Star Wars Episode VII (allowing for spoilers)

[Sparky Prime]

"She knows how to do it, so she MUST have learned how to do it in the past, problem solved" - that's a circular argument. There isn't enough evidence on-screen to suggest it, you can't use her ability as justification for learning that ability when it doesn't fit within the scope of what we know of her, at least not without some stupid exposition to cover it up.

You're way over simplifying it, and it's not a circular argument. A circular argument is something that essentially just restates the argument, effectively going in a circle. It doesn't provide any proof behind the argument being made. For example: the teacher is a good speaker because they can communicate effectively. Rey having learned some skills while growing up alone, surviving by salvaging parts from space ships on the other hand is a solid argument. It's naive to believe she wouldn't have learned any of the skills she's shown to have in the film in the 20 or so years she's grown up under such difficult conditions she's been in on that planet.

You're correct that it's canon, it was in a new Marvel comic and the book Aftermath.

Toldja.

In no way did I make it out to be bad, but I guess since we're on the internet it only makes sense that SOMEONE here would have to take any criticism as a complete and total condemnation.

Well when you posted a huge list of what you thought were story issues, technical issues, and nitpicks, overall being overwhelmingly negative about the film with hardly anything positive to say... How didn't you make it out to be a bad film exactly?

The Resistance has a handful of fighters, Kylo Ren has a Star Destroyer and squads of TIE Fighters at his disposal. You are reaching to kiss this movie's ass.

I didn't see the Star Destroyer at Takodana, did you? All we saw Kylo Ren had with him was a handful of TIE's, a bunch of Stormtroopers and the shuttle he arrived in. If the Star Destroyer had been there, you'd think it would have, you know, done something to stop the X-Wings. You're reaching to find more problems with the film.

At no point does anything here say that the RESISTANCE has a fleet that is protecting the NEW REPUBLIC, something you made up or misconstrued.

Did you even read the article? I haven't made up or misconstrued anything, it confirms the novel explains the fleet was destroyed along with the New Republic capital by the Starkiller. Various articles I've seen (including ones you've posted) say the New Republic only tolerates the Resistance because they offer them protection from the First Order, but at the same time the New Republic doesn't sanction their actions because they're afraid of a confrontation with the First Order (not that it does them any good in the end). There was even a line in the film (I think from Akbar) about the difficulty taking on the Starkiller without the support of their fleet.

I'm not leaving it out, I am the one who cited it. Your argument is nonsense, you cite the same thing I cite and then try to argue it doesn't say that. It says the entire Imperial Starfleet wouldn't be able to do it, and then says it'd take over a thousand ships with more firepower, that defines it.

And yet, your previous post you left that part of the line out. Context is everything, which you're trying to change to suit what you want it to say. And you've obviously completely misunderstood my point if that's what you got out of it, because I didn't cite the line and then argue against my own point. I cited the line to illustrate a reason why your interpretation of it doesn't work. It doesn't define how big the Imperial Fleet is at all. At best, Han was being hyperbolic given he doesn't know what would blow away a planet like that and even contradicts himself in the same sentence ("It'd take a thousand ships and more firepower than I've...", see the importance of that little bit you left off last time?) We cannot take that line as a literal statement about the Imperial Fleet. And while continuing my research on this subject, there actually is another line in the film that contradicts Han... During the Rebel briefing for the attack on the Death Star, it's brought up that the Death Star "carries a firepower greater than half the starfleet".

And still, we have no idea how many ships the Imperial fleet actually has.

Star Destroyers have heavy weaponry in the EU and powerful turbolasers in the film.

Oh, NOW you want to cite the EU when it's convenient for your argument. And again, we've never seen a Star Destroyer's turbolasers used in such a manner in the films to really gauge how powerful they are. We've only seen them used against other ships.

Your memory is incorrect, you misread something, or you read something apocryphal.

Lucas has changed his tune on this, back and forth, many times over the years. What day of the week did you read that on?

Exactly. Lucas had said at some point he considered the EU to be just as much a part of the canon as the films, although as Dom points points out, he hasn't been consistent on that view over the years. I believe the quote I remember was back before he started working on the prequel trilogy. Heck, Lucas himself has even used ideas originally introduced in the EU in the films when he started working on the prequels. The planet Coruscant for example was first mentioned in Timothy Zahn's book, "Heir to the Empire", published in 1991.

[Onslaught Six]

I read some of the thread and unfortunately it's a little too deep in the back-and-forth now to properly get involved so I'd like to use my post to take a step back and maybe do a few "re-establishing" arguments or something, taking in general gists without directly commenting on individual posts. Hope this makes sense.

