What do you think would be the best direction for the Jedi? Let me know below! Don't forget to watch my exclusive breakdown of The Last Jedi: nebula.tv/videos/lsoo-star-wars-the-last-jedi-8-years-later Signing up to Nebula also directly supports the channel :)
I genuinely think that the Jedi have lost their mysticism, they are far too exposed for the viewer. While I agree with their human traits and flaws, the myth of the Jedi is lost, at least for me.
I preferred the mysteriousness of the Jedi that was certainly there in the classic trilogy. It was sadly lost starting with the prequel trilogy. The short fan film Premonition where a young female Jedi, to protect her daughter, must confront and fight a Sith was a particular improvement in my view. Thank you, Tom, for your Star Wars review.
WHY u want feedback? 20:50 YOU DON'T HAVE DIRECTIONS!? The plan is explore -content series- on Scriptwriting ? whut? u have time , funding for that? u better launch your own IP, seriously . 1st Hot Take? Why would your and or OURS idea(s) even matter about Star Wars? The Original Creator can't even interfere on that ... He's the most confused on that btw... Obs When Nebula is going to evolve Smart TV Ux , it's kinda horrible to follow u there...
Despite my admiration for your videos, you are erroneously this time. George Lucas provided a fairly intricate explanation of how the jedi, or champions of the light, decide to serve the republic rather than the force and the highest good. The precuels demonstrate the hyprocesy of adhering to political systems and the complications that exist around following beliefs instead of virtues.
The Jedi I feel are part of a much bigger problem within Star Wars. I think it’s in a tug and pull between hard Science fantasy and Soft Science fantasy. I feel the more the Force is explained, cosmic and living force, the struggles that some have in powers, and the costs that those powers do to you….it becomes a lot less like soft magic and more like a hard magic system. Star Wars I feel is at a turning point. Do we keep digging into the past and go into the Old Republic era….or do we remake the franchise almost completely with a new saga. New characters, heroes, villains, factions, force users, a new galaxy to explore. Something to make Star Wars unrecognizable in terms of story but still astheticly familiar.
The thing about Star Wars is that I am just filled with so much apathy. My Sorrow and Frustration has mellowed into banal disinterest, especially as culturally these stories just no longer have anything new to say. I'm certainly interested in Andor Season 2, but after that I may just tap out for good...
Maybe it's time to put these types of stories to rest. The Jedi don't need their stories told anymore. What more could you expound on them that hasn't been said?
Tbf, they never had anything new to say to begin with. Lucas' original trilogy are wonderful films, but completely derivative of centuries worth of fiction and storytelling.
The idea that people's disconnect from transcendent reality is becoming so total that even in fiction and stories people are losing the ability to look beyond the world of objects and material to see the myths and ideals, the idea that stories are being reduced to merely fictional simulations of a completely profane world is absolutely horrifying.
Mythic heroes were often less than ideal, even if they held ideals, so I think in principle questioning Jedi and especially their larger role is a good thing, because Star Wars isn't just about them either...
It's gotta be 2 things at once: 1. The scientific revolution / enlightenment being revamped into a modern religion (new atheism) 2. The demoralization/complete-deconstruction of western institutions such as Christianity, the government, and the nuclear family If we didn't have these things, we'd have a lot more fantasy staying mythological and symbolic, which is what we NEED more than anything
Sincerity must win over sardonic irony for any franchise to survive. We have deconstructed these stories for the sake of deconstruction, and in the end, it doesn't help anyone. Something to remember with Star War is that Lucas originally wanted to make a Flash Gordon movie. He couldn't get the rights, so he decided to make an original IP based on Flash Gordon, King Arthur, and Samaria film. He even bought the right to remake The Hidden Fortress to make ANH. I think we need new franchises based on what writers sincerely loved. We don't need another Terminator, SW, Jurassic Park, or whatever shit remake or reboot. Take a cance on something new.
It's this but also deeper -- the Joseph Campbell aspect of Lucas' writing is deeply spiritual -- mythic stories are like a culture/tribe/society's shared dreams. These new films are spiritually barren.
@asmrbuddha9033, very true. These new movies are devoid of any spiritual or mythical depth. Deconstruction is the flavor of the day. Everything is deconstructed until nothing can be mended or made whole again. This makes for terrible storytelling.
@@asmrbuddha9033 I agree, I think that is the most glaring weakness of these recent movies. I'm not even a die hard Star Wars fan and that is obvious to me. It's apparent that the folks in Disney truly don't understand how much those moments resonate with people. It's the connective tissue, for the story. The light saber battles and the dog fights are cool but they are also informed by the spiritual part, it's all connected, but the decisions makes are glossing over this and the movies an shows suffer as a result.
YES. Movie studios should absolutely take a chance on something new. However, they won't. Because they only care about money, and they know that adding remakes and sequels and what not to established franchises that people already love, they know that will rake in money for them so they deem it a safe investment. They have zero interest in making risky investments when they know they have the option not to
@aejenkins3048 but if the reboots and remakes end up being $300 million flops, they are not making any money. They need to take some risks, especially on smaller budget projects. I've been saying this for over 20 years.
I am firmly on the camp of the more mythical approach to Star Wars over the cynical, sociological approach. Star Wars to me was always meant to be more of a mythical story, with the Jedi standing as paragons of virtue and self control. That doesn’t mean that there can’t be more complex stories relating to the Force and how people discuss the Light and the Dark, but if the idea of an objective Good and Evil is removed, then it doesn’t represent was Star Wars is supposed to be. That heart needs to remain intact, no matter the story.
I'm with y'all I do lean mythical myself. However I think one of my favorite Star Wars stories is what was going on in KotOR 2 with Kreia raging against the idea of the force itself. It still felt mythical, but also was certainly deeply questioning the role of not only the Jedi and the Sith but the force itself. So y'all think that fits mythical or sociological? Or maybe third path, like if the Sith and Jedi were the titians, maybe the fallout of a larger arc would have what emerges be like the greek gods overthrowing their predecessors.
It's not detached. If star wars decides that it wants to be sociological (or just decides it doesn't know HOW to tell a mythical story), then you'd worry about flow-on effects.
On the other hand, if you had to choose one direction for Star Wars and one for Star Trek, Star Wars was always more grounded and realistic with war, poverty and disease. Where as Star Trek was a idealistic utopia of higher people. So it would make sense for Star Wars to go socioeconomic realistic and for Star Trek to go mythical fairy-tale. Instead now both are mixed messes.
The best depictions of the Jedi are when Yoda describes to Luke how we are more than just flesh, and when Luke throws away his lightsaber instead of killing Vader. Both of these events have one thing in common: They're emotional, they resonate with you. With the prequels, Lucas had good ideas that were horribly executed. He wrote the jedi as being a virtuous, ineffective and stiff institution, blinded by their inflexible ideologies and thus allowing fascism to grow (aesthetics vs praxis). The problem is that the execution made most of it fall on deaf ears, making the audience unaware if they were supposed to identify with the jedi or not. The jedi are the best when they're wise and capable of understanding the world beyond their egos. Not when they're space monks or lightsaber-wielding superheroes.
The fact that Return of the Jedi puts Obi-Wan and Yoda on opposite sides of the Vader question and allows both of them and Vader to be Force Ghosts is meaningful in a way. It moves that little element beyond a trapped sense of good or evil history to a level of heightened spiritual consciousness instead. Anakin isn't a good man at the end per se. But he's shed all of the things that made him a petty, scared, cruel man and held him back from enlightenment. Even Obi-Wan's lies and desire to kill Vader aren't "True Jedi"-like... but this just means there's more to the Jedi thing than getting to Jedi heaven. The ghosts are still "human" and flawed.
Part of the "issue" of the Jedi in the prequels is that by the time of the prequels they were very much a diminished order- the pride before the fall, just like the republic they served.
George said that the prequel Jedi were the "most moral of anybody in the galaxy" (his words). He genuinely believes this, and because of his Buddhist beliefs, he views the attachment rule as noble. But many fans thought George was sending the opposite message. He also said that balance is about destroying the Sith, he never once said the Jedi needed to be destroyed. But fans think the balance is about destroying both the Sith AND the Jedi.
Some Star Wars purists hate Andor tho. Andor is a brilliant TV show based in the Star wars universe, but some don't consider it "real" Star Wars. The problem with Disney is they are chasing real Star Wars for the purists, while also being an incompetent company, and while also appeasing other cultural agendas. It's just a total mess!!!
My admittedly purist stance on Andor is yes it's very good, but why the hell did it (spinoff story about a spinoff character from a spinoff movie) get triple the budget that Kenobi had (two main characters of the entire saga) that same year? I can't enjoy it properly because of those poor executive choices
There are many fan-made features writing good Jedi stories. Jedi are just knights, martial artists, or monks. If you can't tell a good story with those classic archetypes, then you're overthinking it.
@@tauIrrydah The Raid (Martial Artists), Space Marine 2 (Knights), and Hacksaw Ridge (Monk) would disagree. There are many, many ways to interpret classic archetypes into good stories.
It's gotten so bad they need to go into major retcon territory and basically start afresh. Post-RotJ needs to be a low-Force user universe. If a story involves a Jedi, they should really lean into the spiritual element and give it some actual chops. Actually draw from (and obviously slightly modify for flavour) real traditions like Advaita Vedanta and Buddhism and Christian mysticism, which are already influences for the Jedi. Anything set in the prequel (or pre-prequel) era can be free to effectively be a high fantasy setting (equivalent to a high magic setting like something Sanderson would write), while the Empire and post-RotJ eras should be low fantasy/low magic, like the original films themselves.
What their doing now is the reboot. That's kind of what we had before. No Ahsoka... Luke was trying to collect enough about the Jedi to figure out how to move forward, trying to train Leia, but she was busy helping put the Republic government back together. Luke started a new order about 7 years after RotJ, 2 years after Thrawn's defeat, and watching him start from scratch to try to figure out what the Jedi should be was one of the more fascinating aspects of the stories. Truce at Bakura, the X-wing novels, quite a few short stories collections created the low Jedi period, so it did mean something when the Jedi began to emerge again, and one of the struggles of the new order was being so few in number.
While i understand why rebooting is catnip for fans, it really doesn't address the underlying problem and new writers will simply bring back all the stuff they like... including the stuff which undermined the property in the first place. All that is necessary is for enough writers to write the kind of stuff that's good that people start emulating their example. The bad stuff will fall away from non-use and fans will create elaborate fan-theories to make sense of it all. To throw out an example of a story that's technically in canon but ignored is The Punisher becoming an angel. When the next series debuted (written by Garth Ennis of The Boys fame), he threw in a throw-away line about the angels. Didn't explain why Punisher is no longer dead and an angel, just that he's back. Problem sorted as Ennis went on to write the sort of Punisher tales that people wanted to emulate in future runs. Of course, last time I checked he was a ninja, but bad ideas do love happening and the fix is easy enough... stop writing shit stories. No reboots required.
@@stevenclubb7718 Unfortunately, all roads lead to the sequels. They weren't just lackluster stories. They destroyed the rules of hyperspace and the Force, the OTs legacy/Skywalker clan, The New Republic, and the Jedi Order...again. As the anchor films, you can't just ignore them like you might something like the Acolyte or Skeleton Crew. Good writing would definitely help...and I think there's even ways to do some damage control for Han, Luke, and Leia a bit... But the world building damage and bleak trajectory of the story isn't really repairable. You need a reboot *and* good writing. Easiest solution is to go back rather than forward, cause we already had good writing. Just stop adding to the current shipwreck, pick out the best Legends stories and do high quality adaptations of those with the Legends label stuck on them. They also need something like Westend Games again to establish what the shared rules of the universe are and a continuity team that actually cares about such things... Maybe I was overly optimistic, but I had thought better continuity was supposed to be the point of the reboot. Now, relistening to interviews, I don't think it was ever the point. They wanted to embrace Filoni's campfire mentality and drop all the world building so they could just do whatever with lightsabers, but even fantasy needs internal consistency if you want people to stay invested. How hyperspace works is less important than it working that way consistently. Characters too. Luke Skywalker needed to be consistent. Yes, he could age or fail but in a way that's consistent with his character.
@TheChristianPsychopath I've seen worse problems get erased by Never Speaking Of This Again. The problem with retcons is they're often awful stories. The best are where they quickly present a new origin story similar to the Old one with the changes baked in to disguise the retcon and immediately start telling the kind of stories they want to tell (Alan Moore's Swamp Thing is a template for a reason), but if you go in and try to tell a story about why The Hodor Maneuver was something other than what was originally presented, it's hard to disguise it as anything other than the Continuity Accountancy that it is. The better solution is just to pretend this never happened and let fans invent whatever explanation they care to. Like Doctor Who has a few infamous Continuity errors created during the 70s and 80s, which the show ocassionally jokes about, but they've never tried to create a televised episode that explained Romana's multiple regeneration or whether the UNIT stories took place in the 70s or 80s, as no explanation would really work and it's far simpler to just never, ever shine a spotlight on these glaring mistakes. All Star Wars needs to get on track is for them to have a decent plan on what Star Wars should be moving forward and create good shows and movies. They can still cherry pick good elements from bad outings, but never, ever shine a spotlight on the stuff they don't like. We don't need an explanation of Palp's return, we just need never mention his post-OT history ever again. Do we want Star Wars to resemble the Halloween franchise where they erase everything after 2 for H20, then erase everything for Rob Zombie, then erase everything after the original for the latest trilogy.... because that's almost always what happens when a property starts playing the reboot or massive retcon game. The DC Universe is addicted to it these days, because they think resetting Continuity is the answer instead of writing better stories. Star Wars has already erased large chunks of its extended universe twice (first time being Lucas excising some stuff for the prequels). Will the third time be the charm? Somehow I doubt it.
