Mara Jade Skywalker Posted April 13, 2016 Share Posted April 13, 2016 or read Marvel Star Wars Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poe Dameron Posted April 13, 2016 Share Posted April 13, 2016 Anyway, those specifics aside, even if I buy your interpretation of Han's actions, it doesn't change my point-- he was still LEAVING to go be awesome space pirate. I think if a part of Han's reason for leaving was to playing a desperate card for Leia's attention, it does alter your point. Or do you not believe that Han wanted Leia to ask him to stay? And I never thought he kept that reward money that the Alliance could use. How heroic would that be? That's why in the years between films he didn't pay of Jabba. I'm sure he could have wired him some credits. Frankly, all of that's a bit of a plot hole. Why NOT take whatever part of the reward money he needed to go pay off Jabba right after A New Hope? I mean, he obviously believed that he could still clear his debts with Jabba throughout ANH (even if you jettison the Special Edition scene where he works out a deal). It's not THAT much money that we're talking about if Luke can sell his speeder on the street for a good fraction of it. Certainly not enough to break the Rebellion. Keeping Han, Chewie, and the Falcon within the Rebellion would have more than justified the cost. So, why not just make a side trip to Jabba then and there? So, let's just add to it with the idea that, for some reason, Han didn't go see Jabba because that would mean he couldn't come back. Maybe he'd have to fulfill the remainder of his contract and go back to work for Jabba or something. I don't know. But the evidence is there that it's not as simple as wiring over the credits or he would have done it. In the end though, I think the bottom line is that you're looking for subtext in a plot hole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Driver Posted April 13, 2016 Author Share Posted April 13, 2016 Hardly a plot hole when, even if I give you Empire (which I don't), his reflex to leave is literally called out in two other movies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poe Dameron Posted April 13, 2016 Share Posted April 13, 2016 Hardly a plot hole when, even if I give you Empire (which I don't), his reflex to leave is literally called out in two other movies. Honestly, I'm not even sure if you can call it "running away" in A New Hope even if that's what Luke accused him of. I mean, he made it clear from the beginning that he was a mercenary. He did a job, he got paid, it was time to leave before the planet went boom. His reason for staying wasn't even the cause at the time, it seemed to be more to save Luke and Leia. Is it running away when you don't get roped into a suicide mission for a cause you don't believe in? Han's journey there was from self-serving, to serving his friends in A New Hope, and finally serving a cause in Return of the Jedi. I don't think it was actually learning not to run away from things. Which leaves The Force Awakens. Which brings me back to my original point. They may have left in Leia the bulldog. But they made both Han and Luke quitters. So, it may be that the screenwriters didn't understand the characters any better than the EU authors did sometimes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Driver Posted April 13, 2016 Author Share Posted April 13, 2016 Admins: can we instal a "-1" button? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Odine Posted April 13, 2016 Share Posted April 13, 2016 This guy could argue the sky wasn't blue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Svenn Posted April 13, 2016 Share Posted April 13, 2016 I think you're misinterpreting the vision.She was a witness. She saw herself as a child, she saw Luke, she saw Kylo killing Jedi. She wasn't actually there.It's a mixed bag. In some cases she was there and in some cases she wasn't. She wasn't on Bespin and she wasn't with Luke by the fire, but otherwise I think she is seeing visions of her own past and future. The last part of her vision is a vision of her future confrontation with Kylo, which she also sees from a first-person perspective, rather than in the third-person. So it's not true that it's all from a witness perspective. I'd be interested in getting your impression after you go back and watch again with my interpretation. In the rain scene, Rey wakes up face-down on the ground. She looks up to see a guy in a hat getting ready to strike her. There's nobody else there for him to be attacking. Kylo then impales the guy and the scene ends with him stepping towards Rey with his saber down (not in attack position). That's how I remember it anyway. I'll go back and look again too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poe Dameron Posted April 13, 2016 Share Posted April 13, 2016 This guy could argue the sky wasn't blue. Funny, I thought that was pretty solid and in line with the movie. Han flat out tells Leia he's not in it for the mission, he's in it for the money. He takes Luke and Ben for money. He's happy to let Ben take risks because he's already done more than he bargained for. He's perfectly happy to let Leia be executed before Luke dangles a reward in front of his nose. But when the ending comes and he does what he's said he's going to do from his introduction, that's running away? No, it's just being self-serving. Han was about Han. Getting his money and clearing things with Jabba was his goal. Getting killed for a revolution wasn't. It really doesn't fit with the motivation of The Force Awakens at all. In fact, it's sort of the opposite. He went from leaving because he didn't think the Rebellion was his problem