Like Dom, I'm a lot more willing to forgive certain plot elements on the promise of future movies (or even novels and comics). If (for example) Maz being in possession of Luke's lightsaber is never addressed in Episode 8 (or 9, but it would seem to make a lot more sense to address it upfront in the first 20 minutes or so of Ep8) then fuck yeah, it's a stupid move, but I think it's okay to literally say "We're not going to deal with this right now" in a movie that we know months before its release will have sequels. I am more than willing to enjoy the ride for the moment on that one.

Rey does have a minor (IMO) problem with some of her shit not being immediately apparent. I'm willing to disagree that being Force sensitive automatically makes you a skilled pilot (my money is more on Rey's potential bloodline being a factor here; Skywalkers are good pilots) and I think there's a fair amount of assumption that Rey may have some piloting experience; she's already aware of the Millenium Falcon and also tries to hijack a different ship that's busted; I'd have to go watch it again and pay attention but the implication may be that this is a ship she has access to. It's not uncommon in the Star Wars universe for there to be "local" aircraft, after all--she has her Speeder, does that qualify as "aircraft?" Even Luke Skywalker had a T-16 he used to blast wamprats with back home (and they're not much larger than two meters!). Poe Dameron has never flown a TIE but can clearly do so pretty well just on the experience of flying an X-Wing--maybe in the Star Wars universe, piloting a ship is a lot like driving a car, considering they don't have automobiles. There may be differences (automatic vs. manual, clutch, windshield wipers in a different place) but the basic idea is the same.

Obi-Wan Kenobi walks into the Death Star in ANH and not only immediately knows where their shield generator is, but turns it off with a fucking knob--a knob that is labelled in plain English in the original cut. I am willing to believe the Starkiller Base shields are not much more complicated.

I don't think it's fair to use cut scenes or scenes from earlier drafts of scripts or versions of the movie to justify certain arguments. JT is going way off base on this "Luke lightsaber in space" thing; they obviously cut it from the final movie so it's now regulated to non-canonicity, the way Han Solo speaking to Jabba the Hutt on Tattooine in ANH was for 20 years (before Lucas fucked that up). Maz literally says in the movie "I ain't gonna explain this shit right now" which is enough to tell me that they're going to deal with it later. How much any "movie prequel" supplemental material like novels or comics will bear on this remains to be seen, but seeing 4+ different contradictory Transformers prequel comics come out for 4 different movies does not fill me with hope. (I know, different license, don't care.)

Also don't agree that they should've titled this "Episode 8" because there's stuff that can be told inbetween; there are two entire cartoon series with 5 and 2-3 seasons respectively that take place between Episodes 2/3 and 3/4, and Rogue One takes place between episodes 3 and 4, the Han Solo movie will likely do so as well, and the Boba Fett movie will either be wedged in there too or it'll be a ROTJ sequel. In the new movie paradigm the "episodes" moniker only makes sense in that we HAVE to use it to conform to the originals, but it's clear that we have 3 "main" movies and then everything else will just kind of happen on the fringes, so I'm okay with that.

I am sure that if I wanted to, I could find back story for that blue bird looking robot

Word is, she is Leia's tactical protocol droid. (Yes, she!) I was already going to buy the toy for this one because I liked the design but this sealed it.

[Dominic]

There are going to be Solo and Fett movies? What?


And, calling the new movie "Episode 8" because the last movie was numbered "Episode 6". Skipping a number to account for tie-in comics or TV would just be stupid.

[JediTricks]

George Lucas disagrees with you. He'd once said he considered the EU to be just as much part of the canon as the films.

Lucas has changed his tune on this, back and forth, many times over the years. What day of the week did you read that on?

Evidence he's ever changed his statement on this once? I highly doubt you will find any, Lucas has never, ever said the EU is canon.

Not sure you are right about this. If nothing else, you are insulting the audience with that as much as you say Abrams and directors like him do.

Yeah, it's MY fault, not the writer/director/producer's fault. Blame the audience, not the creator.

Disney might be playing the force differently. If the Marvel comics (which are ultimately a Disney product) are anything to go by, the force is much more powerful under Disney. (In one issue, Vader is shown taking out a Y-Wing by throwing a force-guided light saber at it.) Ren's ability to hold off a blaster shot is a greater degree of force ability than what was shown in the old movies. Disney likely changed the rules.

Exposition required to justify this, exposition not found.

But BB-8 is our only protagonist droid and we're forced to suffer him, yet he doesn't really do much to suggest heroism or pluck or bravery, there aren't many defining personal traits.

Does BB8 not shining really that big of a deal?

When he's the face of the movie, when his full name is said over and over in the film? Yeah.

That might have worked better, as Poe had already served his purpose at that point.

Bleh, new characters are needed to flesh out the world organically.