In my opinion, Kannan Jarrus from rebels is what every jedi should aspire to be and is probably the perfect example of a jedi besides legends Luke. He uses love as his greatest strength, not a weakness as the previous jedi saw. Most importantly he has flaws and is well aware of them, but still tries his best. He never even made it to knighthood in the jedi order but knows if he doesn’t step up, no one else will. Thats what a jedi should be
And Rebels also manages to convey the mythological/epic context of Star Wars pretty well, with the Force being treated more as something spiritual in nature and mysterious in lack of total understanding, the latter emphasized by all that was lost with the Empire's dominance. There's an interesting paper from the University of Toronto where the writer made the argument that Rebels acted as essentially a kind of biblical allegory of sorts, primarily through character names. Kanan/Caleb and Ezra both have names of Hebrew origin, which aligns well with both belonging to a group that has been reduced to near-extinction by a tyrannical empire, many antagonists of which interestingly have Roman names, bringing to mind the Classical struggles for Israelite independence during the Roman Empire. This allegory is also encouraged by the general appearance of Lothal as a grassland-dominated planet, which brings to mind the environments of the Levant, having been exploited both spiritually (excavation of the Jedi temple) and materially through the Empire's occupation. It's fairly simple, but it's quite interesting to think about, with the essay concluding that "the onomastics of Star Wars Rebels invite the audience to imagine an alternative universe to its own, one in which the Israelites or Jews stand up to, and eventually defeat, the Roman Empire. In a way, Star Wars Rebels looks forward to a reality that closely resembles the New Testament vision seen by John of Patmos in his Revelation: a righteous Israelite/Jewish victory over the very evil Roman Empire. [...] Maybe something like the Israelites/Jews defeating the Romans could have happened long ago in a galaxy far, far away, even if it did not happen here in our galaxy."
The Jedi idea's really simple, I think. What's weird is I don't see that simplicity coming up much in the actual stories, or not as much as it should. There's quite a bit of exploration into what effect the Jedi have on the world, but not much exploration of what the Jedi actually stand for and why they do the things they do. The Jedi ideas can be more than just philosophy or mythology. They can be a statement of the transformative power of kindness, humility and connection, just as the original trilogy was. Star Wars could really commit to that hopeful, transformative empathy, in a way a lot of other franchises can't. Some of the most popular heroes and stories in modern pop culture are based on that. The most recent I can think of that really spelled it out was 'Everything Everywhere all at Once', and that movie laid it all out thus (paraphrased): "When I choose to see the good side of things, I'm not being naive. It is strategic and necessary. It's how I've learned to survive through everything. The only thing I do know... is that we have to be kind. Especially when we don't know what's going on. I know you see yourself as a fighter. Well, I see myself as one too. This is how I fight." That's it. That's the Jedi. 'Saving what we love, not destroying what we hate.' In his movie, Rian Johnson had the Resistance commit to becoming the heirs of the Jedi ethos. Those are ideas that mean more than the 'Jedi' name, and they are beautiful ideas, that no story-teller would feel comfortable abandoning. It feels as if they are what Star Wars media keeps trying to reach back toward - but it also feels like it's reaching blindly, like it doesn't understand the idea at the heart of the original movies well enough. Even the characters who you would think would understand it the most - Obi-Wan, Luke - are portrayed as confused, despite the simplicity of it. And it is a simple idea. Everything's connected, and everyone, in lots of subtle ways. So don't look at things in isolation, look at the world in terms of relationships. See how related it all is, and how percieved differences don't mean as much as we think. Obi-Wan touches on that when he tells the Gungans they ought to care about the Naboo, because what happens to one will affect the other. Yoda tries to teach Luke that just as a rock and an X-Wing are much more similar than he thinks, so are Luke and his father. And Luke wins when he commits hard to the idea that he and his father are the same, and understands that if he can face the Dark and say no, then his father can too. So, live like that's the case. Hold good feelings in your heart, and give them to others. Recognise the bad feelings for what they are, understand them, and let them pass away. Don't let longing for the past or fear of the future drag you away from appreciating the world around you now. Help others with their troubles, but at peace in yourself, because life goes on and it always will. Open yourself up and let the world in, let it carry you along. It leads to a kind, wise, and serene kind of person. Against that you have the Sith, who say something very different: that you *matter.* In fact, you matter more than everything else. Don't look at the world as a whole, focus on yourself and your perspective. You should have the power to save what you want to save, punish what you feel is wrong, and take what you want to possess. But over time, that ego-focussed viewpoint leads to loss of perspective, and paranoia and fear eventually lead a person to see power as an end in itself, power to hold back change. Grip the world, and twist it to your will. It's not about good and evil as cosmic forces or abstracts, or even as political expressions, but ways in which the world is tangibly, observably healed or poisoned by the empathy, warmth, coldness or cruelty of the people in it. Often I read people talking about attachment, how the Jedi deny them while the Sith embrace them. But it's more complicated than that, in that the Jedi embrace connection with the world, while trying to avoid getting too attached to any one thing in favour of another. While the Sith grip their attachments close, but deny any connection, they deny the idea that these attachments have any power or influence over them. In the prequels, it's Anakin's possessive, obsessive love for his wife - his attachment, his wholly internal desire - that destroys him and others. He fights to control that relationship. In the original movies, it's Luke's unselfish, sacrifical love for his father - their connection, their tangible, mutual emotional link - that saves them both. He lets go, and trusts his fate fully in the hands of another. A story that tries to get past the confusion of the prequels' meaning, and recommits to the ideas of kindness and empathy as transformative forces at the heart of the originals and the Jedi, would be nice.
Exactly. Luke didn't destroy the Emperor. Luke didn't destroy the Deathstar 2. Luke inspired people to do what he couldn't by being kind and keeping faith and empathy.
@@acecosmonaut5559 It did feel that way, for sure. Now, if we can only connect that to the Jedi... The Jedi are intended as the moral heart of Star Wars, to have them talked about as an aloof, overly-religious elite has warped the whole feel of the franchise.
Also the fandom: Let's hate the only guy trying to evolve the franchise in the main series and claim his movie is the worst thing mankind has ever made... Even though it's easily the best of the new trilogy and stand head and shoulders above the stuff that hack JJ Abrams came up with, despite its major flaws (mostly inherited from The Force Awakens).
I have heard so much, "The six movies are about Anakin's rise and fall" so much it's kind of wild. The OT is not written as Anakin's story at all. He's barely in the first movie and doesn't have an arc until the third. But I think people feel uncomfortable if they can't own new generations of Star Wars by making them subservient to their favorite Star Wars in a hierarchy of authority.
I'm fine with having more Skywalker content -- particularly Luke -- so long as they write the character with the proper respect. TLJ and uprooting his character's role for Rey is the opposite of that.
@@LightningRaven42 the fun things is they didn't like Force Awakens because it was too "samey", and they didn't like Rise of Skywalker because... well... I mean no one did, did they? it's impossible to make them happy, they go on about things not "feeling" like Star Wars, and basicaslly what I understand about all of them is that they're desperately chasing the wonder of being kids watching the original trilogy that they can never get back because they're not 5. it's sad.
I honestly don't think anyone truly understood Star Wars beyond George Lucas, Chris Avellone and Irvin Kershner, there are so many subpar to bad Star Wars media nowadays that they are not even worth the apathy, gone is the ambition that is not only a brave attempt but a union of many talented people doing something that they actually care Star Wars can absolutely keep moving forward, but it needs good storytellers, good directors and good writers
Add Drew Karpyshyn that list. Both KOTOR 1 and the Darth Bane novels also truly got it right. The Darth Bane novels even executed the concept that The Acolyte struggled with, showing a Dark Side perspective with nuance without simply invalidating the Jedi. Dave Filloni weirdly seems to have the right understanding but struggles to pull off the good storytelling needed to execute the ideas. Despite the flaws in the series, Kanan was still probably the best Jedi under Disney cannon.
Kersh never really understood Star Wars. He just had George looking over his shoulder constantly, which actually caused a lot of friction on set. That's a big part of what makes Empire so great.
If you're not into Joseph Campbell's mythic structure as a narrative device or a Jungian then you probably should be writing Star Wars. But as LSOO says, if things change, that's fine, but stick to something.
I don't like the phrasing 'truly understood'. I certainly prefer the product of some directors' visions to others, but does that make them the Star Wars authority or just someone who produced something that resonated with me? If I just reference who I thought told the best story then Irvin Kershner wins because Empire is the best Star Wars story; and does 2nd place even matter? I don't think that's constructive though, it's just hierarchy building. I think there's merit in most Star Wars media. For example I was very ready to adopt the Last Jedi's take on abandoning the light/dark, jedi/sith binary (even if other parts of TLJ didn't work for me). JJ rolled that back and told a story I couldn't enjoy in Rise of Skywalker. But JJ's movie was more in line with the original trilogy (including Kershner) than Johnson's take. So who's wrong? Do I not understand Star Wars because I was willing to accept the narrative evolution? I don't think Star Wars has some objective core essence to 'be understood' and be true to. I think effective storytellers tell good stories and they can do that without adhering strictly to what came before.
Small stories are where its at, ill die on that hill. The big stories that seem to try to one up the last in grandure are boxed in for story telling and you end up with absurdity
I've always though a good SW anthology series letting writers and directors play in the sandbox without worrying about canon would be an awesome idea. Just a set of short 30-60 minute self-contained episodes, like the Twilight Zone. Visions did this very well. I'd love to see a live action version.
This sounds like the Jerry Maquire problem, where he posits that the sports agency company should take on less clients in favor of more quality relationships with those same clients. He was fired by lunch hour. I can imagine this short conversation at a Disney exec's office: Great writer: "We need to make these series much shorter in order to tell a great story." Studio Exec: "Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out." These big studios will not agree to make things shorter for the sake of something like mere quality. They want a cash cow that they can milk for decades. To quote the great Wu Tang Clan: C.R.E.A.M.
I feel like the best blend of mythology and “sociology” in the Disney Star Wars era (at least regarding the Jedi) might be found in the Jedi: Fallen Order and Jedi: Survivor games. I think it works so well is because we spend so much time in Cal Kestis’ head and watch as he struggles with both the mythological and more human pressures of his Jedi identity.
Re: Star Wars not knowing what to do with the Jedi: When the Sequels were set to come out, or maybe after the first one had been screened, I was so emotionally excited because it seemed to me that the writing was setting up Kylo Ren to finally explore how enticing it could be to "get ahead" or "make progress" or "become powerful" with hate in your heart. How a young man could be pulled away from "doing the right thing, regardless of the consequences" by exposure to (1) elements of corruption within the "good" system that demoralize him and (2) a universe where the "bad" guys were getting ahead. The sequel series was well placed to speak to the male crisis and address cultural conversations like "nice guys finishing last", elders planting trees whose shade they would never sit under, staying humble underneath someone else's tutelage, waiting your "turn" to move up in the world, and what will happen to you if you never get to move up. I see these all as important conversations that still aren't being resolved in the first world. I think that somewhere in the early writing, people decided that "good and evil" wasn't cool enough to write about. 4:30 - We've been seeing this for a long time. This is why JJ Abrams has gotten so much work, and why we don't ultimately like anything he makes over the long term because there's not actually an arc with payoff and resolution. only fuel for the next thing. In everything he touches, it seems like there was never a story that was trying to be told from the outset. I love your point about the failure to commit.
I know it's well trodden ground to talk about the failures of Palpatine in RoS, but not having Kylo Ren be the big bad, the Sith Lord that needs to be defeated at the end of the trilogy was a massive misstep. By the end of Last Jedi he got everything he wanted. He fired his planet buster, overthrew his Master as is the Sith custom, Became the undisputed Lord of the First Order over Hux and was even tempting Rey to the dark side. By many accounts he won. I think going from that point to expand from.
Kylo was a lazy recycle of Jacen Solo's fall. I did like him destroying the mask, that was actual character growth, but they never bothered giving him actual character motivation. Luke was done so dirty... In the books pre-Disney, he had built a thriving New Jedi Order. He went through massive struggles and losses, but wiping out the Jedi again, was such a lazy way to reset the galaxy back to the beginning of ANH.
I think this is a subject that Tom Van Der Linden is uniquely qualified for, but there's a huge amount to unpack. Because, in my opinion, the conflicting intentions behind Star Wars, and the moral framework it tries to explore through the Jedi, aren't just a reflection of confusion between various storytellers working on the franchise, or merely a lack of vision in the part of Lawrence Kasden, Kathleen Kennedy, and the other keepers of the flame, as it were. I think it reflects the greater struggle to understand the conflict between good and evil that we face in modern times. In a way, the confusion in what it means to be a Jedi is a perfect, poetic reflection of humanity's struggle for meaning. The Jedi originally represented a pretty simple chivalric standard, lifted largely from Arthurian legend, with a few bits and pieces from other mythic traditions. This worked fine for the first film, as it was left wonderfully ambiguous and mysterious. But with the introduction of Yoda, and a deeper exploration of the Jedi's moral code, the general "noble knight" vibe became more and more defined by specific tenets. And that rendered the ambiguously romantic Jedi vulnerable to critical analysis. But what else could they have done? Keep the Jedi ambiguous? The very nature of an ongoing serialized story, where everything is canon, makes that impossible. Analysis and deconstruction become inevitable. The Jedi represent the ideal of what "good" means, but the conversation of what "good" means is never-ending. So once they started defining the Jedi's code, the Star Wars franchise had two choices. They could declare that the code is unquestionably good. But that just means that whatever wisdom Lucas and Kasden put in Yoda's mouth, and whatever tenets subsequent writers added to the mix, however dubious, can never be questioned. And that's a great way to drive the franchise into a dead end of dogmatic morality, based on the half-baked notions seemed like a good idea at the time. Or they could query those notions, which inevitably plunge the Jedi into moral ambiguity. Are they really the highest good? According to whom? I think this initial video is approaching the material with the assumption that the franchise is trying to have its cake, and eat it to. The franchise wants the Jedi and the Sith to be simply "good vs. evil," while also wanting to use this conflict to explore moral ambiguity, and query what good or evil actually means. And it's easy to dismiss this as folly, because after all, you can't have your cake and eat it too. But remember, this is story. And in story, you can DEFINITELY have your cake and eat it too. The greatest stories in history work because they operate as two contradictory narratives happening at the same time. In Frankenstein, we know the real monster is Victor Frankenstein. And yet, there's no denying that his creation is also a monster, a horrific perversion of the natural order, who commits unspeakably evil acts. Yet he is also the victim of Frankenstein's hubris, deserving of empathy and compassion. You can't truly comprehend the story thoroughly without holding these contradictions, and accepting that there's no clear moral answer to the problem. So I think the struggle for the Star Wars franchise to define the Jedi, either as the highest good, or as a political order with a questionable moral code, isn't a problem. It's the core meaning of Star Wars, the conversation that can never have a final conclusion, the ongoing contradiction that has no resolution. If you choose one or the other, the tension is broken, and the story ends. So the series must continue. To me, the problem of the Jedi comes down to what the Jedi think it means to be good. They think good comes from their moral code, and therein lies the source of their identity crisis. Because the rules that define what a Jedi is, the rules about detachment from emotion, connection, passion, are also the source of their downfall. What it means to be a Jedi contains within it the seeds of its own ruin, just as the Sith's endless hunger for control and dominance carry the seeds of its own failure. We want the Jedi to find the answer to their quest for perfect galactic peace and harmony. But by nature, the quest has no end. To deny the darkness within is to give it power. That was the lesson of The Last Jedi. To be a Jedi is to fail, because it's built on conquering inner darkness, an impossible quest that leads to the denial of self. There's no conquering inner darkness. This is hubris. Yet, the great power of the Jedi requires a constant inner struggle with darker urges. This is the place where the moral and the political merge. The Jedi must seek the highest good, within themselves, and in the galaxy. And yet, they will constantly struggle, as the nature of darkness is to shapeshift, to take on deceptive forms, making great evil look like the greater good. That's why the Star Wars story must always question its own professed moralities. Otherwise, it becomes a mouthpiece for a fictional dogma, without actually reflecting on whether its own code of ethics are genuinely moral, or deeply unethical. So what path should the stories take, moral, or political? This is the question that drives Star Wars, and may well drive it on forever. Because each path drives it straight into the other.