in A New Hope (but returning when he realized he did care). To actually running away from his problems in The Force Awakens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Driver Posted April 13, 2016 Author Share Posted April 13, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Driver Posted April 13, 2016 Author Share Posted April 13, 2016 I think you're misinterpreting the vision.She was a witness. She saw herself as a child, she saw Luke, she saw Kylo killing Jedi. She wasn't actually there.It's a mixed bag. In some cases she was there and in some cases she wasn't. She wasn't on Bespin and she wasn't with Luke by the fire, but otherwise I think she is seeing visions of her own past and future. The last part of her vision is a vision of her future confrontation with Kylo, which she also sees from a first-person perspective, rather than in the third-person. So it's not true that it's all from a witness perspective. I'd be interested in getting your impression after you go back and watch again with my interpretation. In the rain scene, Rey wakes up face-down on the ground. She looks up to see a guy in a hat getting ready to strike her. There's nobody else there for him to be attacking. Kylo then impales the guy and the scene ends with him stepping towards Rey with his saber down (not in attack position). That's how I remember it anyway. I'll go back and look again too.Okay now I'm kinda blown in the mind! I'm not sure I agree that Mr. Hat was about to attack her and Ren saved her-- it seemed like hat was running for her ( to protect her?)... but I definitely can see how that scene might be one of her own memories now that you see it. Interesting! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Driver Posted April 13, 2016 Author Share Posted April 13, 2016 This guy could argue the sky wasn't blue. Funny, I thought that was pretty solid and in line with the movie. Han flat out tells Leia he's not in it for the mission, he's in it for the money. He takes Luke and Ben for money. He's happy to let Ben take risks because he's already done more than he bargained for. He's perfectly happy to let Leia be executed before Luke dangles a reward in front of his nose. But when the ending comes and he does what he's said he's going to do from his introduction, that's running away? No, it's just being self-serving. Han was about Han. Getting his money and clearing things with Jabba was his goal. Getting killed for a revolution wasn't. It really doesn't fit with the motivation of The Force Awakens at all. In fact, it's sort of the opposite. He went from leaving because he didn't think the Rebellion was his problem in A New Hope (but returning when he realized he did care). To actually running away from his problems in The Force Awakens.You've over-complicated my original point so much I'm going to restate it. Regardless of the actual narrative or plot machinations, it is in the DNA of Han Solo as a character to run from a moral dilemma. We all know Star Wars is Campbellian, and one of the ways that paradigm defines a hero is for them to refuse a call to action only to realize their error and to then return and do their heroic duty. If you want to keep talking yourself in circles with on the nose details about how many credits Han owed Jabba knock yourself out. My larger point is that outside of the actual narrative, Han's motivations as a fictional character always seem self-serving and cowardly (despite his bravado) but he always reverses that course to be a hero, and his actions in TFA fit that perfectly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Odine Posted April 13, 2016 Share Posted April 13, 2016 This guy could argue the sky wasn't blue. Funny, I thought that was pretty solid and in line with the movie. Han flat out tells Leia he's not in it for the mission, he's in it for the money. He takes Luke and Ben for money. He's happy to let Ben take risks because he's already done more than he bargained for. He's perfectly happy to let Leia be executed before Luke dangles a reward in front of his nose. But when the ending comes and he does what he's said he's going to do from his introduction, that's running away? No, it's just being self-serving. Han was about Han. Getting his money and clearing things with Jabba was his goal. Getting killed for a revolution wasn't. It really doesn't fit with the motivation of The Force Awakens at all. In fact, it's sort of the opposite. He went from leaving because he didn't think the Rebellion was his problem in A New Hope (but returning when he realized he did care). To actually running away from his problems in The Force Awakens. Yeah, and you put your case so strongly and well that Im pretty much right there with you. Hence why I say if you came up with a reason the sky isn't blue I'd probably have a hard time refuting you. Are you related to CM in anyway? But Driver is spot on. Hans nature is to run. He's a scoundrel. And just like Driver already said, what makes him more than just a scoundrel.. and makes him a HERO... is that he fights his nature, and comes back. That doesn't negate the very essence of his character though. Which once again for posterity, is to cut and run. Look out for number one. Be a scoundrel. I just found italics. Isn't that exciting? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryn Posted April 16, 2016 Share Posted April 16, 2016 4. The more I watch it, the more I think Han knows who she is. Not at first, but by the time he's giving her a gun and wanting to keep her close with a "a job" the looks he gives her tells me he's realized who she is, but doesn't feel it is his place to say anything-- but he clearly wants to protect her. I keep thinking it's similar to the Newt character in Lonesome Dove and him suspected being Call's son. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Driver Posted April 16, 2016 Author Share Posted April 16, 2016 Timely reference, Grandpa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest El Chalupacabra Posted April 16, 2016 Share Posted April 16, 2016 Are you related to CM in anyway? Odd you ask that, because for a time, I suspected that Poe was a CM alias at first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Metropolis Posted April 16, 2016 Share Posted April 16, 2016 Abrams said the other day that Rey's parent arent in TFA. So either he was misleading someone(likely), or was dropping a bigger that will have people coming up with even more theories for the next year and a half. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowDog Posted April 16, 2016 Share Posted April 16, 2016 Palpy theory gaining steam!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 16, 2016 Share Posted April 16, 2016 Maybe Ghostie Wan got busy and she is a Kenobi. That's why her parents never came back. He's dead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Driver Posted April 16, 2016 Author Share Posted April 16, 2016 Abrams also said Khan wasn't in STar Trek Into Darkness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Metropolis Posted April 16, 2016 Share Posted April 16, 2016 Because he was misleading us. Which he might have been doing at that Q&A. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Darth Hunter Posted April 16, 2016 Share Posted April 16, 2016 Abrams said the other day that Rey's parent arent in TFA. So either he was misleading someone(likely), or was dropping a bigger that will have people coming up with even more theories for the next year and a half.He later clarified his comments. He meant to say, she doesn't know who they are, but that doesn't mean they aren't in the film: http://www.ew.com/article/2016/04/15/star-wars-force-awakens-jj-abrams-rey-parents Yeah ok. Lucasfilm probably got on his case and so he ended up having to backtrack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pavonis Posted April 16, 2016 Share Posted April 16, 2016 Does Abrams matter at this point? Since others are writing and directing future installments, won't their input into the matter of Rey's parentage be more relevant? Maybe I'm not clear on exactly how much backstory has been decided yet. If the "Story Group" has any function at all for the films, I would imagine that knowing the sequels' back stories would be part of its responsibilities. Though if that is the case, I'm surprised nothing has leaked out on the subject (recall Ben Franklin and his thoughts on secrecy - "three can keep a secret, if two are dead"). I don't think Rey's parentage is as important as we think. It should be possible for someone without a pre-existing connection to the old Jedi-Sith paradigm to make a major contribution to galactic history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 16, 2016 Share Posted April 16, 2016 Plenty of people without that connection have made a major impact: Han, Lando, Mon Mothma, Tarkin, and countless other characters. But the saga has been about the Skywalkers thus far, so it makes sense that it would continue to be. And TFA was about Rey. Much like ANH was about Luke Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poe Dameron Posted April 16, 2016 Share Posted April 16, 2016 Plenty of people without that connection have made a major impact: Han, Lando, Mon Mothma, Tarkin, and countless other characters. But the saga has been about the Skywalkers thus far, so it makes sense that it would continue to be. And TFA was about Rey. Much like ANH was about Luke We've already got a Skywalker in Kylo Ren though. It can be argued that the Skywalker base is already covered by him. Especially if my belief that he will end up in a redemption story comes through. That would a Skywalker the main story arc again, with Rey as an instrument. It also gives Rey her own Luke-like journey where she is burdened by her family's dark past. And, heck, if that's not enough, you can have them fall in love and merge the Skywalker/Palpatine lines together. I'm sure everyone was looking for that to happen... Right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Driver Posted April 16, 2016 Author Share Posted April 16, 2016 Does Abrams matter at this point? Since others are writing and directing future installments, won't their input into the matter of Rey's parentage be more relevant? Maybe I'm not clear on exactly how much backstory has been decided yet. If the "Story Group" has any function at all for the films, I would imagine that knowing the sequels' back stories would be part of its responsibilities. Though if that is the case, I'm surprised nothing has leaked out on the subject (recall Ben Franklin and his thoughts on secrecy - "three can keep a secret, if two are dead"). I don't think Rey's parentage is as important as we think. It should be possible for someone without a pre-existing connection to the old Jedi-Sith paradigm to make a major contribution to galactic history.All of this, yes. As I said above-- i have no doubt that Rey, in the script, was initially written as a Skywalker. Whether they stick to that or not, I don't know. Abrams is part of the brain trust, but he's not writing or directing anything else. The problem is, they've dug a bit of a hole for themselves. All of Rey's abilities and amazingness, to me, is due to her being a Skywalker. They're going to have to sell her abilities extra hard if she isn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts