226
Was my memory wiped or was the Star Wars sequel trilogy just that forgettable?
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 23 Aug 2025
226 points (95.6% liked)
movies
1514 readers
653 users here now
A community about movies and cinema.
Related communities:
- !television@piefed.social
- !homevideo@feddit.uk
- !mediareviews@lemmy.world
- !casualconversation@piefed.social
Rules
- Be civil
- No discrimination or prejudice of any kind
- Do not spam
- Stay on topic
- These rules will evolve as this community grows
No posts or comments will be removed without an explanation from mods.
founded 5 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Well yes, but wasn't the 7th film a reboot of the 1st? It doesn't matter whether it was a good idea initially or not, the point is that changing your mind halfway through about who the big villain is doesn't leave you with enough time to establish a proper replacement.
This is a third act story beat that happened during the second act. The reason why the Vader storyline works is because it has nearly three films worth of development before its big climax.
was is a "reboot"? no. it was just JJ being JJ and unoriginal.
no one "changed their mind". you falsely decided he was the big villain, when he wasn't. as i said, the focus, rightly, should be on Kylo.
it's not a "third act" beat. you're just making up a bunch of stuff because of your assumptions about Snoke. it was great precisely because it flips the script on what we've seen before (ie. Vader/Sidious), as SW has a habit of doing.
it just sounds like you want the OT all over again. just go watch the OT, we had that already.
when kylo struck down Snoke i jumped out of my seat in the theatre in triumph. it was bold AF and i loved it. it showed we had a real storyteller for once. the theatre was in awe. it was awesome.
I guess you watched some alternative universe version of the first two films, because Smoke was 100% the big bad until he was killed off. You literally just acknowledged him as an Emperor re-tread lol
him being an Emperor retread doesn't necessitate him being the big bad. it's just means he's evoking notes of a previous character.
we watched the same film. you just won't let go of your assumptions and let them tell you the story. instead, you're trying to tell them the story, and you can't make it fit. that's why it bothers you.
"Evoking notes" of the previous character...who was the big bad.
yes, Palpatine was. Snoke was not, nor was he beholden to be.
But you said J.J. Abrams was being "unoriginal" with The Force Awakens. In other words, copying the original film/trilogy. In the original trilogy, the Emperor is clearly the big bad and this is established in the first film. So if Smoke is the equivalent of Palpatine, as was also established in the first film of the sequel trilogy, he is clearly the big bad up until Rian Johnson kills him off prematurely. Your core argument here doesn't line up.
The emperor was a footnote in ANH. He's mentioned in passing like once or twice. The big bads of that film were Tarkin and Vader, not the Emperor.
here, let's try this another way.
in ANH, Luke and Han vie for the attention of Princess Leia, setting up an interesting love triangle! Luke even gets a kiss! so according to you, Luke and Leah can't POSSIBLY be related, since incest is gross and illegal, and it would ruin the love triangle.
so when it is revealed that they ARE brother and sister, did George Lucas betray the vision of George Lucas that was CLEARLY set up in ANH and thus ruin Star Wars forever?!
no, of course not.
Replying again with a strawman argument isn't going to convince me. Sorry champ.
it's not a strawman. XD lol that's literally reality.
just because something is setup, doesn't mean one is beholden to it in the future.
If it's "literally reality", I'm sure you can point to where I said this:
I don't recall ever mentioning Luke or Leia's relationship.
hey, i'm sorry this is hard for you to understand. good luck with life!
i think you're just drawing too many conclusions that are simply not necessitated. that's really the "core argument." you assume too much. none of what you think is necessitated to follow, is necessary.
just because JJ is unoriginal doesn't mean anything HAS to follow from that in the future, whatever his intentions may or may not have been. it literally doesn't matter because 1) we don't know, and more importantly 2) he wasn't given control of the trilogy or the second movie.
anyway, JJ never knows what's in his mystery boxes, he just sets them up as a narrative trick.
we needed a real story here, and Rian gave us that. sadly, some ppl couldn't handle it.
the most interesting thing about Snoke is that Kylo overcame him. that's it. he's a narrative stepping stone for the real focus: Kylo.
Rian is the best thing to happen to SW since Filoni.
Of course it doesn't. You also don't have to make a good film or try to contribute to a cohesive trilogy, you can just "subvert expectations" and apparently some people will worship you for it.
i'm glad you can admit now that Snoke was not beholden to be the "big bad." that's a big step for you.