First, I'd like to say that you hit the nail on the head with this. I think the problem is the way the original trilogy worked, it invited the thought that there was more depth to it than what there actually was. Analysis of jedi ethos fails because first we would have to come up with something to analyze. For this to work, the jedi should not embody "good", but a set of beliefs. In this case, they could be exposed to criticism, but at the same time when they are good their goodness would be much more impactful, and coming from something deeper than "there are obvious bad guys in front of us". And then continuously have that set of beliefs challenged, and even have it changed to adapt to the darkness nesting within it. Or you could also move the conflict to an entirely different axis, have the Jedi and Sith embody a collective and individual point of view, and have their balance constantly shift, with no one being ever completely in the right. Or take a page from Moorcock and shift the duality to Law and Chaos, two opposite universal forces both incompatible with life, that can only thrive when both are present in a delicate balance. You could also keep the assumption that the jedi are good by definition, but you might have to veer into some sort of cosmic horror, where the jedi are basically angels sent by the Force to do acts that are by definition good, but might be incomprehensible in the eyes of the protagonists. Of course, in this type of narratives the jedi would not be the main characters but mysterious forces of nature, kind of like some of the stories by Ted Chiang, where God is real and operates in the world but faithful humans struggle to comprehend His works.
@rottensquid after reading your comment just now, I read a few more of them attached to other videos. I just wanted to say that I really appreciate your commitment to civil discourse. It is admirable, and needed. I wish that I had more opportunities to thank individuals for this.
Some of the things I liked most about both the old canon and the new canon were the ways in which the Jedi, individually and collectively, were shown to engage in exactly the sort of moral conversation you describe. The Jedi represent a moral ideal, they fail to live up to that moral ideal, this failure has consequences, they face those consequences and that failure, and they change, trying to draw closer to that ideal which they represent, and succeeding but in an imperfect and temporary manner. To get a bit controversial, we can even see this in The Last Jedi if we really try: Luke trying to rebuild the Jedi Order and failing, then deciding that the old ways didn't work and giving up, then realizing that the true value of the Jedi Order was not the tradition and that if the old ways don't work, the solution is to build a new Jedi Order that learns from its mistakes, but not having the chance to fully realize this objective before dying and having to trust the next generation and its extremely limited training to finish what he started. Not that this message was conveyed with any sort of clarity whatsoever, but at least they were trying to do something right.
Very well said. When we know ‘a lot’ about the Jedi, we end up having to make judgement about whether we agree with them or not- and it’s impossible to please everyone.and this doesn’t have to be a bad thing!
*Tension* is what's missing. Tension is a huge part of *Andor* being among the best (probably _the_ best) Star Wars content of all time. I've suggested how much better Star Wars with-Jedi content could be if we just (A) saw them really have to concentrate hard (and still sometimes fail) to block shots, and (B) see the opposition not just line up like toy soldiers but really try to exploit and overcome them with too many varied shots to block (one of the scenes towards the end of Ahsoka S1 was particularly bad at having really dumb stormtroopers). Basically just increase the seriousness on both sides of the equation and the IP would immediately gain traction to me due to *increased tension.* Apart from the, philosophically modern Star Wars falls a bit flat. I see two potential paths. *1. Path 1: Return to simplicity.* Lightside is good, darkside is evil, and just embrace the fact that most individuals IRL work the same way: they think they're the good guy and everyone different is evil, and it won't be too hard for them to self-insert into the lightside. This version will struggle a bit with realism, as its villains _will_ be a bit "cardboard" (evil for evil's sake). However I think Vader is a good example where not many are criticizing the Vader character for being that way (even though he absolutely is a cardboard villain when you take a moment to consider the motivations for his actions). or *2. Path 2: Advance to realism.* In this version, we end up seeing lightside and darkside powers merely as tools. In fact I think they should explicitly include a light Jedi who uses mindcontrol in a horrible way to achieve a mission objective, and a dark Sith (or mixed Jedi) who uses force lightning to save a bunch of innocents from capture (or worse). Then later we can get one of those *Andor-style monologues* framing the scenes we saw in their moral light, because in the moment we likely didn't care that the Jedi used cool mindcontrol powers to beat the stormtroopers, but when the monologue mentions "good tools can be used for evil" and we flip to a scene of a crying mother dealing with her now-vegetable Stormtrooper son, we understand that the output of our actions and who they affect is what makes an act good or evil.
19:18 THANK YOU! Glad someone said it. If you check out most of Rian Johnsons movies you'll see a fair share of this. Around 10 years ago he stopped world building and started leaning more into deconstruction/dismantling. The bathos effect that MCU does too, that's a heavy one. It's boring when EVERYONE is trying to force meta schtick.
@anthonyml7 well that's the folly of forcing Star Wars, and most established fiction, to be a mirror of sociopolitical content. it just becomes SNL relevancy baiting, which is Rian Johnson's whole career now. Except news media runs in cycles and fads, so trying to align with it will make your stuff age like a banana on a 3 day weekend. Remember the first Cantina Song? that's a scene from the 70s playing by its own rules. it's not like they went into a disco club to get high with a surfer bro with Chewbacca having PTSD from Nam. if you create your own culture, like George Lucas infamously did, you shouldn't suddenly morph it because of an internet fad
@anthonyml7 I never honed in much on Kennedy or saw her effect distinctly, though I'm sure it was there. all of this was under Disney's effect, which we also see through their MCU films. While the highs are awesome, it was so watered down with self parody and bathos meant to ruin the momentum and immersion of each scene for a cheap laugh.
in our postmodern world, no system of power can be perceived as being good natured. Entertainment is written to be anti-establishment. So every single structure has to be disassembled and shown to be problematic at its core. A great example of this is what Star Wars is doing with the concept of a Jedi. now they have absolutely nothing to fall back on and have basically butchered the original concept. the actual art is suffering in quality and vision as a result of this. but that issue is true in so many other franchises. like what are people supposed to believe in if everything is deconstructed? The fact that you have TH-cam videos commenting on this trend proves to me that we are about to enter a new phase of art with redefined values. now that millennials are aging and they’re depressive and pointlessly rebellious outlook is no longer trendy and cool, the target audience for art becomes Gen Z who are really searching for meaning. The movie TV and print entertainment that provides glimpses of meaning are going to be the ones that resonate the most.
Yet to watch the entire video, so I might be repeating what's in it, but I think there were two main events that caused them to ruin the Jedi. The first was when they tried to retcon Anakin to not seem like a psycho in the prequels, which they did by making the Jedi utterly incompetent in Clone Wars. The second was the popularity of Game of Thrones. You can't watch Last Jedi and convince me its "The Jedi were morally grey" arc wasn't a direct result of that series success. Its really annoying how embedded this has become in the series.
@@friendlybane Postmodern philosophy does not allow for such a system. We haven't synthesized a suitable philosophy to replace it. Until we move on from the fetish of deconstruction and accept that a set of principles and presuppositions can be "good enough," with their short comings seen as opportunities rather than damnation then we will not view a system as good natured.
Also, the lack of idealism in media is not casual. It's part of a establishment propaganda disguised superficially as antiestablishment. Ideals are not bad. Ideals are what make people wake up every day and keep going. Having ideals doesn't mean you never question them or you're close minded. Star Wars was inspired by anti vietnam sentiment, according to Lucas himself. American imperialism doesn't want Vietnam protestors again so they prefer young socially conscious people to be stuck in the most unproductive way possible, and that's what they provide with mass media. We've gone from "there's no absolute good and absolute evil, and everyone is a different shade of grey" to "nobody can know what's bad and good".
I think one problem is there was little grasp of what Luke's arc was in the OT and is now therefore an intense desire to freeze him in the middle of it by fans to indulge those moments of heightened excitement and power. Luke Skywalker is a violent, ambitious young man seeking power to get revenge and protect his family. Obi-Wan nurtures this and Yoda condemns it constantly. But notice how Obi-Wan is still a Force Ghost despite having completely different moral perspectives on violence and redemption than Yoda does. But Yoda ends up being wiser. Luke denies the diplomacy and patience of Yoda and never finishes his Jedi training. This leads to his own dismemberment, psychic upheavel, self-doubt, and even straight-up falling to the dark side and two-fisted force choking everybody. But that darkness is thrilling to much of the audience. It doesn't process as a failure. It connects as some "higher form" of Jedi-dom. Yet, while Obi-Wan encourages it, Luke doubts it. Luke walks back. Yoda encourages that self-doubt and nurtures it into possibility on his deathbed. When Luke wants to be better than Obi-Wan thinks he can be, it's not immediately rewarded. Luke fails, lashes out, fails, lashes out again, Luke is a constant failure... until he isn't. And then he almost dies anyway. But his example saves the last of his father's humanity. There is a very problematic reading of this where Luke was "always right" even though Luke was almost always wrong within the actual text of the film. The inability to let Luke be a good Jedi after being a consistently bad Jedi has a knock-on effect for the concept of a Jedi. We end up arguing over the NATURE of Jedi rather than their struggles as people. And that's why Jedi end up being difficult to write and be accepted.
The answer's right there at 11:16. If you want to tell a story about the Jedi, it has to be a fundamentally spiritual or philosophical story. If you want to tell a more materialistic story, there's a whole galaxy full of characters who are barely aware of the force to write about. The original trilogy works so well because although the two struggles are intertwined, ultimately Luke has to win the spiritual battle and the Rebels have to win the material battle.
Deconstruction can be amazing (KOTOR 2, Andor), but it requires a) outstanding writing, and b) a rich source material that stands on its own which can be deconstructed while still respected (KOTOR 1, the OT). Respect for the source materials is the operative term here.
Deconstruction is an overused trope that's been going on since the 90s. Very rarely does it yield good results. If you hear that writers are gonna deconstruct Luke, Picard, Gandalf, Neo, or any other OG character, you can bet 95% of the time it's gonna destroy the character. It's time to give it a rest.
@@One.Zero.One101yeah "deconstruction" in popular media usually just means "what if [insert favourite character here] was actually a massive tool and bad at their job". It rarely actually examines its subject matter in any meaningful way EDIT: it also sometimes means "stopping every five minutes to point out how silly a trope is while still doing the trope anyway"
I actually don't think Andor is in anyway a deconstruction of Star Wars. If anything it's main theme is the most like original Star Wars then any other show: Empire, Fascism, BAD; Uprising against Tyranny, Good.
@davidbeer5015 Agreed. Taking the light side path in KotOR 2 is a great example of this - you acknowledge Kreia’s criticisms of the Jedi, but choose to follow that path regardless because it is ultimately the right thing to do.
The lack of series having resolutions may be better described as the "asymptote of resolution": a story that can never actually reach its resolution as each subsequent step forward is a fraction of the size of the preceding step.
Funny how two video games from over twenty years ago, star wars knights of the older republic, one and two define the sith, and the jedi, clearly that made defined in clear ideals of the philosophy of what jedi and sith both believe
Star Wars issue might not be a Star Wars issue, it might be a Corporation/Hollywood issue. Remember Star Wars was mainly an invention that operated outside the auspices of the business. That’s what you can do when one guy makes enough money to do what he wants with it. Now that Star Wars is grafted into the entire business, it’s gonna be different. I’m not even saying it’s a bad thing, but it’s just gonna be different. Different is tough for some to swallow.
I enjoyed the Clone Wars computer animated series and the Kenobi live action series, both of which focussed on Jedi. I also enjoyed the parts of the Mandalorian that focussed on Jedi (e.g. Asoka Tano & Luke Skywalker).
One thing to note is that the Jedi were right about non-attachment. Attachment is not love, but simple possessiveness or clinging. Those are the emotions Anakin displays towards his mother and towards Padmé. “Attachment says, I love you so make me happy. Love says, I love you so I want you to be happy even if I’m not part of your life.” I paraphrased a Zen Buddhist teaching Lucas used in creating the Jedi.
The movie "Everything everywhere all at once" could heal the jedi. When the Jedi were born within Buddhist & Stoic ideas & got thrown into postmodern deconstruction they could rise again with animism. Lucid constructed spirituality, orientation towards spirits that inspire. Aware of their constructed limited nature & yet committed to the numinous, not as a dogma but as a ongoing process of recreation & adaption.
I disagree with where you draw your lines. ‘Modern Star Wars’ didn’t start with the Disney films. The series almost entirely abandoned the mythological elements over the course of episode 5, and Lucas began deconstructing the Jedi starting with episode 6. The issue is that directors are still slavishly following Lucas’s ideas decades later, without meaningful innovation. We’ve been deconstructing the Jedi for 7 consecutive films and 2 shows, and no director has actually tried to reconstruct them, to write what comes next.