Abrams is not even writing the next movies, he's only a producer. Your argument comes down to blind faith based on suspect information, and that's fine for you to believe in, but it isn't usable as an argument.

Maybe. Maybe not. Wait for the next movie.

I can't tell if you're going to be disappointed when Space Jesus doesn't appear, or if you'll just twist what the next movie shows to fit your faith.

The Starkiller drained a star after two shots. It would have to move. That is just a given.

Script problem? Use the script to explain it away.

You're way over simplifying it, and it's not a circular argument. A circular argument is something that essentially just restates the argument, effectively going in a circle. It doesn't provide any proof behind the argument being made. For example: the teacher is a good speaker because they can communicate effectively. Rey having learned some skills while growing up alone, surviving by salvaging parts from space ships on the other hand is a solid argument. It's naive to believe she wouldn't have learned any of the skills she's shown to have in the film in the 20 or so years she's grown up under such difficult conditions she's been in on that planet.

What's naive is to assume she's learned a SPECIALIZED skill that doesn't directly correspond to her life. Repairs aren't scavenging, they share traits but are different.

Toldja.

One of us was the bigger man and admitted the other was right about something. You were not that man.

Well when you posted a huge list of what you thought were story issues, technical issues, and nitpicks, overall being overwhelmingly negative about the film with hardly anything positive to say... How didn't you make it out to be a bad film exactly?

When the first thing I said in that post was that it wasn't a bad film and the comments weren't meant to invalidate it.

I didn't see the Star Destroyer at Takodana, did you? All we saw Kylo Ren had with him was a handful of TIE's, a bunch of Stormtroopers and the shuttle he arrived in. If the Star Destroyer had been there, you'd think it would have, you know, done something to stop the X-Wings. You're reaching to find more problems with the film.

Funny how you have the exact same lack of proof but it doesn't hamper your argument. Funny that, funny how when you argue the truth always magically bends to your opinion regardless of the facts.

Did you even read the article? I haven't made up or misconstrued anything, it confirms the novel explains the fleet was destroyed along with the New Republic capital by the Starkiller. Various articles I've seen (including ones you've posted) say the New Republic only tolerates the Resistance because they offer them protection from the First Order, but at the same time the New Republic doesn't sanction their actions because they're afraid of a confrontation with the First Order (not that it does them any good in the end). There was even a line in the film (I think from Akbar) about the difficulty taking on the Starkiller without the support of their fleet.

I read the article, it doesn't say that, you conflated what it says. It says clearly the New Republic fleet was wiped out.

And yet, your previous post you left that part of the line out. Context is everything, which you're trying to change to suit what you want it to say. And you've obviously completely misunderstood my point if that's what you got out of it, because I didn't cite the line and then argue against my own point. I cited the line to illustrate a reason why your interpretation of it doesn't work. It doesn't define how big the Imperial Fleet is at all. At best, Han was being hyperbolic given he doesn't know what would blow away a planet like that and even contradicts himself in the same sentence ("It'd take a thousand ships and more firepower than I've...", see the importance of that little bit you left off last time?) We cannot take that line as a literal statement about the Imperial Fleet. And while continuing my research on this subject, there actually is another line in the film that contradicts Han... During the Rebel briefing for the attack on the Death Star, it's brought up that the Death Star "carries a firepower greater than half the starfleet".

And still, we have no idea how many ships the Imperial fleet actually has.

Your big point is a total fail, it doesn't change anything except your argument because you are backed into a corner and grasping at straws.

Exactly. Lucas had said at some point he considered the EU to be just as much a part of the canon as the films, although as Dom points points out, he hasn't been consistent on that view over the years. I believe the quote I remember was back before he started working on the prequel trilogy. Heck, Lucas himself has even used ideas originally introduced in the EU in the films when he started working on the prequels. The planet Coruscant for example was first mentioned in Timothy Zahn's book, "Heir to the Empire", published in 1991.

Never said it, you're both wrong. Coruscant got its name from Zahn's book, but the idea was created by Lucas and is seen in concept art, Zahn took the Imperial core planet and gave it a name. Lucas borrowed that name, he's allowed to take whatever he wants from the EU and put it into canon, that's his ability as ultimate creator.

Like Dom, I'm a lot more willing to forgive certain plot elements on the promise of future movies (or even novels and comics). If (for example) Maz being in possession of Luke's lightsaber is never addressed in Episode 8 (or 9, but it would seem to make a lot more sense to address it upfront in the first 20 minutes or so of Ep8) then fuck yeah, it's a stupid move, but I think it's okay to literally say "We're not going to deal with this right now" in a movie that we know months before its release will have sequels. I am more than willing to enjoy the ride for the moment on that one.

