a beautiful creature," and she was valued only for that. But through Martin's eyes - the eyes of someone who got to know her - we see how as a culture we also shifted from looking at Fisher as a space babe to looking at her as a biting wit and a talented writer. It seems to me that, in a few words, Martin wonderfully summed up some of Fisher's journey and struggle.
Also, Steve Martin actually knew Carrie Fisher. In real life. We can disagree about his tweet - there is always room for many interpretations of any event - but I do not believe we can disagree that the mourning of people who knew the deceased take some priority over the mourning of those who never had a relationship with her. I found the attacks on Martin unseemly, tone deaf and, frankly, not in the spirit of how Fisher lived her life. We, the mob, don't have a right to tell someone what they are allowed to say about a person they know who has died.
The people who attacked Martin were coming from a similar place of fear and pain that the "she was more than Princess Leia!" people came from, but that second group represents to me a side of the internet that is frightening. It's the righteous anger side, the side that does not look at the human being making the tweet, that does not take into account any context, humanity or nuance at all, and that demands only a level of ideological purity no one can maintain.
I should know, I've been in that mob. And I've been eaten by that mob. I know that mob well. That mob operates by taking our most excellent human instincts - a desire for social justice, an impulse to protect the underdog, a love of standing shoulder to shoulder with our fellows when calling out what's wrong in the world - and twisting them to be self-serving, ego-feeding tools of unearned self-righteousness. The internet has allowed us, en masse, to take our desire to do good and pervert it into a way to create status and identity at the expense of others.
Ironically I could be seen as policing others here; that isn't my wish. I may not agree with how people do their public rituals of mourning - I will never be so enlightened that I don't roll my eyes at the waves of bad cartoon tributes that come out in the wake of any famous death - but I don't have to get all up in anybody's face about it. That's a lesson I've learned - it's okay for me to not like something you're doing and keep it to myself. Not every tweet needs to be the place to take a last stand. I'm happier because I let more of this stuff wash off of me, because I don't stew in my resentment towards strangers who have the audacity to do things I don't like that also don't impact me.
You might find that the less time you police others - the less time you spend parsing every word in a tweet, calling out every last statement you don't like, looking under every sentence for a subtext that can offend you - the more time you'll have to be happy. It can be scary because we all spend our time doing things to ignore ourselves and our lives (and getting angry online is a great way to ignore yourself) based on the fear that we won't like what we see if we direct our attention inwards. But overcoming that fear is the only way to get any real happiness that isn't predicated on other people, material goods or changing circumstances.
One thing the old expanded universe never could figure out was Leia's role post-Rebellion. First they made here president (or whatever the title) for far too many terms, to the point she came across as a dictator for overstaying her welcome. Then she became a Jedi, and it didn't feel natural at all. Then she and Han basically became vagabonds, hopping around the galaxy together in the Falcon in a way that always seemed like would drive her crazy.
I'll give TFA this: Leia felt like Leia. But where exactly can her character go from here? I'm sure Johnson utilizes her well in Ep. 8, but I'm thinking even if Fisher had lived Ep. 9 would still be relegating her to a few emotional scenes and then calling the shots behind a holographic display. She's not getting into a lightsaber battle guys, that's just silly.