Never even thought about watching the new gladiator, I love the original too much. The sountrack, the acting, the cinematography, the one liners, the heart ache and the sense of retribution. Its a masterpieces. Just because someone labels a movie as an instalment of a previous story, it doesn't mean it actually is, take the Star Wars Holliday Special for example, sometimes its just best to forget they exist. 🤣
Fun video!! The real issue is the prophecy and what it reveals about the Force. The Promised One was to restore balance to the Force. Like all children growing up watching the original trilogy, I asked the natural question: What imbalance in the Force was the Promised One supposed to rectify? The prequel trilogy's central lore function was to illustrate this imbalance. It turns out, Lucas created something bigger than he understood himself. He mistakenly thought the imbalance in the Force was that a Jedi had to choose whether to focus on the Living Force, like Qui-Gon Jinn or the Cosmic Force, like Yoda. The hope [pun intended] was that the Promised One would enable the Jedi to channel both the Living and Cosmic Force simultaneously and without conflict. Instead, it turns out that the only way to resolve the internal structure of the underlying mythology was to reveal that the Jedi unknowingly utilized fear to access the Force and that all their talk of peace was self-deception. We all noticed that the primary motivation of the Jedi was to avoid turning to the Dark Side. [They justified kidnapping children and turning them into child soldiers by asserting it was to stop the children from growing up to be Dark Side.] But being afraid of the Dark Side is doubling down on the real problem: being afraid of fear is still fear and Fear leads to the Dark Side. Thus, since all Force-Users are based on fear, there are no Force-Users on the other side of fear to balance it out. This is why Sidious knew the Jedi Council were helpless and clueless about his schemes. Some conclusions: 1) if the main issue is structural then it makes sense that the only Jedi stories that can be told would be post-structuralist or not really about the Jedi [i.e., they would be just some generic space wizard and the Force would have no spiritual role to play in the stories, much like the Lantern Corps in the DC comics.] 2) the best way to understand what the Star Wars stories are is to think of the Force as the main character. As with any other character, their actions have to make sense within the context of what we know about the character. Knowledge about any character may be both conscious and unconscious. Yoda is constantly speaking of what the Force wants. He is, it turns out, wrong about what the Force is up to. And this mistake is essential to the story. 3) if the Force is the main character [in a Fifth Business sort of way no less] the stagnancy is structural. That is, since all Jedi stories must be structured by what we know about the Force, the Force seeks balance while we want more Jedi stories. The imbalance was in us all along. 4) As the Old Republic is a story of a technologically and socially stagnant society, stagnant for millennia no less, so is the nature of any story we can ever tell about the Force. No narrative choice can ever resolve the conflict between the character of the Force as revealed through its prophecy and our clamoring for more Jedi stories. But we can do better than the Jedi. We could choose to be at peace. 5) When writing fiction about mysticism, write what you know. Lucas did not fully understand what it would take to keep your balance when thrust into the Unifying Force, i.e., all irl mysticisms have some mystical union with the Divine, or the Universe, or the Real etc. It looks like he relied too heavily on Joseph Campbell and his f@scist theory of a monomyth to smokescreen his shortcomings. 6) The sequel trilogy does right by the Force. For the most part.
I think people get confused by the prequels' interpretation of the Jedi, and think that that should be peak Jedi. When in reality, those Jedi being deeply flawed was the reason their ineptitude ushered in the worst dictatorship the galaxy had ever seen. (Well, except the Rakata I guess, but nvm them for a moment). Luke should've been seen as the pinnacle of actual Jedi philosophy, when he used love to turn Vader away from the Dark Side. Anakin had it right when he said Jedi are encouraged to love; his attachment was a result of his fears, not his emotional connections to his family. Real love is not attachment, because real love allows whatever energy a person brings to a relationship to exist: it calmly redirects and transforms the negative energies, rather than blocking them outright. Prequels Jedi? Blocked and denied things. That is why they failed.
The fact that modern writers refuse to write "straightforward" mythical good versus evil stories is by far the biggest problem. It all needs to be cynically gray, "complex", and "realistic", and that just doesn't work for something like Jedi and Sith. It makes it all feel terribly hollow and pointless.
Dave Filoni was a disaster for my interest in Star Wars. The difference between Andor’s deep and personal storytelling contrasts *starkly* with his shows that feel like a kid smashing his toys together while debating power levels with his friends
What Star Wars stories should keep revisiting over and over is that it sucks to join the Dark Side. Aside from the obvious recurring theme that the Dark Side will uglify and deform you one way or another, there's the subtle theme that the Dark Side is ultimately a lonely place to be. This point was delivered poignantly during the Stover novel of Revenge of the Sith. At the final hour, when Darth Vader was lifted off the operating table for the first time and asking about Padme, as he writhes in torment at the news, he realized ultimately what the Dark Side offers. After all that's said and done, after all the promises of flashy lightning powers and physical might, at the end of the day, after the logical result of putting yourself first, is that yourself is all you'll ever have. You will never have friends you can laugh and cry about life with, no loving children jumping into your arms at the end of a long day, no lover you can share your most intimate thoughts with. You will have no one to trust, no one who will care for, nothing. And that, is the crux of Darth Vader's torment and self-loathing. All Star Wars stories should hammer this point over and over, as a warning on the wages of self-centerness.
Something that is missing is that the codification and fleshing out of the Jedi is something that have happened multiple times. It was already done before the prequels in the RPG and novels. Where IIRC they kept more of the nomadic master-apprentice formula rather then such a centralised command structure intertwined with the state. Then the prequels changed it all and then even more with the sequels yeah. These days the various substantive contributions to Star Wars of the late 80s and the 90s are often forgotten.
18:35 Yes! Someone finally said it. I never understood why people said Last Jedi was so different when it regurgitated so much iconography from previous films, brought back so many familiar elements just to go "yoink" when something brand new would be better, introduced so many ideas that didn't go anywhere within its own story (Finn being introduced to war profiteering only to declare himself Rebel Scum anyway) and has tonal inconsistencies throughout. I always thought the sequel trilogy's main theme would be Reformation, and that desire is kinda there in Last Jedi. But because it spent two hours spinning its wheels just to re-establish the status quo, and that's why it failed in my eyes.
The main thing to take out of this is just one: the lack of vision. Most of Disney Star Wars just throws out many interesting ideas to come of as visionary and like it has something to say, but in reallity it only exists as pure product, made to milk one of the biggest franchises of all time.
Star Wars was best when it was influenced by Joseph Campbell's The Hero with a Thousand Faces. It was a myth with sci-fi dressings. Now it has turned into a sci-fi with robes and lightsabers. We have gotten to the point where can't accept religion as a force for good in the world, so we can't accept it in Star Wars either. Unfortunately, it can't exist without it's spiritual and mythological roots.
Yes, but the hero's journey has been done to death. It was over after the original trilogy. Retelling the story in the same franchise doesn't really work.
Same thing happened to the Star Wars Galaxies MMO. When there was maybe 1 or 2 Jedi on an entire server, the game flourished. When they made it a starting class that literally everyone could play, the game keeled over dead practically overnight.
I really appreciate you. You serve two purposes for me. You educate me with your analysis of films and its so insightful and thoughtful. Also when i struggle to sleep. I put on your videos that ive already seen because your calm voice helps me sleep really well. Thank you
The collective consciousness is exhausted with Star Wars (and most forms of modern storytelling) because stories are no longer there to temporarily take us into a quiet space and give us something thought-provoking that we can take back to the real world. Franchises are the destination - the end in-and-of themselves. The complexity of life, coupled with the technological capacity to create endless media, derail the integrative superpower we have to make action out of meaning. Instead we're left with endless, fantastical worldbuilding that only serves to sap our lives, take our money, and delude us into a false sense of safety, which we masturbate to every night through high-definition visual archetypes. Please, LSOO, break your own statis and get back to myth, sincerity, and real intellectualism.
To be honest I completely disagree with the interpretation that the message is TLJ is that - "the Jedi must end". The message is opposite - the sacred Jedi texts are saved from the old, decrepit scaffolding of a dead temple and brought back to the world, Luke proclaims that how won't be the Last Jedi, the broom boy enamored by the myth will be the part of the new generation of the Jedi. It is essentially the story of the new generation learning from the old values and reinvigorating them in a new way. The story of the Phoenix burning in its own flames to be born anew. The reason people think "letting it all die" is the message is that it is expressed by Luke, and later by the villain of the story - Kylo Ren. But the movie clearly states - they are wrong! The fact that people buy into this message means that Kylo is a compelling villain with interesting motivations, that go beyond "Unlimited Powah!!", not that he is correct.
@anthonyml7 TLJ has its flaws but I think it is overhated, and grifted over by some edgelord inluencers. With the level of malice and bad faith criticism anything can be made to look awful. I bet that if the ESB were released today these edgelords would complain about: - how AT-ATs are stupid camel-like boxy machines, how defeating them with towing cables was unrealistic, - how the damsel Luke saved in original Star Wars was stolen from him by bad boy Han, - how Luke in general is presented as a soyak and loser, losing nearly every confrontation, and being made fun of by a Muppet, - how the entire chase sequence through asteroid field is stupid, without Falcon shooting back, with asteroids in unrealistic distances and with stupid space worms - how Han hiding Falcon by attaching itself to command tower of a Star Destroyer was beyond nonsensic, - how "No, I am your father" reveal destroyed the characters of Luke, Obi-wan, Vader and the Jedi as a whole at the same time, - etc, etc. All of the above is technically true... You just have to give the most malicious interpretation of this movie. I bet if this was the climate around the movie you would not have a lot of fun. The difference these days is that we pay attention to these grifters, whereas in the past we would call them what that are - not reviewers or critics but true killjoys.
@@mreszotnik I agree. In Johnson's work you can see more of the Lucas' philosophy, even though visually he tried to separate his work from all the previous movies. JJ copied almost everything, but he still didn't get, what Star Wars is really about.
Ngl, I kinda like RotJ. I respected it's ability to actually SAY and DO things and stand by them.... until the next movie got scared and walked it back
Problem is that Star Wars thinks good vs evil is a simple concept, so they try to abandon that good vs evil stuff. Andor is often credited for being morally grey and abandoning the good vs evil thing, but I think the opposite. It does what the prequels do(with better quality obviously) and shows that good people, good intentioned people play a heavy hand in the rise of evil. It shows that evil doesn't need to defeat good to win, it just needs good to be complacent. That's why it resonates with so many Star Wars and non-Star Wars fans alike. It doesn't do the whole "good and evil are the same thing, it's just perspective dude" and proceed to equate a clearly more morally sound side seem as bad as the literal embodiment of evil. When you do that, it turns people off and/or(no pun intended) makes them rather nihilistic. Nuance doesn't = everything is the same, therefore good and evil don't exist.
Wow. Thank you for bringing up the concept of the Schroedinger plot. Finally I managed to see put into words a feeling that I could never express properly and that is generally keeping me from being involved in following the plot of modern tv series.
the acolyte was a mess but at least it was an attempt to expand the timeline parameters. imagine having to sit through yet ANOTHER show/movie where protagonists fight Stormtroopers/the Empire
This scene (0:15) has bothered me since I saw it at the movies. Dooku turns away from Anakin, who could simply slash across Dooku's back and end the duel. Yet he just lowers his lightsabre and does nothing.
The superman comparison is spot on. I think we have to examine the finer points of what is good and what is evil and what do good people have a duty to stop when there is so much evil. I also feel like theres nothing wrong with the jedi through organizational dogma becoming corrupt and needing the be torn down to be rebuilt. At the end of the day our heroes have to be heroic and have to be good in a way that most everyone can agree is good.
Star Wars Origins, highly praised, including by Mark Hamill himself, gave us something most significantly refreshing. Especially having it set on Earth which I’m sure a lot of fans were hoping for.
Nope, Long Ago in a Galaxy Far, Far Away... keep it away from Earth. Plenty of other earth based sci-fi. (I don't mind this stuff in fan films, but not for the story canon.)
“Schrodinger’s story” is a wonderful and perfectly apt term for modern franchises. If only Kreia had her way and the force ended entirely. This is what the response to the cycle should be.
It's interesting. I feel like KoToR II dealt with this kind of things as well. How to place the Jedi in the universe and how the force should relate to those beings in the universe at large.
All great points. Thank you for your commentary. Btw I'm looking forward to your next video - when I finished watching Gladiator 2, I was sure there were originally two scripts (probably for even entirely different movies) and they just stitched them together to make it "somehow" connect with Gladiator 1. Interested in your thoughts!
I paused at around 15:40, and I have to say - I love that the video didn't end here. I think I was almost expecting it to, as so many video essays are content with diagnosing a problem and expressing it and then stopping there. Not that it would have been a bad thing either, but thank you for adding these last 10 minutes on potential solutions!
The Jedi were a kind of 'space knight' and 'space monk': a paladin, a warrior cleric. It was a way for people to identify with a construct that was both strong and noble. The Superman/Batman contrast was a good one: Superman is a person with unbelievable power who uses it for the benefit of others. The Superman story is a story yearning for a protector, and the Jedi story is a story yearning to *be* the protector. For some reason, some people think it's innovative to re-imagine a story, flipping the villains and the heroes. Well, what if Superman is actually 'bad', what if The Wicked Witch is actually good, etc. Mankind has an intrinsic desire to believe in a hero and to be on the side of good, but in reality, that gets complicated. So we can fall back on stories...except the newer people working in the world of the creator want to reimagine the components of that creation. It's 'edgy'. It's a cycle of destruction we see over and over, redefining the heroes as villains and the villains as heroes...or as 'understandable' villains who have trauma. One of the biggest things I had to learn in life, period, was to stop identifying with the villain (and their trauma) and to be able to identify good people.