I don't really get this judging the movie based on faith thing, judge the movie on its own merits is how I see it. It didn't feel like something that needed to be discussed further, it was a cheaty shorthand way of doing it, cut scenes and the new EU covered it, it wasn't that satisfying.

Rey does have a minor (IMO) problem with some of her shit not being immediately apparent. I'm willing to disagree that being Force sensitive automatically makes you a skilled pilot (my money is more on Rey's potential bloodline being a factor here; Skywalkers are good pilots) and I think there's a fair amount of assumption that Rey may have some piloting experience; she's already aware of the Millenium Falcon and also tries to hijack a different ship that's busted; I'd have to go watch it again and pay attention but the implication may be that this is a ship she has access to. It's not uncommon in the Star Wars universe for there to be "local" aircraft, after all--she has her Speeder, does that qualify as "aircraft?" Even Luke Skywalker had a T-16 he used to blast wamprats with back home (and they're not much larger than two meters!). Poe Dameron has never flown a TIE but can clearly do so pretty well just on the experience of flying an X-Wing--maybe in the Star Wars universe, piloting a ship is a lot like driving a car, considering they don't have automobiles. There may be differences (automatic vs. manual, clutch, windshield wipers in a different place) but the basic idea is the same.

No, her speeder is a ground transport, the T-16 is an atmospheric flight craft made by the same company as the X-wing. Basically, the T-16 Skyhopper is a farmer's cropduster, and his skill with it translates to flying a fighter plane. Rey doesn't enjoy that with her fudgesicle speeder, it's akin to a motorcycle. Poe can fly a flight craft because he's a pilot of other sky/space craft, that's the argument every SW movie makes, TFA isn't alone there.

Obi-Wan Kenobi walks into the Death Star in ANH and not only immediately knows where their shield generator is, but turns it off with a fucking knob--a knob that is labelled in plain English in the original cut. I am willing to believe the Starkiller Base shields are not much more complicated.

R2 and 3PO tell and show him where to go and what to do.

I don't think it's fair to use cut scenes or scenes from earlier drafts of scripts or versions of the movie to justify certain arguments. JT is going way off base on this "Luke lightsaber in space" thing; they obviously cut it from the final movie so it's now regulated to non-canonicity, the way Han Solo speaking to Jabba the Hutt on Tattooine in ANH was for 20 years (before Lucas fucked that up). Maz literally says in the movie "I ain't gonna explain this shit right now" which is enough to tell me that they're going to deal with it later. How much any "movie prequel" supplemental material like novels or comics will bear on this remains to be seen, but seeing 4+ different contradictory Transformers prequel comics come out for 4 different movies does not fill me with hope. (I know, different license, don't care.)

It's in the final script, the scenes were cut. You can excise them from the story, although they appear in the novel, that's fine. I have no problem with this, I think it's not going to pay off ever in a future movie myself, but it's still an issue in this film to just have it there dangling, it doesn't really even carry that much weight.

And, calling the new movie "Episode 8" because the last movie was numbered "Episode 6". Skipping a number to account for tie-in comics or TV would just be stupid.

That isn't what I said, I said call it Ep 8 because the story between ROTJ and now is obviously rich enough to be TFA's own prequel(s).

[Sparky Prime]

What's naive is to assume she's learned a SPECIALIZED skill that doesn't directly correspond to her life. Repairs aren't scavenging, they share traits but are different.

It does directly correspond to her life. She turns in scavenged parts to survive. It's logical those parts would be worth more if they were in working order, especially given we saw Unkar Plutt would cheat Rey on what portions parts were worth. Given she wants to survive, it's logical she'd learn to fix any broken parts she finds. After 20 or so years at it, she obviously got to be pretty good at it.

One of us was the bigger man and admitted the other was right about something. You were not that man.

You think you're being the bigger man just because you admitted you were wrong about one little thing? Who has resorted to name calling here? Oh, right, that was you.

When the first thing I said in that post was that it wasn't a bad film and the comments weren't meant to invalidate it.

Oh, so just saying it wasn't a bad film somehow negates that you've been overwhelmingly negative about the film? No seriously, how is that supposed to give the impression you didn't think it was a bad film? The only thing I've seen you say you actually liked about it was the X-Wing stuff with Poe.

Funny how you have the exact same lack of proof but it doesn't hamper your argument. Funny that, funny how when you argue the truth always magically bends to your opinion regardless of the facts.

What lack of proof? The movie didn't show the Star Destroyer at Takodana, did it? That's a fact. You can't claim Kylo Ren had more support with him than he was actually shown to have with him in the film. Funny how it seems you're trying to bend the truth regardless of the facts but yet you accuse me of it instead.

I read the article, it doesn't say that, you conflated what it says. It says clearly the New Republic fleet was wiped out.

