Ian_C
Jedi Master
We're going to disagree on this, but the point of saying you won't accept any criticism of someone who hasn't watched it is akin to saying you wouldn't accept the opinion of someone who has read the novelization. What I read wasn't said in any biased form one way or the other, just a straight outline of events and some dialogue. At this point, I think I know about as much as anyone who has seen it.
The problem with your rebuttal is you're looking at the fine details and saying the general comparisons aren't there as a result. Of course Abrams changed the fine details. If he hadn't, it would have been a straight remake. This wasn't a Van Sant Psycho shot for shot remake. It was more like a Zack Snyder Dawn of the Dead re-imagining. Take the original, and change just enough so you can't call it a straight up remake. Abrams himself has admitted this is essentially a remake of the OT, and justified it saying he had to reintroduce people to SW before 8 & 9 go in a different direction.
Having said that, I'm sure this is a waste of my time, but allow me to counter some points.
"Rey = young innocent with no parents on desert planet who discovers she is Force sensitive and becomes the main hero = Luke"
Luke skywalker was a farmer, stuck in a backwater dreaming of adventure and the chance to get away from his mundane life. Rey has been left on Jakku, learnt to survive on her own instincts and skills as a scavenger but has always been waiting for someone or something to come back to get her. She has faith that she is counting down the time until this happens and is doing what she can to survive in the meantime.
The differences are noted, but you still have both characters left on a desert planet as children. Both discover at about the same age they are Force sensitive - and in fact both were unfamiliar with the Force when they discovered it. Both become the central character. For Rey, that's a lot of assumption she becomes the main protagonist in 8 & 9, but if she isn't, what's the point? You actually brought up another similarity I didn't mention. Both are awaiting the day they get to leave the desert planet behind. Hell, by the end, they both get to use their father's lightsaber (I believe 100% Rey is Luke's daughter).
"Kylo Ren = former Jedi apprentice who falls to the Dark Side, acquires a black outfit and red lightsaber, and becomes the real villain's #1 henchman = Darth Vader"
Yes, both characters fell to the dark side. That is where the similarities end. Vader was pure granite. Emotionless, terrifying and in control of everything he did. He was also supremely loyal to his master, the emperor. Ren is angry, far more like a human than vader ever was. He is not properly in control of his skills and is fallible. How many times did Vader ever get hit or injured by blaster fire? If there was any comparison to be made here it would be more like HCs anakin, however he was light side, falling towards dark, where as Ren is dark, possibly falling towards light. It is also hinted he pursuing a personal agenda. Vader was not (until he found out he had a son and sister, but that was not immediate)
You expanded on what I said. What part of my comparison was false? Both are apprentices who fall to the Dark Side. Both wear black costumes with a mask. Both use a red lightsaber. Both are the #1 sidekick to the real villain. The simple description of each character is identical. Since Anakin IS Vader, I think arguing he's more like Anakin is a moot point. Let's meet in the middle ground. He's like Anakin shortly after his fall, as Anakin was also conflicted for a while. Experience and never completing his Jedi training are why Kylo Ren isn't as skilled. Being dark and falling towards light would be a direct comparison to Vader's conflicted state at the end of ROTJ, fighting to not be good.
"Finn = guy who escapes big ship in the beginning of the movie, hooks up with lost young hero on desert planet, and is used mostly as comedic relief after that = C-3PO"
This is not the character at all. Finn is a first order defector who is trying to escape his past and gets drawn into the good fight. You are trying to make a square peg fit a round hole here. You would have found more similarity if you had compared his character to Solo. He doesn't have the same streetwise nature though. He is a conditioned soldier and knows very little else.
Every movie has a comedic relief character. From not just spoilers, but reviews of people who have seen it, Finn appears to fill the comedic relief role. Yes, he's a soldier and 3PO is a droid. Both would rather stay away from a fight, as seen by Finn in the escape, not wanting to go back to to Jakku, and trying to get away while the others are talking to Maz. Sure, he ends up fighting in the end, but as a plot device, in this movie he's mostly used for comedic relief, and the source of inside intelligence on the First Order. The FO want him much in the same way the Empire wanted the droids in ANH. And of course, both characters, as I said, meet the central hero after crash landing on the desert planet while escaping a Star Dsetroyer.