The way you present your argument is almost as if "being stuck" is the only problem of the franchise. I agree vision cohesion is part of the issue, but the stories being told are just bad. Bad in quality, bad in ideas, bad in morals, bad in logic. Even in isolation, none of the ideas presented by Disney worked, thats why they tried A and it didn't work, then tried B and found out it also didn't work. The writers dont understand Star Wars. And I think you don't understand it either. Your description of what a Jedi is, was very superficial. For a really good analysis of What a Jedi is, check "What JEDI Used To Be" from youtuber schnee. If you can't understand the Jedi, you can't create a Star Wars film WITH the Jedi. That's part of the reason the only stories that worked, didn't use the Jedi.
my favourite Star Wars story of recent years has to be the Force Awakens video game. aside from just very much liking Cameron Monaghan, I appreciated how it was a small story about an individual overcoming his trauma and past, even if he was a Jedi and thus linked to the greater galactic narrative. he wasn't a Skywalker or a Palpatine or whoever, he was just a random dude with some shit to deal with. the secondary characters and villains were also quite good imo unfortunately I'm a PC gamer so I never made it through Survivor :(
Great points about the Jedi! One key element here is: who is the desired audience? Disney wants to sell the Star Wars property to as many people as possible… they have tried different shows for different audiences, so there most definitely is not a singular vision. Making money by throwing stuff at the wall and seeing what sticks with these different audiences is why Star Wars has suffered (tremendously) in quality. Its world building, characters, mythology, and story telling has been very messy. Lucas had a singular vision and goals for what Star Wars could achieve, warts-and-all - while Disney doesn’t have a passionate vision (beyond making money out of the property). I personally love Star Wars - and I always will, similar to how an unlucky sports fan stays true (and is stuck) with a sub-par team. I’ve had some great times and memories with Star Wars - and I’m grateful… but more importantly, there’s hope for the future being better. An awesome action movie, a deep story with complex characters, some worthwhile extensions to the lore… that’s what keeps fans like me on the hook. I’ll pick up a book, rewatch the movies looking for missed details, try out the new Disney plus shows, and buy merchandise out of a desire to relive the happiness of the best moments. Escapism is a real thing - and while I’d like to see more mature interpretive stories, I don’t have much hope for that here in the Disney era. Andor is in that camp - and I’m super grateful to have it.
This is why shows like Mr InBetween are so good. They don't try to last, and last, and last. 3 shorter seasons. In, out, done. Character arcs galore, with a finality that is both satisfying and even kind of realistic given its tone. We need more series that not only know HOW to end, but also WHEN.
the two courses of action you speak reminds me of the duality that Modernism deals with: 1- myth - heart/soul - (modern) 2- sociopolitical examination of matters of the world - grounded de-constructionism (postmodern) = metamodern oscillation between ernest / ironic
I agree a lot. But one thing to mention is that, with what can be done with visual effects, since basically the first X-Men movies and The Matrix, it's hard to find how to compete while still staying true to the Jedi lore, and it may have influenced many bad or questionable decisions. The Mandalorian and Andor gave the opportunity to free the story of what the audience would expect if Jedi were involved, and it must ve deeply felt that almost any scene with Magneto in the X-Men made him look way more powerful than any Jedi. They don't just have no idea what story to tell, they don't know how to make it as great as the competition.
I'm definitely more of a fan of the course correction back to the jedi in original+prequel series framing. I think that black and white framing is actually best for it because people can instill their own sense of gray for it. The original framing worked because it was a black and white story, so of course black and white jedi fit into it. The prequel worked pretty good because it could imply the gray without having to state it - if white can become black, is there gray? The sequels intent is planted in the gray and thus fall short because, in our desire to instill meaning, it makes the intent feel bland in the first place. We can sense where the gray is even without being directly told what is gray and what isn't.
Order 66 was dramatic and good at the time but in retrospect, this story decision was a mistake in my opinion. It basically prevented almost all future jedi/sith potential story ideas. One of the big things that makes the old republic so cool is that the jedi order and sith still exist. There’s a deep lore and mythos that’s just not as present in the current timeline. All the cool stuff happened in the past. Star wars emptied the tank of cool jedi stuff in the story prior to the new movies and they never filled it up with more cool stuff. They just kept trying to pump from an already empty tank.
You should check out Legends. Pre-2014, Star Wars had a tons of stories exploring thousands of years of history and different phases of the Jedi Order. What's most baffling about the new films is not letting Luke keep his New Jedi Order. It was easily the most fascinating part of the lore and he had to start from scratch and regrow the order, and an easy to insert a diverse cast and new conflicts. They allowed marriage, partly because no one had told him differently, and while I wasn't the biggest fan of the Del Rey period, they did actually struggle with the positive and negative aspect of attachments.
They just couldn't keep it simple. The less we knew the better the Jedi were. The more we've learned the more they've unravelled and pissed people off.
Let's be clear here: The issue with the Jedi began when Disney took over. And Disney's issue is (despite producing outrageously stupid scripts and having no unified vision) that they fundamentally misunderstand (deliberately or not) that you CAN explore the flaws of the Jedi (as the original 6 films did, to some extent) without making them either completely incompetent, absolutely moronic, cartoonishly villainous or insanely ridiculous. They misunderstand that Jedi and Sith are not equal minded and that the Jedi - despite having flaws, as everyone does - strife to be better, to improve themselves, to help the people and protect them. They strive to be heroes. And that is also a weakness, often exploited by the Sith. The way I see it, most movies and series made under Disney would have to be removed from canon somehow to even be able to start fixing this. To your point of antagonists and connections to the past: There is no lack of antagonists that are not Sith in both Books and Series. The issue is not a lack of possible antagonists for the Jedi but an absolute lack of creativity and arrogant decisions in the past, de-canonizing basically all extended universe narratives. The Jedi striving to not get involved in politics (or at least prioritizing Ideals over Politics) does not mean that they do not serve the people of the republic, which may get them involved in politics. As you explore in your "Solution 2": There are many ways to actually explore different avenues and I firmly believe there is a lot of material already out there just waiting for the silver screen. Just stop the deconstruction and de-mystification. Escapism is - in my view - the most fundamental reason why fantasy and science fiction works for most people and that has been lost over the past decade. There are no mysteries, everything has to be explained, deconstructed and analyzed. But for me that is just not entertaining. That is just more of what I do every day.
The Clone Wars did all of this WAAAAY worse than Disney. There are literally people who think Mace Windu is a badguy because of that nonsense. And he didn't even do anything bad in Clone Wars, they just hyper-empathized with Ahsoka and Anakin while they acted like douchebags constantly and got away with it. 😂
@@MrBazBake And now you can think about who wrote Clone Wars and who is in charge of Star Wars at Disney. And then you will know, why I did not cite Clone Wars as a good example. It is not entirely bad but it layed the groundwork for a lot of the issues. Also, you cannot tell me that Clone Wars is worse then the Acolyte.
‘The Last Jedi was not subversive enough’… Yup you get it. It raised the possibility of new possibilities but not enough to get really excited and truly feel like the GFFA was opening up to be a bigger stage.
In the prequels, Jedi order is already fully political. They are the enforcers of the republic, elite bodyguards, special forces, protectors.They are attached with the republic, they falter (can’t see the slow rise of sith under their nose) as the republic falters. In the OG trilogy, the Jedi spearheaded the rebellion to get back to the republican ways. It is quite clear what they always were: A praetorian guard of sorts without an emperor.
I'll never forget the day it was announced that Disney had bought Lucasfilms. I said, boldly, 'this is the best possible thing for Star Wars. Too many people love this universe for it to fail. You could make a strong argument that there is no one less qualified to make a Star Wars than George Lucas at this point' and man. This must be what it's like when flat earthers see the 24 hour Sun. I've never been so wrong in my life.
In the original trilogy, Jedi are space samurai/cowboys. The magic is in the creative synthesis of samurai movies and westerns in a science fiction setting. Everything else after is various degrees of death of the author.
I appreciate that you reasoned that there's nothing inherently wrong with the sociopolitical/deconstructive approach that gives the rebels/Jedi more of a Grey moral standing, and even defended the direction that Last Jedi hinted at rather than wholesale dismissing it. These ideas can, just like Marvel and DC and other universes, exist in the same franchise with more mythological and classically good vs evil stories. Lots of people might disagree, but getting new and conflicting perspectives of the wars and the jedi gives flavor and enriches the universe. It's how we get things like Rogue One and Andor, and although some of the other shows didn't execute it well, I still believe there's stories about the Jedi that can be told outside of the mythological framework. The serious problem seems to be that they don't want to commit to anything, like you mentioned. They want to explore the greys, but then they remind you at the end that there's still light and dark and that light needs to win. But then they hardly change anything about the light side, and all you're left with at the end is this muddy taste. It's obviously beneficial to make us question the light side and "good guys" instead of having us believe they're just absolutely good, but idk, why not just go further in it and introduce a new concept at that point (like the Grey Jedi from Legends or whatever it came from). At the end, Disney still wanted to sell blue/green and red lightsabers. If that was the case, just stick to the mythological approach instead of blue-balling us by teasing something new. Either give us something new or stick to the classic, you can't have the cake and eat it.
13:21 oh my word! “It’s time for the Jedi to end” is the same film that says “and I will not be the last Jedi” and has kids playing Jedi and a force using kid being hopeful. How do people keep missing this?
A big part of this lack of direction from Disney is what is the Force supposed to be? Not just its powers , but what does it represent? You can play around with the concept of the Jedi especially as all characters will vary in personality and motivation, but what are the ground rules for those that try to channel the power of the Force for different ends?
It becomes clear that there's a problem with the Jedi when the best Star Wars recently has had little to nothing to do with the Jedi. And, it's not a problem that some parts of Star Wars barely even mention the Jedi. It's a problem with the franchise as a whole. If a franchise wants to stay relevant it needs to have variety (especially if it churns out a lot of content). So, it's a problem that you can get good stories without the Jedi but once they become the center of the story it's hard to imagine it being a good story anymore. And, when you ruin an iconography you hurt the image (in this case brand/franchise) it's associated with. Also, it may sound cynical to refer to a group of stories as a "brand" or "franchise" but when it turns out an insane amount of lackluster content it's hard not to think of it as such. Finally, YAY a video that criticizes modern Star Wars without using the words "wOKe" or "DEI" Thank the lord.
I think the real problem with the treatment of the Jedi in the sequels was that they were in no way allowed to evolve. We see that Luke attempted to build a new order, but it was once again wiped out and Luke becomes a bitter pessimist. And then ROS fully reset it, but added nothing new. Rey essentially replaced Luke and nothing in the world had changed. Luke defeated the Emperor not by overpowering him or removing all emotion, but by showing his father compassion and mercy. Why this message was not properly carried forward, I don't know. In Legends, Luke married and had children, why would he stick to the celibate way if he'd learned the real value of familial love? Why do chatacters like Ahsoka and Luke seem to stick to the strict mantra of no attachements when they both know better? And both know that Anakin was undone by the Jedi's enforced stoicism? These are questions that still frustrate me. Disney's failire to address or acknowledge them continues to stall the Jedi from any real evolution in terms of their ideology or value. And I don't believe more movies about Rey will fix anything. Neither do I think a story about the Jedi's origin will give us satisfying answers.
My apathy for Star Wars has grown so big that, despite insta-clicking every LSOO the minute I see it, I almost didn't feel like watching this video. It just feels so futile to even discuss what's wrong with Disney's contribution - it's like trying to discuss what's wrong with pouring mayonnaise on a chicken, strapping bombs to it and entering it into a beauty pageant. Asking "what's wrong" almost doesn't even feel like a question that makes sense anymore, without even thinking about solutions. Thankfully, in no small part due to this channel's influence on me, I've developed a wider range of love for cinema and I am opening myself up to so many other great films and film-makers. I'll watch Andor S2 since I enjoyed the first, but even then, I feel like I watch it less as a Star Wars story and more just as a fun space drama.
What do you think would be the best direction for the Jedi? Let me know below!
Don't forget to watch my exclusive breakdown of The Last Jedi: nebula.tv/videos/lsoo-star-wars-the-last-jedi-8-years-later
Signing up to Nebula also directly supports the channel :)
I genuinely think that the Jedi have lost their mysticism, they are far too exposed for the viewer. While I agree with their human traits and flaws, the myth of the Jedi is lost, at least for me.
I preferred the mysteriousness of the Jedi that was certainly there in the classic trilogy. It was sadly lost starting with the prequel trilogy. The short fan film Premonition where a young female Jedi, to protect her daughter, must confront and fight a Sith was a particular improvement in my view. Thank you, Tom, for your Star Wars review.
WHY u want feedback?
20:50 YOU DON'T HAVE DIRECTIONS!?
The plan is explore -content series- on Scriptwriting ?
whut? u have time , funding for that?
u better launch your own IP, seriously .
1st Hot Take?
Why would your and or OURS idea(s) even matter about Star Wars?
The Original Creator can't even interfere on that ...
He's the most confused on that btw...
Obs When Nebula is going to evolve Smart TV Ux , it's kinda horrible to follow u there...
Despite my admiration for your videos, you are erroneously this time. George Lucas provided a fairly intricate explanation of how the jedi, or champions of the light, decide to serve the republic rather than the force and the highest good. The precuels demonstrate the hyprocesy of adhering to political systems and the complications that exist around following beliefs instead of virtues.
The Jedi I feel are part of a much bigger problem within Star Wars. I think it’s in a tug and pull between hard Science fantasy and Soft Science fantasy.
I feel the more the Force is explained, cosmic and living force, the struggles that some have in powers, and the costs that those powers do to you….it becomes a lot less like soft magic and more like a hard magic system.
Star Wars I feel is at a turning point. Do we keep digging into the past and go into the Old Republic era….or do we remake the franchise almost completely with a new saga.
New characters, heroes, villains, factions, force users, a new galaxy to explore. Something to make Star Wars unrecognizable in terms of story but still astheticly familiar.
The thing about Star Wars is that I am just filled with so much apathy. My Sorrow and Frustration has mellowed into banal disinterest, especially as culturally these stories just no longer have anything new to say. I'm certainly interested in Andor Season 2, but after that I may just tap out for good...
It's interesting how most of the properties Disney has acquired, that I used to love (Pixar, Marvel, Star Wars), inspire so little in me anymore 😔
Maybe it's time to put these types of stories to rest. The Jedi don't need their stories told anymore. What more could you expound on them that hasn't been said?
It’s time to let old things die.