Way to ignore everything I said just because you refuse to acknowledge the Resistance had a larger fleet than just 2 squads of X-Wings. There is even a line in the film about taking on the Starkiller with out the support of their fleet.

Your big point is a total fail, it doesn't change anything except your argument because you are backed into a corner and grasping at straws.

It doesn't change my argument at all, nor am I grasping at straws. There's still absolutely nothing establishing the size of the Imperial Fleet in the films, and nothing you've posted has disputed that. The only thing that changed here is the statement that the firepower of somewhat over half the Imperial Fleet is about that of the Death Star. You did say "until you can find a source in the canon showing a better argument, this is the most definitive statement". Well there you go, Han Solo was wrong about the strength of the Imperial Fleet. And that was the ONLY line you'd clung to for support of your argument despite that line really not supporting your argument in the first place.

Never said it, you're both wrong. Coruscant got its name from Zahn's book, but the idea was created by Lucas and is seen in concept art, Zahn took the Imperial core planet and gave it a name. Lucas borrowed that name, he's allowed to take whatever he wants from the EU and put it into canon, that's his ability as ultimate creator.

He did, you're wrong. See, I can do that too. And you're missing the point. Lucas, even according to the quote you posted, wanted to keep the EU consistent with the films. But it didn't just work one way with the EU matching up to the films. Lucas had it work BOTH ways, using the EU for the films as well. Of course he's allowed to do that, but the point is he didn't have to.

[Shockwave]

Having looked at the links JT provided earlier, one of them actually said in the deleted scenes that it wasn't Coruscant that was destroyed.

[Dominic]

Evidence he's ever changed his statement on this once? I highly doubt you will find any, Lucas has never, ever said the EU is canon.

I recall it being said in the 90s, pre-Prequels (likely when Lucas was relying on license money from novels and such as a revenue stream).

Yeah, it's MY fault, not the writer/director/producer's fault. Blame the audience, not the creator.

Yes, I will blame the audience when the audience is demanding (or needing) explication about something that can be safely assumed.

If the Star Killer drains stars for power, then is it obviously going to have to move in order to find new stars....to kill.

Exposition required to justify this, exposition not found.

It is a stylistic choice more than a plot point. Disney seems to be playing the force differently than Lucas did. (Superman has gotten more and less powerful over the years. Times, and narrative styles, change.)

Bleh, new characters are needed to flesh out the world organically.

Finn is also new. Poe had served his purpose (unless there are plans to use him for something in the next movie or two).

Any idea why Finn ended up in a coma? Did Boyega sign on for the next movie?

I can't tell if you're going to be disappointed when Space Jesus doesn't appear, or if you'll just twist what the next movie shows to fit your faith.

I will wait for the next move before whining about something that is likely to be addressed in that movie. (And, if the hanging questions are not addressed or if they are addressed stupidly, I will complain about it *after* the next movie is out, rather than complaining that it was not addressed NOW.)

I don't really get this judging the movie based on faith thing, judge the movie on its own merits is how I see it. It didn't feel like something that needed to be discussed further, it was a cheaty shorthand way of doing it, cut scenes and the new EU covered it, it wasn't that satisfying.

What is the problem with assuming that something will be addressed in a later movie (that is known to be coming out)?

If this was Episode 5, you would be complaining that Jabba had not been on screen or that Fett was not shown arriving in Cloud City.

hat isn't what I said, I said call it Ep 8 because the story between ROTJ and now is obviously rich enough to be TFA's own prequel(s).

Earlier in this very thread, you were saying that people should not be required to be familiar with non-movie content (books, comics, shows) to see the movie. Now, you are saying that the numbering for "the Force Awakens" should count that stuff as a movie?

Abrams picked up with Episode 7, that is the number he used. Should not be a problem.

[JediTricks]

hat isn't what I said, I said call it Ep 8 because the story between ROTJ and now is obviously rich enough to be TFA's own prequel(s).

Earlier in this very thread, you were saying that people should not be required to be familiar with non-movie content (books, comics, shows) to see the movie. Now, you are saying that the numbering for "the Force Awakens" should count that stuff as a movie?

Abrams picked up with Episode 7, that is the number he used. Should not be a problem.

The amount of misunderstanding you are showing with that comment makes me downright sad at how poorly you comprehended my actual point. I am being entirely serious, it bums me out to a surprising degree.

Anyway, my actual point on that matter had nothing to do with books or nu-EU, everything to do with dialogue and information presented in the film itself. The film itself says "these things happened between then and now", and I was arguing that those things are important and eventful enough that they are this movie's defacto prequel-level content rather than just minor filler between ROTJ and TFA, that to me says TFA calling itself "Episode 7" is proving it's a soft reboot by using the same "we have this big prequel content we're building our story off of that we aren't showing you." I have no problem with this as a storytelling method, just saying it's disingenuous for Abrams to claim this movie isn't a reboot when it uses ANH's structure AND "untold past" storytelling methods.