"BB-8 = smartass little droid who contains vital information and because of that is being hunted by bad guys = R2-D2"
Again, as I was watching the film I felt I had met a new an distinctively different character in BB8.
But for the purpose of plot, BB-8 is almost identical to what R2-D2 was in ANH. He holds vital information both the good guys and bad guys want. He's the astromech for an X-Wing pilot who fires the final shot at the Death Star.
"Maz = small alien who speaks in riddles and focuses young hero as to their destiny = Yoda"
Maybe, maybe not. I didn't feel Maz was speaking in riddles, nor was she a Jedi Master, nor is she seemingly going to train Rey in the ways of the force. Infact I would suggest your description above is more what Obi Wan did for luke then Yoda. They are both aliens and they are both short so you are right there. Perhaps Maz is an ewok?
Apparently the Visual Dictionary says Maz is 1000 years old, and definitely Force sensitive, but never trained as a Jedi. I never insinuated Maz would train Rey at all. She's a short alien who uses "different" speech to convince the hero to accept their destiny. You're right, the same comparison can be made to Obi-Wan in this regard, but I went with Yoda due to the age and physical comparisons. Either way, you're conceding Maz is a copy of a major mentor figure in the OT.
"Starkiller Base = giant planet modified to become destructive force used to wipe out Rebel base = Death Star I AND II"
I will agree here, and this is the part I had the biggest issue with. I was disappointed that they had rehashed the super weapon idea again. I don't want to see another one of these. They don't really work.
I think this is the most common criticism I've seen so far, even from those who loved it.
"Starkiller Base = ice planet = Hoth"
They were on a planet with forest, as well as an ice planet, as well as a planet mostly covered in ocean. Every terrain has previously been used in star wars films, and the planet earth has run out of terrains for them to film on. What additional terrains would you suggest? Cities (done that), Space stations (Done that). Farmland (Naboo maybe). Perhaps they should go to a planet made of Jelly.
Fair point on only so many locations, and the inclusion of a forest. But did that have to include updated Snowtroopers, updated snowspeeders (even if they were used by the bad guys). I will admit this is one of my weaker criticisms - but the point is to show the sheer amount of copied material from the OT.
"Starkiller Base = having a weakness exposed in a trench that fighter spacecraft can infiltrate and blow the whole damn thing up = Death Star I"
Not quite right here. The ships failed initially. It needed a strike team to infiltrate and destroy it. You could have put an endor reference in here instead. Anyway, I do have a bit of a problem with a third death star as stated above. Surely they would have learnt some basic engineering lessons from the previous two. Mind you, this does ring true to reality. Look up the fate of the HMS Hood.
Again, I could have gone with either reference. I used DS I because of the trench run. The fact they needed a strike team was DS II, agreed. So Abrams used elements from both Death Star's. Again, that's conceding he took OT plot for this movie. Sure, real life may show repeats in mistakes. However, when it comes to a movie, doing this for the third time is lazy and lacks originality. Instead of picking apart the fine detail differences, look at how the general public, with just basic knowledge of the OT having watched it once or twice, will see this. This is the crowd TFA will need if it wants to break cumulative gross records, and DS III will result in a lot of casual people not going back for repeated viewings, if at all.
"Captain Phasma = mysterious soldier employed by the Empire hunting down heroes that wears a unique suit of armor with a cape over one shoulder that we only see a little of = Boba Fett"
Phasma is a dull and flat character with little point other than marketing. Phasma is also not a bounty hunter, nor mysterious. Fett had the aura of a badass about him. Phasma is there to sell figures.
Again, you're going for fine details. One is a commanding Stormtrooper, and one is a bounty hunter. Yep. But both are used in similar ways. Their job is to hunt down the Empire's/First Order's targets. Both have unique armor with a cape over one shoulder. Other people in this very thread have commented on Phasma being TFA's version of Fett. Just because it fails to succeed in this doesn't negate that's what they were going for.
