4 ms·

I'll assume spoilers are fair game here, since this article is pretty much a spoiler in its entirety. The authors take many liberties in interpretation to fit

I'll assume spoilers are fair game here, since this article is pretty much a spoiler in its entirety. The authors take many liberties in interpretation to fit their viewpoint. For instance, Luke didn't "hallucinate" Yoda's presence on Ahch-To, unless you think his previous force ghosts (as in ROTJ) were hallucinations, as well. Perhaps Rian did mean for Yoda's force ghost in this scene to be a hallucination, but I don't think he did. The authors just twisted this scene to fit their interpretation, which is disappointing. UPDATE: The piece is satire https://twitter.com/smcohoe/status/951474247104307200 https://twitter.com/smcohoe/status/951474247104307200

trevelyan 9y ago
Yes, it's a silly interpretation. Especially inconsistent since if Yoda is Luke's hallucination as the article asserts, then Luke himself is "killing the past" in the same way that Kylo Ren does, and treating the film as a Millennial attack on the Baby Boomers is rather short-sighted when they are both doing the same thing. As far as I can see, the only thing approaching a coherent theme in TLJ is the question of how one can move forward if encumbered by the past (Finn and Rey also have these issues). This offers perhaps 1% of the thematic and political subtly of the Lucas trilogies. But even this seems a challenge for the script to grapple with coherently -- surely Yoda (presented as a figure of wisdom) should not be using lightning and fire (Sith tools) to destroy embodied wisdom. And if we are to view Luke as doing the right thing then surely the only logical conclusion of this way of thinking is that Kylo Ren is on the right track. Ironic that Poe Dameron (who destroys most of the Rebellion) is seen negatively when all he was doing was clearing the way for victory by getting rid of all those ships (human lives)!
- theli0nheart 9y ago
  Note what Yoda says before he destroys the tree: "There's nothing in those books she does not already possess." And then remember the final scene on the Falcon, where you can clearly see that the books are safely with Rey. She must have taken them before she left, and Yoda knows this. In that period of time, though, the audience (and Luke) is left to believe that Yoda truly did choose to destroy ancient Jedi artifacts. Which really makes one wonder what the heck is going on—and leaves you to question which side is good, and which is bad? It really blurs the lines between Light and Dark, and crescendos at the throne room scene where Snoke is murdered to when Kylo asks Rey to join him. You almost want her to say yes to his offer! Unlike ESB, the offer isn't just theoretical. Snoke was just overthrown. In my opinion, the whole sequence was masterfully done.
  - trevelyan 9y ago
    Hey Lionheart. Just to be clear -- I don't think TLJ is devoid of meaning. The film clearly wants to say that anyone can be a hero and that what matters is not being trapped by the past (protect what you love, learn from your mistakes and move on). There is nothing wrong with this message. It doesn't bother me if people like TLJ, although I personally don't think the film makes much sense. If Yoda deceives Luke that saves TLJ from having Yoda actually mirror Kylo Ren, but it doesn't explain the fire and lightning (Sith tools associated with hell imagery) nor does it resolve the underlying problem since deception is also Dark Side behaviour.... There are a few other areas where the film contradicts itself, but this is an obvious one: if we take the film seriously we must surely ask ourselves why Yoda is acting like a Sith Lord? I didn't see any attempt to answer that puzzle in the film and while we may get the solution in film #3, as far as I can tell TLJ just accepts that whatever Yoda does is good (because he is Yoda) and whatever Kylo Ren does is bad (because he is the villain). The filmmakers have bought into the loose symbolic framework of the saga, but they don't seem to understand it and/or act consistently within it. To the extent there is a message, it comes out because the good guys tell us exactly what it is and we aren't supposed to think too critically about it.
    - theli0nheart 9y ago
      > If Yoda deceives Luke that saves TLJ from having Yoda actually mirror Kylo Ren, but it doesn't explain the fire and lightning (Sith tools associated with hell imagery) nor does it resolve the underlying problem since deception is also Dark Side behaviour.... It comes down to intent. Fire, lightning, and destruction aren't relegated to the Dark Side of the Force. Jedis have always had their share of destruction and murder. They were a literal army during the time of the Old Republic. Obi-Wan and Qui-Gon's behavior in the first scenes of TPM show this firsthand. They were sent to the Trade Federation to intimidate—not a very noble thing to do on the surface, but it was in the greater good. There have been innumerable essays and analyses understanding how the two sides differ, but the one that's always stuck with me is that the Jedi are at their core more of a guiding force, whereas the Sith are a controlling force. Everything the Sith do is for their own greater good, whereas the Jedi will do things (even kill, or destroy) if it leads to the greater good of others. And, in this case, the destruction of the temple leads Luke to understand that old books aren't what are important. No one died when that tree was destroyed. And it may very well have been what pushed Luke to self-sacrifice and save the remnants of the Resistance. That seems like a very "Jedi" thing to do (IMO).
- humanrebar 9y ago
  > ... the only thing approaching a coherent theme in TLJ is the question of how one can move forward if encumbered by the past... I thought they were rather explicit about the "learning from mistakes" theme.
loteck 9y ago
You said they take many liberties, but you only mention one. I agree with the one you mentioned, but I couldn't really find other issues. What are the other liberties?
- theli0nheart 9y ago
  Granted. Lots of opinions stated as fact, or just wrong. Here are a few: > The original Star Wars films (Episodes IV-VI) celebrated the revolutions of the 1960s and 1970s > Leia’s use of the Force to return, zombie-like, to a position of leadership and oversee further disasters is another instance of boomers’ misusing their privileges to cling to their hegemony as long as they can. > Note that in none of the eight movies so far is the intensive and painful Jedi training regimen followed through. > The film’s meta-commentary is that the revolutions of 1968 and following accomplished nothing. UPDATE: The entire piece is definitely satire, which explains why the opinions expressed within it are so silly. :)
abritinthebay 9y ago
It went off the rails a little at the end (when it talks about Rey & Finn, then the bit you mentioned). But most of the points it makes are before then anyhow, and I can't find anything wrong with it before then.