Tbf, they never had anything new to say to begin with. Lucas' original trilogy are wonderful films, but completely derivative of centuries worth of fiction and storytelling.
Apathy is death, In this case the death of Starwars.
The idea that people's disconnect from transcendent reality is becoming so total that even in fiction and stories people are losing the ability to look beyond the world of objects and material to see the myths and ideals, the idea that stories are being reduced to merely fictional simulations of a completely profane world is absolutely horrifying.
The ONLY thing the Acolyte showed us was that even “A Long time ago, in a galaxy far far away….we still have Fatherless black families”. 😂
Ah, love the smell of hate in the morning. Especially when it's thinly veiled as a joke.
Mythic heroes were often less than ideal, even if they held ideals, so I think in principle questioning Jedi and especially their larger role is a good thing, because Star Wars isn't just about them either...
Damn Tolkien, you cooked there
It's gotta be 2 things at once:
1. The scientific revolution / enlightenment being revamped into a modern religion (new atheism)
2. The demoralization/complete-deconstruction of western institutions such as Christianity, the government, and the nuclear family
If we didn't have these things, we'd have a lot more fantasy staying mythological and symbolic, which is what we NEED more than anything
Sincerity must win over sardonic irony for any franchise to survive. We have deconstructed these stories for the sake of deconstruction, and in the end, it doesn't help anyone.
Something to remember with Star War is that Lucas originally wanted to make a Flash Gordon movie. He couldn't get the rights, so he decided to make an original IP based on Flash Gordon, King Arthur, and Samaria film. He even bought the right to remake The Hidden Fortress to make ANH.
I think we need new franchises based on what writers sincerely loved. We don't need another Terminator, SW, Jurassic Park, or whatever shit remake or reboot. Take a cance on something new.
It's this but also deeper -- the Joseph Campbell aspect of Lucas' writing is deeply spiritual -- mythic stories are like a culture/tribe/society's shared dreams. These new films are spiritually barren.
@asmrbuddha9033, very true. These new movies are devoid of any spiritual or mythical depth. Deconstruction is the flavor of the day. Everything is deconstructed until nothing can be mended or made whole again. This makes for terrible storytelling.
@@asmrbuddha9033 I agree, I think that is the most glaring weakness of these recent movies. I'm not even a die hard Star Wars fan and that is obvious to me. It's apparent that the folks in Disney truly don't understand how much those moments resonate with people. It's the connective tissue, for the story. The light saber battles and the dog fights are cool but they are also informed by the spiritual part, it's all connected, but the decisions makes are glossing over this and the movies an shows suffer as a result.
YES. Movie studios should absolutely take a chance on something new. However, they won't. Because they only care about money, and they know that adding remakes and sequels and what not to established franchises that people already love, they know that will rake in money for them so they deem it a safe investment. They have zero interest in making risky investments when they know they have the option not to
@aejenkins3048 but if the reboots and remakes end up being $300 million flops, they are not making any money. They need to take some risks, especially on smaller budget projects. I've been saying this for over 20 years.
I am firmly on the camp of the more mythical approach to Star Wars over the cynical, sociological approach. Star Wars to me was always meant to be more of a mythical story, with the Jedi standing as paragons of virtue and self control. That doesn’t mean that there can’t be more complex stories relating to the Force and how people discuss the Light and the Dark, but if the idea of an objective Good and Evil is removed, then it doesn’t represent was Star Wars is supposed to be. That heart needs to remain intact, no matter the story.
Yes i always thought this "the jedi were actually bad" garbage was just that, garbage. People misunderstood George and then ran with it
I'm with y'all I do lean mythical myself. However I think one of my favorite Star Wars stories is what was going on in KotOR 2 with Kreia raging against the idea of the force itself. It still felt mythical, but also was certainly deeply questioning the role of not only the Jedi and the Sith but the force itself. So y'all think that fits mythical or sociological? Or maybe third path, like if the Sith and Jedi were the titians, maybe the fallout of a larger arc would have what emerges be like the greek gods overthrowing their predecessors.
It's not detached. If star wars decides that it wants to be sociological (or just decides it doesn't know HOW to tell a mythical story), then you'd worry about flow-on effects.
Exactly, at it's core it's a tale as old as time
On the other hand, if you had to choose one direction for Star Wars and one for Star Trek, Star Wars was always more grounded and realistic with war, poverty and disease. Where as Star Trek was a idealistic utopia of higher people. So it would make sense for Star Wars to go socioeconomic realistic and for Star Trek to go mythical fairy-tale. Instead now both are mixed messes.
Remember when there were only like 3 or 4 Jedi that survived order 66 & seeing one was a big reveal instead of an expectation?
The best depictions of the Jedi are when Yoda describes to Luke how we are more than just flesh, and when Luke throws away his lightsaber instead of killing Vader. Both of these events have one thing in common: They're emotional, they resonate with you.
With the prequels, Lucas had good ideas that were horribly executed. He wrote the jedi as being a virtuous, ineffective and stiff institution, blinded by their inflexible ideologies and thus allowing fascism to grow (aesthetics vs praxis). The problem is that the execution made most of it fall on deaf ears, making the audience unaware if they were supposed to identify with the jedi or not.
The jedi are the best when they're wise and capable of understanding the world beyond their egos. Not when they're space monks or lightsaber-wielding superheroes.
The fact that Return of the Jedi puts Obi-Wan and Yoda on opposite sides of the Vader question and allows both of them and Vader to be Force Ghosts is meaningful in a way. It moves that little element beyond a trapped sense of good or evil history to a level of heightened spiritual consciousness instead.
Anakin isn't a good man at the end per se. But he's shed all of the things that made him a petty, scared, cruel man and held him back from enlightenment.
Even Obi-Wan's lies and desire to kill Vader aren't "True Jedi"-like... but this just means there's more to the Jedi thing than getting to Jedi heaven. The ghosts are still "human" and flawed.
Part of the "issue" of the Jedi in the prequels is that by the time of the prequels they were very much a diminished order- the pride before the fall, just like the republic they served.
George said that the prequel Jedi were the "most moral of anybody in the galaxy" (his words). He genuinely believes this, and because of his Buddhist beliefs, he views the attachment rule as noble. But many fans thought George was sending the opposite message. He also said that balance is about destroying the Sith, he never once said the Jedi needed to be destroyed. But fans think the balance is about destroying both the Sith AND the Jedi.
Just started watching. Wanna mention that Andor is the best thing in Star Wars happened in Disney era
Andor, Visions and the Vader comics.
Some Star Wars purists hate Andor tho.
Andor is a brilliant TV show based in the Star wars universe, but some don't consider it "real" Star Wars. The problem with Disney is they are chasing real Star Wars for the purists, while also being an incompetent company, and while also appeasing other cultural agendas.
It's just a total mess!!!
@@dually81purists already have the classic trilogy - no Andor or other Star Wars movie can take it away
My admittedly purist stance on Andor is yes it's very good, but why the hell did it (spinoff story about a spinoff character from a spinoff movie) get triple the budget that Kenobi had (two main characters of the entire saga) that same year? I can't enjoy it properly because of those poor executive choices
Thats not saying a lot
There are many fan-made features writing good Jedi stories. Jedi are just knights, martial artists, or monks. If you can't tell a good story with those classic archetypes, then you're overthinking it.
George Lucas handle the jedi pretty well and I don't even like George Lucas as an person too many anger outburst
Those stories are mostly boring. INCREDIBLY BORING.
@@tauIrrydah The Raid (Martial Artists), Space Marine 2 (Knights), and Hacksaw Ridge (Monk) would disagree. There are many, many ways to interpret classic archetypes into good stories.
It's gotten so bad they need to go into major retcon territory and basically start afresh. Post-RotJ needs to be a low-Force user universe. If a story involves a Jedi, they should really lean into the spiritual element and give it some actual chops. Actually draw from (and obviously slightly modify for flavour) real traditions like Advaita Vedanta and Buddhism and Christian mysticism, which are already influences for the Jedi.
Anything set in the prequel (or pre-prequel) era can be free to effectively be a high fantasy setting (equivalent to a high magic setting like something Sanderson would write), while the Empire and post-RotJ eras should be low fantasy/low magic, like the original films themselves.
What their doing now is the reboot. That's kind of what we had before. No Ahsoka... Luke was trying to collect enough about the Jedi to figure out how to move forward, trying to train Leia, but she was busy helping put the Republic government back together. Luke started a new order about 7 years after RotJ, 2 years after Thrawn's defeat, and watching him start from scratch to try to figure out what the Jedi should be was one of the more fascinating aspects of the stories. Truce at Bakura, the X-wing novels, quite a few short stories collections created the low Jedi period, so it did mean something when the Jedi began to emerge again, and one of the struggles of the new order was being so few in number.
While i understand why rebooting is catnip for fans, it really doesn't address the underlying problem and new writers will simply bring back all the stuff they like... including the stuff which undermined the property in the first place.
All that is necessary is for enough writers to write the kind of stuff that's good that people start emulating their example. The bad stuff will fall away from non-use and fans will create elaborate fan-theories to make sense of it all.
To throw out an example of a story that's technically in canon but ignored is The Punisher becoming an angel. When the next series debuted (written by Garth Ennis of The Boys fame), he threw in a throw-away line about the angels. Didn't explain why Punisher is no longer dead and an angel, just that he's back. Problem sorted as Ennis went on to write the sort of Punisher tales that people wanted to emulate in future runs. Of course, last time I checked he was a ninja, but bad ideas do love happening and the fix is easy enough... stop writing shit stories. No reboots required.
@@stevenclubb7718 Unfortunately, all roads lead to the sequels. They weren't just lackluster stories. They destroyed the rules of hyperspace and the Force, the OTs legacy/Skywalker clan, The New Republic, and the Jedi Order...again. As the anchor films, you can't just ignore them like you might something like the Acolyte or Skeleton Crew.
Good writing would definitely help...and I think there's even ways to do some damage control for Han, Luke, and Leia a bit... But the world building damage and bleak trajectory of the story isn't really repairable.
You need a reboot *and* good writing. Easiest solution is to go back rather than forward, cause we already had good writing. Just stop adding to the current shipwreck, pick out the best Legends stories and do high quality adaptations of those with the Legends label stuck on them.
They also need something like Westend Games again to establish what the shared rules of the universe are and a continuity team that actually cares about such things...
Maybe I was overly optimistic, but I had thought better continuity was supposed to be the point of the reboot. Now, relistening to interviews, I don't think it was ever the point. They wanted to embrace Filoni's campfire mentality and drop all the world building so they could just do whatever with lightsabers, but even fantasy needs internal consistency if you want people to stay invested. How hyperspace works is less important than it working that way consistently.
Characters too. Luke Skywalker needed to be consistent. Yes, he could age or fail but in a way that's consistent with his character.
@TheChristianPsychopath I've seen worse problems get erased by Never Speaking Of This Again.
The problem with retcons is they're often awful stories. The best are where they quickly present a new origin story similar to the Old one with the changes baked in to disguise the retcon and immediately start telling the kind of stories they want to tell (Alan Moore's Swamp Thing is a template for a reason), but if you go in and try to tell a story about why The Hodor Maneuver was something other than what was originally presented, it's hard to disguise it as anything other than the Continuity Accountancy that it is. The better solution is just to pretend this never happened and let fans invent whatever explanation they care to.
Like Doctor Who has a few infamous Continuity errors created during the 70s and 80s, which the show ocassionally jokes about, but they've never tried to create a televised episode that explained Romana's multiple regeneration or whether the UNIT stories took place in the 70s or 80s, as no explanation would really work and it's far simpler to just never, ever shine a spotlight on these glaring mistakes.
All Star Wars needs to get on track is for them to have a decent plan on what Star Wars should be moving forward and create good shows and movies. They can still cherry pick good elements from bad outings, but never, ever shine a spotlight on the stuff they don't like. We don't need an explanation of Palp's return, we just need never mention his post-OT history ever again.
Do we want Star Wars to resemble the Halloween franchise where they erase everything after 2 for H20, then erase everything for Rob Zombie, then erase everything after the original for the latest trilogy.... because that's almost always what happens when a property starts playing the reboot or massive retcon game. The DC Universe is addicted to it these days, because they think resetting Continuity is the answer instead of writing better stories. Star Wars has already erased large chunks of its extended universe twice (first time being Lucas excising some stuff for the prequels). Will the third time be the charm? Somehow I doubt it.
Would love that too but KK will never allow it
In my opinion, Kannan Jarrus from rebels is what every jedi should aspire to be and is probably the perfect example of a jedi besides legends Luke. He uses love as his greatest strength, not a weakness as the previous jedi saw. Most importantly he has flaws and is well aware of them, but still tries his best. He never even made it to knighthood in the jedi order but knows if he doesn’t step up, no one else will. Thats what a jedi should be
And Rebels also manages to convey the mythological/epic context of Star Wars pretty well, with the Force being treated more as something spiritual in nature and mysterious in lack of total understanding, the latter emphasized by all that was lost with the Empire's dominance. There's an interesting paper from the University of Toronto where the writer made the argument that Rebels acted as essentially a kind of biblical allegory of sorts, primarily through character names. Kanan/Caleb and Ezra both have names of Hebrew origin, which aligns well with both belonging to a group that has been reduced to near-extinction by a tyrannical empire, many antagonists of which interestingly have Roman names, bringing to mind the Classical struggles for Israelite independence during the Roman Empire. This allegory is also encouraged by the general appearance of Lothal as a grassland-dominated planet, which brings to mind the environments of the Levant, having been exploited both spiritually (excavation of the Jedi temple) and materially through the Empire's occupation.
It's fairly simple, but it's quite interesting to think about, with the essay concluding that "the onomastics of Star Wars Rebels invite the audience to imagine an alternative universe to its own, one in which the Israelites or Jews stand up to, and eventually defeat, the Roman Empire. In a way, Star Wars Rebels looks forward to a reality that closely resembles the New Testament vision seen by John of Patmos in his Revelation: a righteous Israelite/Jewish victory over the very evil Roman Empire. [...] Maybe something like the Israelites/Jews defeating the Romans could have happened long ago in a galaxy far, far away, even if it did not happen here in our galaxy."