"Luke Goes Into Seclusion On A Remote Island = where he goes after his failure = Yoda Goes To Dagobah"
Luke had left after failing to restore the Jedi order, due to loosing Ren to the dark side. Luke has not gone into seclusion though. The film stated he had gone to find the Jedi Temple. Wheras Yoda did nothing till Luke found him, Luke has been actively pursuing another as yet unknown goal.
The first four words of the opening crawl text are "Luke Skywalker has vanished." He disappeared as soon as Kylo had slaughtered everyone inside and destroyed the Jedi Academy (which by the way is a direct comparison to Anakin killing everyone in the Jedi Temple). The Resistance don't know where he is. The First Order don't know where he is. Han Solo doesn't know where he is. Apparently, this period of disappearance has been over the course of years. It takes a secret code that only R2 can unlock to even know where to go. That's not going into seclusion? Surely if this wasn't the case, Leia at a minimum would know where her brother is? And where did you get the impression Luke is pursuing some goal in his 2 minutes of screen time? He's spent years alone on an island!
"General Hux = Nazi-like leader in charge of Starkiller Base (ie Death Star I) who is shown to be disagreeable to Klo Ren (Darth Vader) - Grand Mofff Tarkin"
They are both leaders of an army. I felt the first order, particularly the character of Hux, was far more fanatical in its feel that the empire ever was. Tarkin was a far more measured and calculated leader. Hux did have a real feel of Nazi about him. Plus, does an army not need a general. What sort of leader were you expecting. Imperial officers are all generally cut from the same cloth.
The point was that throughout ESB and ROTJ, Imperial officers feared Vader and were under his command. Only in ANH did we have Tarkin (and Motti) who openly questioned him. Tarkin was in command (under Palpatine's rule), and was in charge of DS I. Here, we have Hux, who appears to not so much be under Ren's command is he is having to co-exist with him, and he does not get along with him. And Hux is in command of DS III. Sure, there are various levels of command in both empires, but the Hux character is a direct parallel to Tarkin's role in ANH, with the only real difference being Tarkin seemed to have more respect for Vader than Hux has for Ren.
"Snoke = mysterious leader seen mostly in hologram form seated on a throne and is the true leader of the bad guys = Emperor"
It seems we are destined to have a puppet master controlling things where the dark side is concerned. I guess thats just the way of the dark side. Rule of two and all that.
So, is that a concession to my point? And the "rule of two" was a purely PT concept brought up in TPM. I thought JJ wanted to distance himself from that? Just as an extra point, having now seen an image of Snoke, and knowing his role as the evil ringleader, I have a sneaking suspicion we may have it revealed he's actually Palpatine who survived, with advanced age and injuries accounting for his look.
"Poe = Rebel pilot who is an unsung hero and plays a vital role in the destruction of Starkiller Base (ie Death Star II) = Wedge Antilles"
Not unsung at all. Widely known and lauded as the hero pilot of the rebellion. This in my opinion is something the previous films have lacked (certainly star wars had no established rebel heroes). A rebel hero who is just that, a rebel hero who made his name as a pilot for the rebellion. Perhaps what Wedge would have become by ROTJ.
Maybe unsung was the wrong word. I meant background character. He has a prominant role, but is not on the same level as the main cast. He's a more fleshed out Wedge, and his role in destroying DS III was the same as Wedge's for sure.
"Kylo Ren vs Han Solo = young former Jedi turned Sith kills older father with lightsaber blow after father tries to convince him to let go of his hatred = Vader vs Obi-Wan"
Obi Wan was not vaders father. There was as far as I remember no trying to turn Vader back to light when Obi Wan and vader duelled. This did not come until return of the jedi and was luke, vaders son trying to convince his father to let go of his hatred. In the case of luke and vader, luke successfully brought the light side out of vader. In TFA, murdering his father pushed ren further from the light to the dark.
In the absence of an actual father, Obi-Wan was Vader's father figure. In that regard, Kylo killing Han is similar to Vader killing Obi-Wan. In ANH Obi-Wan may have given up on Vader, but in ROTS, he sure as hell wanted to convert Anakin back to the light side. Again, an amalgamation of the same character from different movies. Maybe they incorporated a little of Luke trying to change Vader into it too, but as straight generality, Han vs Kylo = Obi-Wan vs Vader.