It does directly correspond to her life. She turns in scavenged parts to survive. It's logical those parts would be worth more if they were in working order, especially given we saw Unkar Plutt would cheat Rey on what portions parts were worth. Given she wants to survive, it's logical she'd learn to fix any broken parts she finds. After 20 or so years at it, she obviously got to be pretty good at it.

Your evidence is that she must have picked up and become extremely fluent in a lot of skills on display in that time even though they have are at best semi-related to correlating with her shown role and the actions she describes about her life (such as never leaving the planet), and by that argument it proves that she has those skills, and you don't see that as circular logic. She pulls small parts out of a giant space ship, we see her cleaning off those parts, and that's it. We don't see complex machinery that works being her trade-in, just scavenged bits and bobs, Unkar Plutt doesn't test them for operational ability. Your leap of faith isn't structurally sound in the storytelling.

Oh, so just saying it wasn't a bad film somehow negates that you've been overwhelmingly negative about the film? No seriously, how is that supposed to give the impression you didn't think it was a bad film? The only thing I've seen you say you actually liked about it was the X-Wing stuff with Poe.

100% of your replies to my comments were filed under my "Story Issues, Technical Issues, and Nitpicks" section. You are picking and choosing, don't blame me because you're focusing on that part of the discussion. I will now highlight some positive statements that I made in this forum about it:

It's "fine", not as bad as Abrams' Star Trek movies, not as insulting to the canon, likable new characters for the most part

My take was 7/10. I will say that it didn't have much in the way that excited me, mostly it was Poe's material being brash and flying the X-wing. But it wasn't bad.

Slash-Film has the following notes from the Ep 7 script: http://www.slashfilm.com/star-wars-the- ... ns-ending/
as well as deleted scenes: http://www.slashfilm.com/star-wars-the- ... ed-scenes/
The stuff explaining the Republic's relationship to the Resistance comes off as very prequel-like, and further deconstructs the ROTJ victory.
Maz having Force powers would have been too much, had the prequels not happened I would have been ok with this, but now it's too late to just add random Force-adept non-Jedi who aren't with the Dark Side.

(Note that my comments are negatives about what they took out, supporting the choice to remove them)

All that stuff I said in the previous comment doesn't invalidate this movie's watchability though, I don't mean to suggest that.

but honestly, I think any age kid could watch this film overall.

Not sure how a new adversary (or even a continued fight) makes the movie bad though.

You are conflating "bad" with "deconstructionist".

So it felt pretty grounded to have Kylo Ben feel that pull, and even is horrified by the choices he made in killing his father.

And then after that it was just you and dom responding to my issues comments, leaving me little room to say anything positive.

What lack of proof? The movie didn't show the Star Destroyer at Takodana, did it? That's a fact. You can't claim Kylo Ren had more support with him than he was actually shown to have with him in the film. Funny how it seems you're trying to bend the truth regardless of the facts but yet you accuse me of it instead.

I don't have to have evidence, I'm not arguing from the negative, you are. Your argument is that they don't have additional resources which is why they take Rey and discontinue the hunt for BB-8, but you don't know that at all and the film doesn't say it or suggest it.

In fact, I do have evidence to my point, Kylo Ren's landing party includes TIE Fighters, TIE Fighters don't have hyperdrives, they are brought to locations by Star Destroyers. Where did we see even the more advanced SF TIE Fighters being carried earlier in this film, was it the fighter bay of a Star Destroyer? It was.

Way to ignore everything I said just because you refuse to acknowledge the Resistance had a larger fleet than just 2 squads of X-Wings. There is even a line in the film about taking on the Starkiller with out the support of their fleet.

I'm not ignoring it, I'm not seeing it AS I ALREADY SAID. You will have to quote it from that article, I don't see it there. As for the movie, I don't remember that line, here's what the script shows dialogue about the Resistance fleet...

LEIA: The First Order: they're charging the weapon again, now.
(then, heart sinking)
Our system is the next target.

C-3PO: Oh my. Without the Republic fleet, we're doomed.

[in a later scene]

VOBER DAND: Two more X-wings down. That's half our fleet destroyed.

It doesn't change my argument at all, nor am I grasping at straws. There's still absolutely nothing establishing the size of the Imperial Fleet in the films, and nothing you've posted has disputed that. The only thing that changed here is the statement that the firepower of somewhat over half the Imperial Fleet is about that of the Death Star. You did say "until you can find a source in the canon showing a better argument, this is the most definitive statement". Well there you go, Han Solo was wrong about the strength of the Imperial Fleet. And that was the ONLY line you'd clung to for support of your argument despite that line really not supporting your argument in the first place.