The Jedi idea's really simple, I think. What's weird is I don't see that simplicity coming up much in the actual stories, or not as much as it should. There's quite a bit of exploration into what effect the Jedi have on the world, but not much exploration of what the Jedi actually stand for and why they do the things they do.
The Jedi ideas can be more than just philosophy or mythology. They can be a statement of the transformative power of kindness, humility and connection, just as the original trilogy was. Star Wars could really commit to that hopeful, transformative empathy, in a way a lot of other franchises can't. Some of the most popular heroes and stories in modern pop culture are based on that.
The most recent I can think of that really spelled it out was 'Everything Everywhere all at Once', and that movie laid it all out thus (paraphrased):
"When I choose to see the good side of things, I'm not being naive. It is strategic and necessary. It's how I've learned to survive through everything. The only thing I do know... is that we have to be kind. Especially when we don't know what's going on. I know you see yourself as a fighter. Well, I see myself as one too. This is how I fight."
That's it. That's the Jedi. 'Saving what we love, not destroying what we hate.' In his movie, Rian Johnson had the Resistance commit to becoming the heirs of the Jedi ethos. Those are ideas that mean more than the 'Jedi' name, and they are beautiful ideas, that no story-teller would feel comfortable abandoning. It feels as if they are what Star Wars media keeps trying to reach back toward - but it also feels like it's reaching blindly, like it doesn't understand the idea at the heart of the original movies well enough. Even the characters who you would think would understand it the most - Obi-Wan, Luke - are portrayed as confused, despite the simplicity of it.
And it is a simple idea. Everything's connected, and everyone, in lots of subtle ways. So don't look at things in isolation, look at the world in terms of relationships. See how related it all is, and how percieved differences don't mean as much as we think.
Obi-Wan touches on that when he tells the Gungans they ought to care about the Naboo, because what happens to one will affect the other. Yoda tries to teach Luke that just as a rock and an X-Wing are much more similar than he thinks, so are Luke and his father. And Luke wins when he commits hard to the idea that he and his father are the same, and understands that if he can face the Dark and say no, then his father can too.
So, live like that's the case. Hold good feelings in your heart, and give them to others. Recognise the bad feelings for what they are, understand them, and let them pass away. Don't let longing for the past or fear of the future drag you away from appreciating the world around you now. Help others with their troubles, but at peace in yourself, because life goes on and it always will. Open yourself up and let the world in, let it carry you along. It leads to a kind, wise, and serene kind of person.
Against that you have the Sith, who say something very different: that you *matter.* In fact, you matter more than everything else. Don't look at the world as a whole, focus on yourself and your perspective. You should have the power to save what you want to save, punish what you feel is wrong, and take what you want to possess. But over time, that ego-focussed viewpoint leads to loss of perspective, and paranoia and fear eventually lead a person to see power as an end in itself, power to hold back change. Grip the world, and twist it to your will.
It's not about good and evil as cosmic forces or abstracts, or even as political expressions, but ways in which the world is tangibly, observably healed or poisoned by the empathy, warmth, coldness or cruelty of the people in it.
Often I read people talking about attachment, how the Jedi deny them while the Sith embrace them. But it's more complicated than that, in that the Jedi embrace connection with the world, while trying to avoid getting too attached to any one thing in favour of another. While the Sith grip their attachments close, but deny any connection, they deny the idea that these attachments have any power or influence over them. In the prequels, it's Anakin's possessive, obsessive love for his wife - his attachment, his wholly internal desire - that destroys him and others. He fights to control that relationship. In the original movies, it's Luke's unselfish, sacrifical love for his father - their connection, their tangible, mutual emotional link - that saves them both. He lets go, and trusts his fate fully in the hands of another.
A story that tries to get past the confusion of the prequels' meaning, and recommits to the ideas of kindness and empathy as transformative forces at the heart of the originals and the Jedi, would be nice.
I think this is possibly the best explanation of the jedi & sith I have seen.
Exactly. Luke didn't destroy the Emperor. Luke didn't destroy the Deathstar 2. Luke inspired people to do what he couldn't by being kind and keeping faith and empathy.
I think Skeleton Crew is the closest story in live action Star Wars that delivers the sentiment you're referring to in your final sentence.
@@acecosmonaut5559 It did feel that way, for sure. Now, if we can only connect that to the Jedi...
The Jedi are intended as the moral heart of Star Wars, to have them talked about as an aloof, overly-religious elite has warped the whole feel of the franchise.
Very well said
"Hey we have this whole universe but let's just focus on the problems of the same family over and over, ok?"
Also the fandom:
Let's hate the only guy trying to evolve the franchise in the main series and claim his movie is the worst thing mankind has ever made... Even though it's easily the best of the new trilogy and stand head and shoulders above the stuff that hack JJ Abrams came up with, despite its major flaws (mostly inherited from The Force Awakens).
@@LightningRaven42 The last jedi was my favourite of the last trilogy, that movie had something
I have heard so much, "The six movies are about Anakin's rise and fall" so much it's kind of wild. The OT is not written as Anakin's story at all. He's barely in the first movie and doesn't have an arc until the third.
But I think people feel uncomfortable if they can't own new generations of Star Wars by making them subservient to their favorite Star Wars in a hierarchy of authority.
I'm fine with having more Skywalker content -- particularly Luke -- so long as they write the character with the proper respect.
TLJ and uprooting his character's role for Rey is the opposite of that.
@@LightningRaven42 the fun things is they didn't like Force Awakens because it was too "samey", and they didn't like Rise of Skywalker because... well... I mean no one did, did they? it's impossible to make them happy, they go on about things not "feeling" like Star Wars, and basicaslly what I understand about all of them is that they're desperately chasing the wonder of being kids watching the original trilogy that they can never get back because they're not 5. it's sad.
I honestly don't think anyone truly understood Star Wars beyond George Lucas, Chris Avellone and Irvin Kershner, there are so many subpar to bad Star Wars media nowadays that they are not even worth the apathy, gone is the ambition that is not only a brave attempt but a union of many talented people doing something that they actually care
Star Wars can absolutely keep moving forward, but it needs good storytellers, good directors and good writers
Add Drew Karpyshyn that list. Both KOTOR 1 and the Darth Bane novels also truly got it right. The Darth Bane novels even executed the concept that The Acolyte struggled with, showing a Dark Side perspective with nuance without simply invalidating the Jedi.
Dave Filloni weirdly seems to have the right understanding but struggles to pull off the good storytelling needed to execute the ideas. Despite the flaws in the series, Kanan was still probably the best Jedi under Disney cannon.
That is hardly true; take a deep dive into how jedi are understood in The old republic (2 does it best imo) or the extended galaxy before disney.
Kersh never really understood Star Wars. He just had George looking over his shoulder constantly, which actually caused a lot of friction on set. That's a big part of what makes Empire so great.
If you're not into Joseph Campbell's mythic structure as a narrative device or a Jungian then you probably should be writing Star Wars. But as LSOO says, if things change, that's fine, but stick to something.
I don't like the phrasing 'truly understood'. I certainly prefer the product of some directors' visions to others, but does that make them the Star Wars authority or just someone who produced something that resonated with me? If I just reference who I thought told the best story then Irvin Kershner wins because Empire is the best Star Wars story; and does 2nd place even matter? I don't think that's constructive though, it's just hierarchy building. I think there's merit in most Star Wars media. For example I was very ready to adopt the Last Jedi's take on abandoning the light/dark, jedi/sith binary (even if other parts of TLJ didn't work for me). JJ rolled that back and told a story I couldn't enjoy in Rise of Skywalker. But JJ's movie was more in line with the original trilogy (including Kershner) than Johnson's take. So who's wrong? Do I not understand Star Wars because I was willing to accept the narrative evolution? I don't think Star Wars has some objective core essence to 'be understood' and be true to. I think effective storytellers tell good stories and they can do that without adhering strictly to what came before.
Small stories are where its at, ill die on that hill. The big stories that seem to try to one up the last in grandure are boxed in for story telling and you end up with absurdity
I've always though a good SW anthology series letting writers and directors play in the sandbox without worrying about canon would be an awesome idea. Just a set of short 30-60 minute self-contained episodes, like the Twilight Zone. Visions did this very well. I'd love to see a live action version.
Nothing like a simple story told well. Seven Samurai is objectively a very basic tale but it continues to resonate.
@@andrewchambers9752 Are you talking about Star Wars Visions?
@@kakal10s yes, SW Visions
Once you save the galaxy once it feels less and less impactful the more times you save it
This sounds like the Jerry Maquire problem, where he posits that the sports agency company should take on less clients in favor of more quality relationships with those same clients. He was fired by lunch hour.
I can imagine this short conversation at a Disney exec's office:
Great writer: "We need to make these series much shorter in order to tell a great story."
Studio Exec: "Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out."
These big studios will not agree to make things shorter for the sake of something like mere quality. They want a cash cow that they can milk for decades. To quote the great Wu Tang Clan: C.R.E.A.M.
I feel like the best blend of mythology and “sociology” in the Disney Star Wars era (at least regarding the Jedi) might be found in the Jedi: Fallen Order and Jedi: Survivor games. I think it works so well is because we spend so much time in Cal Kestis’ head and watch as he struggles with both the mythological and more human pressures of his Jedi identity.
Just beat the game & couldn't agree more. It sucks that so much of the fanbase won't play this game.
Re: Star Wars not knowing what to do with the Jedi: When the Sequels were set to come out, or maybe after the first one had been screened, I was so emotionally excited because it seemed to me that the writing was setting up Kylo Ren to finally explore how enticing it could be to "get ahead" or "make progress" or "become powerful" with hate in your heart. How a young man could be pulled away from "doing the right thing, regardless of the consequences" by exposure to (1) elements of corruption within the "good" system that demoralize him and (2) a universe where the "bad" guys were getting ahead. The sequel series was well placed to speak to the male crisis and address cultural conversations like "nice guys finishing last", elders planting trees whose shade they would never sit under, staying humble underneath someone else's tutelage, waiting your "turn" to move up in the world, and what will happen to you if you never get to move up. I see these all as important conversations that still aren't being resolved in the first world.
I think that somewhere in the early writing, people decided that "good and evil" wasn't cool enough to write about.
4:30 - We've been seeing this for a long time. This is why JJ Abrams has gotten so much work, and why we don't ultimately like anything he makes over the long term because there's not actually an arc with payoff and resolution. only fuel for the next thing. In everything he touches, it seems like there was never a story that was trying to be told from the outset.
I love your point about the failure to commit.
I know it's well trodden ground to talk about the failures of Palpatine in RoS, but not having Kylo Ren be the big bad, the Sith Lord that needs to be defeated at the end of the trilogy was a massive misstep. By the end of Last Jedi he got everything he wanted. He fired his planet buster, overthrew his Master as is the Sith custom, Became the undisputed Lord of the First Order over Hux and was even tempting Rey to the dark side. By many accounts he won. I think going from that point to expand from.
Kylo was a lazy recycle of Jacen Solo's fall. I did like him destroying the mask, that was actual character growth, but they never bothered giving him actual character motivation.
Luke was done so dirty... In the books pre-Disney, he had built a thriving New Jedi Order. He went through massive struggles and losses, but wiping out the Jedi again, was such a lazy way to reset the galaxy back to the beginning of ANH.
I think this is a subject that Tom Van Der Linden is uniquely qualified for, but there's a huge amount to unpack. Because, in my opinion, the conflicting intentions behind Star Wars, and the moral framework it tries to explore through the Jedi, aren't just a reflection of confusion between various storytellers working on the franchise, or merely a lack of vision in the part of Lawrence Kasden, Kathleen Kennedy, and the other keepers of the flame, as it were. I think it reflects the greater struggle to understand the conflict between good and evil that we face in modern times. In a way, the confusion in what it means to be a Jedi is a perfect, poetic reflection of humanity's struggle for meaning.
The Jedi originally represented a pretty simple chivalric standard, lifted largely from Arthurian legend, with a few bits and pieces from other mythic traditions. This worked fine for the first film, as it was left wonderfully ambiguous and mysterious. But with the introduction of Yoda, and a deeper exploration of the Jedi's moral code, the general "noble knight" vibe became more and more defined by specific tenets. And that rendered the ambiguously romantic Jedi vulnerable to critical analysis.
But what else could they have done? Keep the Jedi ambiguous? The very nature of an ongoing serialized story, where everything is canon, makes that impossible. Analysis and deconstruction become inevitable. The Jedi represent the ideal of what "good" means, but the conversation of what "good" means is never-ending. So once they started defining the Jedi's code, the Star Wars franchise had two choices. They could declare that the code is unquestionably good. But that just means that whatever wisdom Lucas and Kasden put in Yoda's mouth, and whatever tenets subsequent writers added to the mix, however dubious, can never be questioned. And that's a great way to drive the franchise into a dead end of dogmatic morality, based on the half-baked notions seemed like a good idea at the time. Or they could query those notions, which inevitably plunge the Jedi into moral ambiguity. Are they really the highest good? According to whom?
I think this initial video is approaching the material with the assumption that the franchise is trying to have its cake, and eat it to. The franchise wants the Jedi and the Sith to be simply "good vs. evil," while also wanting to use this conflict to explore moral ambiguity, and query what good or evil actually means. And it's easy to dismiss this as folly, because after all, you can't have your cake and eat it too.
But remember, this is story. And in story, you can DEFINITELY have your cake and eat it too. The greatest stories in history work because they operate as two contradictory narratives happening at the same time. In Frankenstein, we know the real monster is Victor Frankenstein. And yet, there's no denying that his creation is also a monster, a horrific perversion of the natural order, who commits unspeakably evil acts. Yet he is also the victim of Frankenstein's hubris, deserving of empathy and compassion. You can't truly comprehend the story thoroughly without holding these contradictions, and accepting that there's no clear moral answer to the problem.
So I think the struggle for the Star Wars franchise to define the Jedi, either as the highest good, or as a political order with a questionable moral code, isn't a problem. It's the core meaning of Star Wars, the conversation that can never have a final conclusion, the ongoing contradiction that has no resolution. If you choose one or the other, the tension is broken, and the story ends. So the series must continue.