"Leia = strong female leader who convinces man close to her to go and try to convert bad guy back to good = Leia (to Luke on Endor)"
Yes, but it worked with Luke. Han failed.
The end result is irelevant. She did the same thing in two different movies with two different characters. Yawn.
"Rey Obtains Millennium Falcon = hero goes to junk shop, meets with slimy junk dealer, finds an unexpected friend, and ends up finding ship (or important part of one) that gets them off desert planet = Qui-Gon goes to Mos Espa, meets Watto, discovers Anakin, and finds hyperdrive he needs to get off Tatooine"
We didn't get all of the betting a ship in a pod race with a ten year old who has never piloted a pod before garbage though did we. They needed a ship, and ended up stealing the Falcon, which wasn't their first choice. The film needed a way to bring the new characters together with the old. They used the falcon as that link.
You're back to picking apart my general similarity with finer details. Nothing I said was wrong. It was just fleshed out differently in each movie. As you'd expect. I'm sure that with some original thinking, they could have found the Falcon without having to go to an alien junk dealer on a desert planet after coincidentally finding an unexpected ally first, then coming across the ship/part of ship, that enables them to escape that desert planet.
"Max Von Sydow's character = person who supplies Poe/BB-8 with info the bad guys REALLY want, before being killed by Kylo Ren very early into movie = Captain Antilles, transporting Leia who provides R2-D2 with info the bad guys REALLY want, before being killed by Vader very early into movie"
No more than an extra in my opinion. The plot here was more important than the characters sadly, as I like Von Sydow.
An extra, just like Captain Antilles. And the role of that extra mirrored Antilles, even occurring at the same point of the movie with the same end result to the character.
"Than there's all the bits of fan service/cameos/Easter eggs. X-Wings, TIE Fighters, Star Destroyers, Chewbacca, Ackbar, Nien Nunb, various bits of dialogue, etc."
The film is supposed to be shot in an existing universe. Expect to see familiar parts of that universe. I far preferred seeing familiar objects and faces than seeing completely new everything, a la prequels. Its supposed to be the star wars universe after all. Why would it not have a familiar feel?
In a film so heavy with OT copies, not everything needed to be there. Having said that, I just wanted to point out a whole lot more OT bits stolen for this movie that didn't really deserve a full description. I agree that we needed some familiar stuff. TFA just goes overboard with it.
For the record, there was plenty familiar in the PT. The droids. Obi-Wan. Anakin/Vader. Palpatine. Tatooine. Fett. Jedi. Sith. The Lars homestead. Jabba the Hutt. Star Destroyers. White armored troopers. Tarkin. Death Star plans. Yoda. Royal guards. Then there's the things that are similar, or referenced at some point in the OT. Bail Organa. Coruscant. The Senate. Leia's mother. Twins separated at birth. Maul's Sith Infiltrator is an early design Vader TIE with an extended cockpit. The clone fighters are bulky, less streamlined X-Wings. Primitive race beating the technologically advanced army (Ewoks vs Gungans).
Why couldn't the ships have evolved in a 30 year period the way they did in the PT vs the OT? And if we need to keep TIE Fighters and X-Wings, why would we not see TIE Bombers, Interceptors, A-Wings, Y-Wings, etc.?
I think the problem with a lot of people who are disappointed is how old where you when you saw star wars. 99% of people on here saw it through the eyes of a child. How many of you broke it down so analytically at the time?
The thing I find ironic about this is that this is the exact argument I use on those that hate the PT. Yet the majority, who hate the PT, are 'right' and PT fans are 'apologists', while now things have been reversed, those that love TFA are 'right', and people who don't like/are not interested in TFA are 'haters'. Extremely hypocritical to me.
My final point, a lot of you were worried about Disney making this film too Disney. Its far more Star Wars and far less Disney then The Phantom Menace was, and Disney didn't even make that.