You are wrong, and your claim of "somewhat over half the fleet" is not cited. Way to take your victory lap while the ball lands in foul territory.

Never said it, you're both wrong. Coruscant got its name from Zahn's book, but the idea was created by Lucas and is seen in concept art, Zahn took the Imperial core planet and gave it a name. Lucas borrowed that name, he's allowed to take whatever he wants from the EU and put it into canon, that's his ability as ultimate creator.

He did, you're wrong. See, I can do that too. And you're missing the point. Lucas, even according to the quote you posted, wanted to keep the EU consistent with the films. But it didn't just work one way with the EU matching up to the films. Lucas had it work BOTH ways, using the EU for the films as well. Of course he's allowed to do that, but the point is he didn't have to.

None of what you're saying makes sense, none of what you're citing is accurate, and nowhere did Lucas say he wanted to keep the EU consistent with the films. It's like you're not even living in the same dimension as the rest of us.

Having looked at the links JT provided earlier, one of them actually said in the deleted scenes that it wasn't Coruscant that was destroyed.

You got me! Or wait, I myself already mentioned that on the previous page, in the post I think you're sourcing from when I said:

So Hosnian Prime is definitely not Coruscant, and audiences should know this by their visual simil... no, their name in the mov... no, their role in the stor... no.

I recall it being said in the 90s, pre-Prequels (likely when Lucas was relying on license money from novels and such as a revenue stream).

What you recall is not evidence, nor would we expect your recall to be accurate 100% of the time.

Yeah, it's MY fault, not the writer/director/producer's fault. Blame the audience, not the creator.

Yes, I will blame the audience when the audience is demanding (or needing) explication about something that can be safely assumed.

If the Star Killer drains stars for power, then is it obviously going to have to move in order to find new stars....to kill.

Speaking of your recall... you are responding to the wrong thing. That comment was about Rey being written as an audience proxy Mary Sue, not about the Starkiller.

It is a stylistic choice more than a plot point. Disney seems to be playing the force differently than Lucas did. (Superman has gotten more and less powerful over the years. Times, and narrative styles, change.)

Or they just weren't entirely consistent and it wasn't a choice but a mistake. You're swapping results for intents.

Finn is also new. Poe had served his purpose (unless there are plans to use him for something in the next movie or two).

Any idea why Finn ended up in a coma? Did Boyega sign on for the next movie?

You can be quite sure he's signed for whatever they damned well want, they learned from Robert Downey Jr.'s paychecks to make sure to get sequel contracts tied up for every actor they can so they don't have to give away quite as many dump trucks as money to get them back.

I would assume he ends up in a coma to heighten Rey's anger and solitude facing Kylo Ren, and her lonely task of finding Luke afterwards not gummed up with another character. I dunno though, the script makes clear his fate is uncertain. I am quite sure he'll return though, he's the main protagonist on the poster, he hits ethnic group targets if you're a callous marketing type, he's youthful, he can give a unique story insight, and he's likable.

What is the problem with assuming that something will be addressed in a later movie (that is known to be coming out)?

It's based purely on presumption of another's work rather than its own merits.

If this was Episode 5, you would be complaining that Jabba had not been on screen or that Fett was not shown arriving in Cloud City.

That's a terrible argument and I hope you know it's a terrible argument. We know how Fett arrives on Cloud City, he tracks the Falcon to Bespin, but Fett being on Cloud City isn't REMOTELY of the same importance to the story as Luke's lightsaber in TFA. In fact, the only McGuffins in ESB on that scale are Yoda and Luke's group of friends. How Yoda got to Dagobah is not part of the importance of his use as a story element. How Luke's friends get to Cloud City might be, but guess what happens after Luke leaves Hoth? They show how Luke's friends get from Hoth to Bespin, not leaving them dead on Hoth in one scene and then alive and being tortured on Bespin in a later one, or what would be a more accurate use here, showing them all in a coma on Yavin IV at the end of ANH and then alive and being tortured on Bespin towards the end of the 4th act of ESB.

[JediTricks]

Emo Kylo Ren and Very Lonely Luke twitter accounts throw down:

https://twitter.com/KyloR3n/status/6852 ... 65?lang=en

[Sparky Prime]

Your evidence is that she must have picked up and become extremely fluent in a lot of skills on display in that time even though they have are at best semi-related to correlating with her shown role and the actions she describes about her life (such as never leaving the planet), and by that argument it proves that she has those skills, and you don't see that as circular logic. She pulls small parts out of a giant space ship, we see her cleaning off those parts, and that's it. We don't see complex machinery that works being her trade-in, just scavenged bits and bobs, Unkar Plutt doesn't test them for operational ability. Your leap of faith isn't structurally sound in the storytelling.