trevelyan 9y ago

Yes, it's a silly interpretation. Especially inconsistent since if Yoda is Luke's hallucination as the article asserts, then Luke himself is "killing the past" in the same way that Kylo Ren does, and treating the film as a Millennial attack on the Baby Boomers is rather short-sighted when they are both doing the same thing. As far as I can see, the only thing approaching a coherent theme in TLJ is the question of how one can move forward if encumbered by the past (Finn and Rey also have these issues). This offers perhaps 1% of the thematic and political subtly of the Lucas trilogies. But even this seems a challenge for the script to grapple with coherently -- surely Yoda (presented as a figure of wisdom) should not be using lightning and fire (Sith tools) to destroy embodied wisdom. And if we are to view Luke as doing the right thing then surely the only logical conclusion of this way of thinking is that Kylo Ren is on the right track. Ironic that Poe Dameron (who destroys most of the Rebellion) is seen negatively when all he was doing was clearing the way for victory by getting rid of all those ships (human lives)!

theli0nheart 9y ago
Note what Yoda says before he destroys the tree: "There's nothing in those books she does not already possess." And then remember the final scene on the Falcon, where you can clearly see that the books are safely with Rey. She must have taken them before she left, and Yoda knows this. In that period of time, though, the audience (and Luke) is left to believe that Yoda truly did choose to destroy ancient Jedi artifacts. Which really makes one wonder what the heck is going on—and leaves you to question which side is good, and which is bad? It really blurs the lines between Light and Dark, and crescendos at the throne room scene where Snoke is murdered to when Kylo asks Rey to join him. You almost want her to say yes to his offer! Unlike ESB, the offer isn't just theoretical. Snoke was just overthrown. In my opinion, the whole sequence was masterfully done.
- trevelyan 9y ago
  Hey Lionheart. Just to be clear -- I don't think TLJ is devoid of meaning. The film clearly wants to say that anyone can be a hero and that what matters is not being trapped by the past (protect what you love, learn from your mistakes and move on). There is nothing wrong with this message. It doesn't bother me if people like TLJ, although I personally don't think the film makes much sense. If Yoda deceives Luke that saves TLJ from having Yoda actually mirror Kylo Ren, but it doesn't explain the fire and lightning (Sith tools associated with hell imagery) nor does it resolve the underlying problem since deception is also Dark Side behaviour.... There are a few other areas where the film contradicts itself, but this is an obvious one: if we take the film seriously we must surely ask ourselves why Yoda is acting like a Sith Lord? I didn't see any attempt to answer that puzzle in the film and while we may get the solution in film #3, as far as I can tell TLJ just accepts that whatever Yoda does is good (because he is Yoda) and whatever Kylo Ren does is bad (because he is the villain). The filmmakers have bought into the loose symbolic framework of the saga, but they don't seem to understand it and/or act consistently within it. To the extent there is a message, it comes out because the good guys tell us exactly what it is and we aren't supposed to think too critically about it.
  - theli0nheart 9y ago
    > If Yoda deceives Luke that saves TLJ from having Yoda actually mirror Kylo Ren, but it doesn't explain the fire and lightning (Sith tools associated with hell imagery) nor does it resolve the underlying problem since deception is also Dark Side behaviour.... It comes down to intent. Fire, lightning, and destruction aren't relegated to the Dark Side of the Force. Jedis have always had their share of destruction and murder. They were a literal army during the time of the Old Republic. Obi-Wan and Qui-Gon's behavior in the first scenes of TPM show this firsthand. They were sent to the Trade Federation to intimidate—not a very noble thing to do on the surface, but it was in the greater good. There have been innumerable essays and analyses understanding how the two sides differ, but the one that's always stuck with me is that the Jedi are at their core more of a guiding force, whereas the Sith are a controlling force. Everything the Sith do is for their own greater good, whereas the Jedi will do things (even kill, or destroy) if it leads to the greater good of others. And, in this case, the destruction of the temple leads Luke to understand that old books aren't what are important. No one died when that tree was destroyed. And it may very well have been what pushed Luke to self-sacrifice and save the remnants of the Resistance. That seems like a very "Jedi" thing to do (IMO).
humanrebar 9y ago
> ... the only thing approaching a coherent theme in TLJ is the question of how one can move forward if encumbered by the past... I thought they were rather explicit about the "learning from mistakes" theme.

loteck 9y ago

You said they take many liberties, but you only mention one. I agree with the one you mentioned, but I couldn't really find other issues. What are the other liberties?

theli0nheart 9y ago
Granted. Lots of opinions stated as fact, or just wrong. Here are a few: > The original Star Wars films (Episodes IV-VI) celebrated the revolutions of the 1960s and 1970s > Leia’s use of the Force to return, zombie-like, to a position of leadership and oversee further disasters is another instance of boomers’ misusing their privileges to cling to their hegemony as long as they can. > Note that in none of the eight movies so far is the intensive and painful Jedi training regimen followed through. > The film’s meta-commentary is that the revolutions of 1968 and following accomplished nothing. UPDATE: The entire piece is definitely satire, which explains why the opinions expressed within it are so silly. :)

abritinthebay 9y ago

It went off the rails a little at the end (when it talks about Rey & Finn, then the bit you mentioned). But most of the points it makes are before then anyhow, and I can't find anything wrong with it before then.