If by being "too Disney" you mean lighthearted, fun, and with some cartoonish characters, then you're right TPM was ore Disneyfied. If you mean milking a beloved franchise for all its worth by just giving its fans a straight up rehash of what they loved 30 years ago, then no, TFA is 100% Disney.
Ian
The problem with your rebuttal is you're looking at the fine details and saying the general comparisons aren't there as a result. Of course Abrams changed the fine details. If he hadn't, it would have been a straight remake. This wasn't a Van Sant Psycho shot for shot remake. It was more like a Zack Snyder Dawn of the Dead re-imagining. Take the original, and change just enough so you can't call it a straight up remake. Abrams himself has admitted this is essentially a remake of the OT, and justified it saying he had to reintroduce people to SW before 8 & 9 go in a different direction.
Having said that, I'm sure this is a waste of my time, but allow me to counter some points.
"Rey = young innocent with no parents on desert planet who discovers she is Force sensitive and becomes the main hero = Luke"
Luke skywalker was a farmer, stuck in a backwater dreaming of adventure and the chance to get away from his mundane life. Rey has been left on Jakku, learnt to survive on her own instincts and skills as a scavenger but has always been waiting for someone or something to come back to get her. She has faith that she is counting down the time until this happens and is doing what she can to survive in the meantime.
The differences are noted, but you still have both characters left on a desert planet as children. Both discover at about the same age they are Force sensitive - and in fact both were unfamiliar with the Force when they discovered it. Both become the central character. For Rey, that's a lot of assumption she becomes the main protagonist in 8 & 9, but if she isn't, what's the point? You actually brought up another similarity I didn't mention. Both are awaiting the day they get to leave the desert planet behind. Hell, by the end, they both get to use their father's lightsaber (I believe 100% Rey is Luke's daughter).
"Kylo Ren = former Jedi apprentice who falls to the Dark Side, acquires a black outfit and red lightsaber, and becomes the real villain's #1 henchman = Darth Vader"
Yes, both characters fell to the dark side. That is where the similarities end. Vader was pure granite. Emotionless, terrifying and in control of everything he did. He was also supremely loyal to his master, the emperor. Ren is angry, far more like a human than vader ever was. He is not properly in control of his skills and is fallible. How many times did Vader ever get hit or injured by blaster fire? If there was any comparison to be made here it would be more like HCs anakin, however he was light side, falling towards dark, where as Ren is dark, possibly falling towards light. It is also hinted he pursuing a personal agenda. Vader was not (until he found out he had a son and sister, but that was not immediate)
You expanded on what I said. What part of my comparison was false? Both are apprentices who fall to the Dark Side. Both wear black costumes with a mask. Both use a red lightsaber. Both are the #1 sidekick to the real villain. The simple description of each character is identical. Since Anakin IS Vader, I think arguing he's more like Anakin is a moot point. Let's meet in the middle ground. He's like Anakin shortly after his fall, as Anakin was also conflicted for a while. Experience and never completing his Jedi training are why Kylo Ren isn't as skilled. Being dark and falling towards light would be a direct comparison to Vader's conflicted state at the end of ROTJ, fighting to not be good.
"Finn = guy who escapes big ship in the beginning of the movie, hooks up with lost young hero on desert planet, and is used mostly as comedic relief after that = C-3PO"
This is not the character at all. Finn is a first order defector who is trying to escape his past and gets drawn into the good fight. You are trying to make a square peg fit a round hole here. You would have found more similarity if you had compared his character to Solo. He doesn't have the same streetwise nature though. He is a conditioned soldier and knows very little else.
Every movie has a comedic relief character. From not just spoilers, but reviews of people who have seen it, Finn appears to fill the comedic relief role. Yes, he's a soldier and 3PO is a droid. Both would rather stay away from a fight, as seen by Finn in the escape, not wanting to go back to to Jakku, and trying to get away while the others are talking to Maz. Sure, he ends up fighting in the end, but as a plot device, in this movie he's mostly used for comedic relief, and the source of inside intelligence on the First Order. The FO want him much in the same way the Empire wanted the droids in ANH. And of course, both characters, as I said, meet the central hero after crash landing on the desert planet while escaping a Star Dsetroyer.
"BB-8 = smartass little droid who contains vital information and because of that is being hunted by bad guys = R2-D2"
Again, as I was watching the film I felt I had met a new an distinctively different character in BB8.
But for the purpose of plot, BB-8 is almost identical to what R2-D2 was in ANH. He holds vital information both the good guys and bad guys want. He's the astromech for an X-Wing pilot who fires the final shot at the Death Star.
"Maz = small alien who speaks in riddles and focuses young hero as to their destiny = Yoda"
Maybe, maybe not. I didn't feel Maz was speaking in riddles, nor was she a Jedi Master, nor is she seemingly going to train Rey in the ways of the force. Infact I would suggest your description above is more what Obi Wan did for luke then Yoda. They are both aliens and they are both short so you are right there. Perhaps Maz is an ewok?
Apparently the Visual Dictionary says Maz is 1000 years old, and definitely Force sensitive, but never trained as a Jedi. I never insinuated Maz would train Rey at all. She's a short alien who uses "different" speech to convince the hero to accept their destiny. You're right, the same comparison can be made to Obi-Wan in this regard, but I went with Yoda due to the age and physical comparisons. Either way, you're conceding Maz is a copy of a major mentor figure in the OT.
"Starkiller Base = giant planet modified to become destructive force used to wipe out Rebel base = Death Star I AND II"
I will agree here, and this is the part I had the biggest issue with. I was disappointed that they had rehashed the super weapon idea again. I don't want to see another one of these. They don't really work.
I think this is the most common criticism I've seen so far, even from those who loved it.
"Starkiller Base = ice planet = Hoth"
They were on a planet with forest, as well as an ice planet, as well as a planet mostly covered in ocean. Every terrain has previously been used in star wars films, and the planet earth has run out of terrains for them to film on. What additional terrains would you suggest? Cities (done that), Space stations (Done that). Farmland (Naboo maybe). Perhaps they should go to a planet made of Jelly.
Fair point on only so many locations, and the inclusion of a forest. But did that have to include updated Snowtroopers, updated snowspeeders (even if they were used by the bad guys). I will admit this is one of my weaker criticisms - but the point is to show the sheer amount of copied material from the OT.
"Starkiller Base = having a weakness exposed in a trench that fighter spacecraft can infiltrate and blow the whole damn thing up = Death Star I"
Not quite right here. The ships failed initially. It needed a strike team to infiltrate and destroy it. You could have put an endor reference in here instead. Anyway, I do have a bit of a problem with a third death star as stated above. Surely they would have learnt some basic engineering lessons from the previous two. Mind you, this does ring true to reality. Look up the fate of the HMS Hood.
Again, I could have gone with either reference. I used DS I because of the trench run. The fact they needed a strike team was DS II, agreed. So Abrams used elements from both Death Star's. Again, that's conceding he took OT plot for this movie. Sure, real life may show repeats in mistakes. However, when it comes to a movie, doing this for the third time is lazy and lacks originality. Instead of picking apart the fine detail differences, look at how the general public, with just basic knowledge of the OT having watched it once or twice, will see this. This is the crowd TFA will need if it wants to break cumulative gross records, and DS III will result in a lot of casual people not going back for repeated viewings, if at all.
"Captain Phasma = mysterious soldier employed by the Empire hunting down heroes that wears a unique suit of armor with a cape over one shoulder that we only see a little of = Boba Fett"
Phasma is a dull and flat character with little point other than marketing. Phasma is also not a bounty hunter, nor mysterious. Fett had the aura of a badass about him. Phasma is there to sell figures.
Again, you're going for fine details. One is a commanding Stormtrooper, and one is a bounty hunter. Yep. But both are used in similar ways. Their job is to hunt down the Empire's/First Order's targets. Both have unique armor with a cape over one shoulder. Other people in this very thread have commented on Phasma being TFA's version of Fett. Just because it fails to succeed in this doesn't negate that's what they were going for.
"Luke Goes Into Seclusion On A Remote Island = where he goes after his failure = Yoda Goes To Dagobah"
Luke had left after failing to restore the Jedi order, due to loosing Ren to the dark side. Luke has not gone into seclusion though. The film stated he had gone to find the Jedi Temple. Wheras Yoda did nothing till Luke found him, Luke has been actively pursuing another as yet unknown goal.