I'm not saying that argument is what proves that she has those skills at all. The movie SHOWS she has those skills so whether you like it or not, she has those skills. My argument is simply that she must have learned those skills in the 20 or so years she'd been on Jakku, not that she was miraculously "automatically good" at it as you claimed. You admit the skills are at least semi-related. So why couldn't she have taught herself to be proficient at it in all the YEARS she'd been stuck on Jakku? It's not like she had anything else better to do with her time on a planet where there is nothing to do but salvaging parts from space ships. I'd also have to argue, she'd have to have some experience with complex machinery to be taking things apart, especially with a big ship like the Star Destroyer. Be a good way to get yourself killed taking something apart with no idea what you're doing. And she did seem to already be somewhat familiar with the whatever that ship the TIE fighters destroyed and the Millennium Falcon to suggest she may have worked on them before. So I really don't see it as a leap of faith when the movie does seem to drop some subtle hints.

Look at it this way... Han Solo is good with a blaster the first time we see him in episode 4, right? So was he "automatically good" at it just because we never saw him learn how to shoot, or tinker with it before we saw him shoot Greedo? Course not. It's implied he'd had plenty of experience with it by then. Rey is no different here.

100% of your replies to my comments were filed under my "Story Issues, Technical Issues, and Nitpicks" section. You are picking and choosing, don't blame me because you're focusing on that part of the discussion. I will now highlight some positive statements that I made in this forum about it:

You're mincing two different topics. Of course the majority of my replies have been directed towards that section, but this is a separate topic that has come about during that discussion. Yes, you did say you didn't think it was a bad film. But again, aside from saying you liked the Poe material and X-Wing stuff, you really didn't point out anything positive you liked in the film itself. I'm not picking and choosing anything, you really didn't say much of anything positive about the film itself. Instead, you posted a HUGE LIST filled with negatives that took up the MAJORITY of your post. There's absolutely no balance to indicate why you didn't think it was a bad film. The impression you give in that first post is that, despite saying it wasn't a bad film, you didn't seem to think it was a good film. Even in your quoted list here, none of it is really about what's in the film. It's mainly stuff outside of it like that you thought it was better than Abrams take on Star Trek or stuff they kept out of the film.

And then after that it was just you and dom responding to my issues comments, leaving me little room to say anything positive.

Nothing is stopping you...

In fact, I do have evidence to my point, Kylo Ren's landing party includes TIE Fighters, TIE Fighters don't have hyperdrives, they are brought to locations by Star Destroyers. Where did we see even the more advanced SF TIE Fighters being carried earlier in this film, was it the fighter bay of a Star Destroyer? It was.

Actually, the TIE/sf fighters that are featured in this film are, in fact, equipped with hyperdrives and deflector shields, unlike the previous TIEs. They don't need a Star Destroyer to bring them to a location.

I'm not ignoring it, I'm not seeing it AS I ALREADY SAID. You will have to quote it from that article, I don't see it there.

All you've said was that I "made it up" or "conflated what it says", you didn't address anything.
Admittedly the article does say the New Republic Fleet was what the Starkiller destroyed, but still, the point was the Resistance was vaguely allied with the New Republic against the First Order and counted on the fleet to back them up when the time came. They would have had more forces to work with if the Starkiller hadn't destroyed them.

You are wrong, and your claim of "somewhat over half the fleet" is not cited. Way to take your victory lap while the ball lands in foul territory.

I'm not wrong, and what do you mean my claim's "not cited"? When I said the quote came from the Rebel briefing for the attack on the Death Star, that wasn't specific enough for you? Or did you need that in MLA format? Either way, here's the exact quote:

ADMIRAL DODONNA: "The battle station is heavily shielded and carries a firepower greater than half the star fleet. It's defenses are designed around a direct large-scale assault. A small one-man fighter should be able to penetrate the outer defense.

None of what you're saying makes sense, none of what you're citing is accurate, and nowhere did Lucas say he wanted to keep the EU consistent with the films. It's like you're not even living in the same dimension as the rest of us.

Funny, seeing as even you admitted that the name Coruscant came from the EU, which George Lucas later put into the films. And even in the quote YOU posted, Lucas said: "But I do try to keep it consistent. The way I do it now is they have a Star Wars Encyclopedia. So if I come up with a name or something else, I look it up and see if it has already been used." As I pointed out. So what I've cited is indeed accurate. And Dom backs up the claim that Lucas had said the EU was part of canon at some point. Seems to be you're the one living in another dimension from the rest of us.