The first four words of the opening crawl text are "Luke Skywalker has vanished." He disappeared as soon as Kylo had slaughtered everyone inside and destroyed the Jedi Academy (which by the way is a direct comparison to Anakin killing everyone in the Jedi Temple). The Resistance don't know where he is. The First Order don't know where he is. Han Solo doesn't know where he is. Apparently, this period of disappearance has been over the course of years. It takes a secret code that only R2 can unlock to even know where to go. That's not going into seclusion? Surely if this wasn't the case, Leia at a minimum would know where her brother is? And where did you get the impression Luke is pursuing some goal in his 2 minutes of screen time? He's spent years alone on an island!
"General Hux = Nazi-like leader in charge of Starkiller Base (ie Death Star I) who is shown to be disagreeable to Klo Ren (Darth Vader) - Grand Mofff Tarkin"
They are both leaders of an army. I felt the first order, particularly the character of Hux, was far more fanatical in its feel that the empire ever was. Tarkin was a far more measured and calculated leader. Hux did have a real feel of Nazi about him. Plus, does an army not need a general. What sort of leader were you expecting. Imperial officers are all generally cut from the same cloth.
The point was that throughout ESB and ROTJ, Imperial officers feared Vader and were under his command. Only in ANH did we have Tarkin (and Motti) who openly questioned him. Tarkin was in command (under Palpatine's rule), and was in charge of DS I. Here, we have Hux, who appears to not so much be under Ren's command is he is having to co-exist with him, and he does not get along with him. And Hux is in command of DS III. Sure, there are various levels of command in both empires, but the Hux character is a direct parallel to Tarkin's role in ANH, with the only real difference being Tarkin seemed to have more respect for Vader than Hux has for Ren.
"Snoke = mysterious leader seen mostly in hologram form seated on a throne and is the true leader of the bad guys = Emperor"
It seems we are destined to have a puppet master controlling things where the dark side is concerned. I guess thats just the way of the dark side. Rule of two and all that.
So, is that a concession to my point? And the "rule of two" was a purely PT concept brought up in TPM. I thought JJ wanted to distance himself from that? Just as an extra point, having now seen an image of Snoke, and knowing his role as the evil ringleader, I have a sneaking suspicion we may have it revealed he's actually Palpatine who survived, with advanced age and injuries accounting for his look.
"Poe = Rebel pilot who is an unsung hero and plays a vital role in the destruction of Starkiller Base (ie Death Star II) = Wedge Antilles"
Not unsung at all. Widely known and lauded as the hero pilot of the rebellion. This in my opinion is something the previous films have lacked (certainly star wars had no established rebel heroes). A rebel hero who is just that, a rebel hero who made his name as a pilot for the rebellion. Perhaps what Wedge would have become by ROTJ.
Maybe unsung was the wrong word. I meant background character. He has a prominant role, but is not on the same level as the main cast. He's a more fleshed out Wedge, and his role in destroying DS III was the same as Wedge's for sure.
"Kylo Ren vs Han Solo = young former Jedi turned Sith kills older father with lightsaber blow after father tries to convince him to let go of his hatred = Vader vs Obi-Wan"
Obi Wan was not vaders father. There was as far as I remember no trying to turn Vader back to light when Obi Wan and vader duelled. This did not come until return of the jedi and was luke, vaders son trying to convince his father to let go of his hatred. In the case of luke and vader, luke successfully brought the light side out of vader. In TFA, murdering his father pushed ren further from the light to the dark.
In the absence of an actual father, Obi-Wan was Vader's father figure. In that regard, Kylo killing Han is similar to Vader killing Obi-Wan. In ANH Obi-Wan may have given up on Vader, but in ROTS, he sure as hell wanted to convert Anakin back to the light side. Again, an amalgamation of the same character from different movies. Maybe they incorporated a little of Luke trying to change Vader into it too, but as straight generality, Han vs Kylo = Obi-Wan vs Vader.
"Leia = strong female leader who convinces man close to her to go and try to convert bad guy back to good = Leia (to Luke on Endor)"
Yes, but it worked with Luke. Han failed.
The end result is irelevant. She did the same thing in two different movies with two different characters. Yawn.
"Rey Obtains Millennium Falcon = hero goes to junk shop, meets with slimy junk dealer, finds an unexpected friend, and ends up finding ship (or important part of one) that gets them off desert planet = Qui-Gon goes to Mos Espa, meets Watto, discovers Anakin, and finds hyperdrive he needs to get off Tatooine"
We didn't get all of the betting a ship in a pod race with a ten year old who has never piloted a pod before garbage though did we. They needed a ship, and ended up stealing the Falcon, which wasn't their first choice. The film needed a way to bring the new characters together with the old. They used the falcon as that link.
You're back to picking apart my general similarity with finer details. Nothing I said was wrong. It was just fleshed out differently in each movie. As you'd expect. I'm sure that with some original thinking, they could have found the Falcon without having to go to an alien junk dealer on a desert planet after coincidentally finding an unexpected ally first, then coming across the ship/part of ship, that enables them to escape that desert planet.
"Max Von Sydow's character = person who supplies Poe/BB-8 with info the bad guys REALLY want, before being killed by Kylo Ren very early into movie = Captain Antilles, transporting Leia who provides R2-D2 with info the bad guys REALLY want, before being killed by Vader very early into movie"
No more than an extra in my opinion. The plot here was more important than the characters sadly, as I like Von Sydow.
An extra, just like Captain Antilles. And the role of that extra mirrored Antilles, even occurring at the same point of the movie with the same end result to the character.
"Than there's all the bits of fan service/cameos/Easter eggs. X-Wings, TIE Fighters, Star Destroyers, Chewbacca, Ackbar, Nien Nunb, various bits of dialogue, etc."
The film is supposed to be shot in an existing universe. Expect to see familiar parts of that universe. I far preferred seeing familiar objects and faces than seeing completely new everything, a la prequels. Its supposed to be the star wars universe after all. Why would it not have a familiar feel?
In a film so heavy with OT copies, not everything needed to be there. Having said that, I just wanted to point out a whole lot more OT bits stolen for this movie that didn't really deserve a full description. I agree that we needed some familiar stuff. TFA just goes overboard with it.
For the record, there was plenty familiar in the PT. The droids. Obi-Wan. Anakin/Vader. Palpatine. Tatooine. Fett. Jedi. Sith. The Lars homestead. Jabba the Hutt. Star Destroyers. White armored troopers. Tarkin. Death Star plans. Yoda. Royal guards. Then there's the things that are similar, or referenced at some point in the OT. Bail Organa. Coruscant. The Senate. Leia's mother. Twins separated at birth. Maul's Sith Infiltrator is an early design Vader TIE with an extended cockpit. The clone fighters are bulky, less streamlined X-Wings. Primitive race beating the technologically advanced army (Ewoks vs Gungans).
Why couldn't the ships have evolved in a 30 year period the way they did in the PT vs the OT? And if we need to keep TIE Fighters and X-Wings, why would we not see TIE Bombers, Interceptors, A-Wings, Y-Wings, etc.?
I think the problem with a lot of people who are disappointed is how old where you when you saw star wars. 99% of people on here saw it through the eyes of a child. How many of you broke it down so analytically at the time?
The thing I find ironic about this is that this is the exact argument I use on those that hate the PT. Yet the majority, who hate the PT, are 'right' and PT fans are 'apologists', while now things have been reversed, those that love TFA are 'right', and people who don't like/are not interested in TFA are 'haters'. Extremely hypocritical to me.
My final point, a lot of you were worried about Disney making this film too Disney. Its far more Star Wars and far less Disney then The Phantom Menace was, and Disney didn't even make that.
If by being "too Disney" you mean lighthearted, fun, and with some cartoonish characters, then you're right TPM was ore Disneyfied. If you mean milking a beloved franchise for all its worth by just giving its fans a straight up rehash of what they loved 30 years ago, then no, TFA is 100% Disney.
Ian