To me, the problem of the Jedi comes down to what the Jedi think it means to be good. They think good comes from their moral code, and therein lies the source of their identity crisis. Because the rules that define what a Jedi is, the rules about detachment from emotion, connection, passion, are also the source of their downfall. What it means to be a Jedi contains within it the seeds of its own ruin, just as the Sith's endless hunger for control and dominance carry the seeds of its own failure. We want the Jedi to find the answer to their quest for perfect galactic peace and harmony. But by nature, the quest has no end. To deny the darkness within is to give it power. That was the lesson of The Last Jedi. To be a Jedi is to fail, because it's built on conquering inner darkness, an impossible quest that leads to the denial of self. There's no conquering inner darkness. This is hubris. Yet, the great power of the Jedi requires a constant inner struggle with darker urges.
This is the place where the moral and the political merge. The Jedi must seek the highest good, within themselves, and in the galaxy. And yet, they will constantly struggle, as the nature of darkness is to shapeshift, to take on deceptive forms, making great evil look like the greater good. That's why the Star Wars story must always question its own professed moralities. Otherwise, it becomes a mouthpiece for a fictional dogma, without actually reflecting on whether its own code of ethics are genuinely moral, or deeply unethical.
So what path should the stories take, moral, or political? This is the question that drives Star Wars, and may well drive it on forever. Because each path drives it straight into the other.
First, I'd like to say that you hit the nail on the head with this.
I think the problem is the way the original trilogy worked, it invited the thought that there was more depth to it than what there actually was. Analysis of jedi ethos fails because first we would have to come up with something to analyze.
For this to work, the jedi should not embody "good", but a set of beliefs. In this case, they could be exposed to criticism, but at the same time when they are good their goodness would be much more impactful, and coming from something deeper than "there are obvious bad guys in front of us".
And then continuously have that set of beliefs challenged, and even have it changed to adapt to the darkness nesting within it.
Or you could also move the conflict to an entirely different axis, have the Jedi and Sith embody a collective and individual point of view, and have their balance constantly shift, with no one being ever completely in the right. Or take a page from Moorcock and shift the duality to Law and Chaos, two opposite universal forces both incompatible with life, that can only thrive when both are present in a delicate balance.
You could also keep the assumption that the jedi are good by definition, but you might have to veer into some sort of cosmic horror, where the jedi are basically angels sent by the Force to do acts that are by definition good, but might be incomprehensible in the eyes of the protagonists. Of course, in this type of narratives the jedi would not be the main characters but mysterious forces of nature, kind of like some of the stories by Ted Chiang, where God is real and operates in the world but faithful humans struggle to comprehend His works.
@rottensquid after reading your comment just now, I read a few more of them attached to other videos. I just wanted to say that I really appreciate your commitment to civil discourse. It is admirable, and needed.
I wish that I had more opportunities to thank individuals for this.
Some of the things I liked most about both the old canon and the new canon were the ways in which the Jedi, individually and collectively, were shown to engage in exactly the sort of moral conversation you describe. The Jedi represent a moral ideal, they fail to live up to that moral ideal, this failure has consequences, they face those consequences and that failure, and they change, trying to draw closer to that ideal which they represent, and succeeding but in an imperfect and temporary manner.
To get a bit controversial, we can even see this in The Last Jedi if we really try: Luke trying to rebuild the Jedi Order and failing, then deciding that the old ways didn't work and giving up, then realizing that the true value of the Jedi Order was not the tradition and that if the old ways don't work, the solution is to build a new Jedi Order that learns from its mistakes, but not having the chance to fully realize this objective before dying and having to trust the next generation and its extremely limited training to finish what he started. Not that this message was conveyed with any sort of clarity whatsoever, but at least they were trying to do something right.
I agree with this 100%
Very well said. When we know ‘a lot’ about the Jedi, we end up having to make judgement about whether we agree with them or not- and it’s impossible to please everyone.and this doesn’t have to be a bad thing!
*Tension* is what's missing. Tension is a huge part of *Andor* being among the best (probably _the_ best) Star Wars content of all time.
I've suggested how much better Star Wars with-Jedi content could be if we just (A) saw them really have to concentrate hard (and still sometimes fail) to block shots, and (B) see the opposition not just line up like toy soldiers but really try to exploit and overcome them with too many varied shots to block (one of the scenes towards the end of Ahsoka S1 was particularly bad at having really dumb stormtroopers). Basically just increase the seriousness on both sides of the equation and the IP would immediately gain traction to me due to *increased tension.*
Apart from the, philosophically modern Star Wars falls a bit flat. I see two potential paths.
*1. Path 1: Return to simplicity.* Lightside is good, darkside is evil, and just embrace the fact that most individuals IRL work the same way: they think they're the good guy and everyone different is evil, and it won't be too hard for them to self-insert into the lightside. This version will struggle a bit with realism, as its villains _will_ be a bit "cardboard" (evil for evil's sake). However I think Vader is a good example where not many are criticizing the Vader character for being that way (even though he absolutely is a cardboard villain when you take a moment to consider the motivations for his actions).
or
*2. Path 2: Advance to realism.* In this version, we end up seeing lightside and darkside powers merely as tools. In fact I think they should explicitly include a light Jedi who uses mindcontrol in a horrible way to achieve a mission objective, and a dark Sith (or mixed Jedi) who uses force lightning to save a bunch of innocents from capture (or worse). Then later we can get one of those *Andor-style monologues* framing the scenes we saw in their moral light, because in the moment we likely didn't care that the Jedi used cool mindcontrol powers to beat the stormtroopers, but when the monologue mentions "good tools can be used for evil" and we flip to a scene of a crying mother dealing with her now-vegetable Stormtrooper son, we understand that the output of our actions and who they affect is what makes an act good or evil.
19:18 THANK YOU! Glad someone said it. If you check out most of Rian Johnsons movies you'll see a fair share of this. Around 10 years ago he stopped world building and started leaning more into deconstruction/dismantling. The bathos effect that MCU does too, that's a heavy one. It's boring when EVERYONE is trying to force meta schtick.
That idea in of itself opposes what the jedi represent and stand for so, what a shocker lol
@anthonyml7 well that's the folly of forcing Star Wars, and most established fiction, to be a mirror of sociopolitical content. it just becomes SNL relevancy baiting, which is Rian Johnson's whole career now. Except news media runs in cycles and fads, so trying to align with it will make your stuff age like a banana on a 3 day weekend. Remember the first Cantina Song? that's a scene from the 70s playing by its own rules. it's not like they went into a disco club to get high with a surfer bro with Chewbacca having PTSD from Nam.
if you create your own culture, like George Lucas infamously did, you shouldn't suddenly morph it because of an internet fad
@ Agreed, his damage to the franchise couldn't even be fixed by ROS. And even then this was all under Kennedy's watch.
@anthonyml7 I never honed in much on Kennedy or saw her effect distinctly, though I'm sure it was there. all of this was under Disney's effect, which we also see through their MCU films. While the highs are awesome, it was so watered down with self parody and bathos meant to ruin the momentum and immersion of each scene for a cheap laugh.
I was literally thinking 'i wonder if Like Stories of Old will upload today' and lo and behold
I checked him an hour ago.
in our postmodern world, no system of power can be perceived as being good natured. Entertainment is written to be anti-establishment. So every single structure has to be disassembled and shown to be problematic at its core. A great example of this is what Star Wars is doing with the concept of a Jedi. now they have absolutely nothing to fall back on and have basically butchered the original concept. the actual art is suffering in quality and vision as a result of this.
but that issue is true in so many other franchises. like what are people supposed to believe in if everything is deconstructed?
The fact that you have TH-cam videos commenting on this trend proves to me that we are about to enter a new phase of art with redefined values.
now that millennials are aging and they’re depressive and pointlessly rebellious outlook is no longer trendy and cool, the target audience for art becomes Gen Z who are really searching for meaning. The movie TV and print entertainment that provides glimpses of meaning are going to be the ones that resonate the most.
Yet to watch the entire video, so I might be repeating what's in it, but I think there were two main events that caused them to ruin the Jedi.
The first was when they tried to retcon Anakin to not seem like a psycho in the prequels, which they did by making the Jedi utterly incompetent in Clone Wars.
The second was the popularity of Game of Thrones. You can't watch Last Jedi and convince me its "The Jedi were morally grey" arc wasn't a direct result of that series success.
Its really annoying how embedded this has become in the series.
Give me one example of a system that is good-natured?
@@friendlybane Postmodern philosophy does not allow for such a system. We haven't synthesized a suitable philosophy to replace it. Until we move on from the fetish of deconstruction and accept that a set of principles and presuppositions can be "good enough," with their short comings seen as opportunities rather than damnation then we will not view a system as good natured.
@@friendlybane give me one example where destroying the hope or faith in something leads to a healthier lifestyle.
Also, the lack of idealism in media is not casual. It's part of a establishment propaganda disguised superficially as antiestablishment. Ideals are not bad. Ideals are what make people wake up every day and keep going. Having ideals doesn't mean you never question them or you're close minded. Star Wars was inspired by anti vietnam sentiment, according to Lucas himself. American imperialism doesn't want Vietnam protestors again so they prefer young socially conscious people to be stuck in the most unproductive way possible, and that's what they provide with mass media. We've gone from "there's no absolute good and absolute evil, and everyone is a different shade of grey" to "nobody can know what's bad and good".
I think one problem is there was little grasp of what Luke's arc was in the OT and is now therefore an intense desire to freeze him in the middle of it by fans to indulge those moments of heightened excitement and power.
Luke Skywalker is a violent, ambitious young man seeking power to get revenge and protect his family. Obi-Wan nurtures this and Yoda condemns it constantly.
But notice how Obi-Wan is still a Force Ghost despite having completely different moral perspectives on violence and redemption than Yoda does. But Yoda ends up being wiser.
Luke denies the diplomacy and patience of Yoda and never finishes his Jedi training. This leads to his own dismemberment, psychic upheavel, self-doubt, and even straight-up falling to the dark side and two-fisted force choking everybody.
But that darkness is thrilling to much of the audience. It doesn't process as a failure. It connects as some "higher form" of Jedi-dom.
Yet, while Obi-Wan encourages it, Luke doubts it. Luke walks back. Yoda encourages that self-doubt and nurtures it into possibility on his deathbed.
When Luke wants to be better than Obi-Wan thinks he can be, it's not immediately rewarded. Luke fails, lashes out, fails, lashes out again, Luke is a constant failure... until he isn't.
And then he almost dies anyway. But his example saves the last of his father's humanity.
There is a very problematic reading of this where Luke was "always right" even though Luke was almost always wrong within the actual text of the film.
The inability to let Luke be a good Jedi after being a consistently bad Jedi has a knock-on effect for the concept of a Jedi.
We end up arguing over the NATURE of Jedi rather than their struggles as people. And that's why Jedi end up being difficult to write and be accepted.
Obi-Wan as the knight, Yoda as the philosopher. Intriguing. You could make a story about it. Do Good vs Be Good. Activist vs Thinker.
The answer's right there at 11:16. If you want to tell a story about the Jedi, it has to be a fundamentally spiritual or philosophical story. If you want to tell a more materialistic story, there's a whole galaxy full of characters who are barely aware of the force to write about. The original trilogy works so well because although the two struggles are intertwined, ultimately Luke has to win the spiritual battle and the Rebels have to win the material battle.
This!!!
Deconstruction can be amazing (KOTOR 2, Andor), but it requires a) outstanding writing, and b) a rich source material that stands on its own which can be deconstructed while still respected (KOTOR 1, the OT). Respect for the source materials is the operative term here.
Deconstruction is an overused trope that's been going on since the 90s. Very rarely does it yield good results. If you hear that writers are gonna deconstruct Luke, Picard, Gandalf, Neo, or any other OG character, you can bet 95% of the time it's gonna destroy the character. It's time to give it a rest.
@@One.Zero.One101yeah "deconstruction" in popular media usually just means "what if [insert favourite character here] was actually a massive tool and bad at their job". It rarely actually examines its subject matter in any meaningful way
EDIT: it also sometimes means "stopping every five minutes to point out how silly a trope is while still doing the trope anyway"
I actually don't think Andor is in anyway a deconstruction of Star Wars. If anything it's main theme is the most like original Star Wars then any other show: Empire, Fascism, BAD; Uprising against Tyranny, Good.
I think with deconstruction, the ending of it probably should be some form of reconstruction. Break it down to its core, rebuild from there.
@davidbeer5015 Agreed. Taking the light side path in KotOR 2 is a great example of this - you acknowledge Kreia’s criticisms of the Jedi, but choose to follow that path regardless because it is ultimately the right thing to do.
The lack of series having resolutions may be better described as the "asymptote of resolution": a story that can never actually reach its resolution as each subsequent step forward is a fraction of the size of the preceding step.
Funny how two video games from over twenty years ago, star wars knights of the older republic, one and two define the sith, and the jedi, clearly that made defined in clear ideals of the philosophy of what jedi and sith both believe
Star Wars issue might not be a Star Wars issue, it might be a Corporation/Hollywood issue. Remember Star Wars was mainly an invention that operated outside the auspices of the business. That’s what you can do when one guy makes enough money to do what he wants with it. Now that Star Wars is grafted into the entire business, it’s gonna be different. I’m not even saying it’s a bad thing, but it’s just gonna be different. Different is tough for some to swallow.
Agreed, Disney ruined SW
I enjoyed the Clone Wars computer animated series and the Kenobi live action series, both of which focussed on Jedi. I also enjoyed the parts of the Mandalorian that focussed on Jedi (e.g. Asoka Tano & Luke Skywalker).
One thing to note is that the Jedi were right about non-attachment. Attachment is not love, but simple possessiveness or clinging. Those are the emotions Anakin displays towards his mother and towards Padmé. “Attachment says, I love you so make me happy. Love says, I love you so I want you to be happy even if I’m not part of your life.” I paraphrased a Zen Buddhist teaching Lucas used in creating the Jedi.
The movie "Everything everywhere all at once" could heal the jedi. When the Jedi were born within Buddhist & Stoic ideas & got thrown into postmodern deconstruction they could rise again with animism. Lucid constructed spirituality, orientation towards spirits that inspire. Aware of their constructed limited nature & yet committed to the numinous, not as a dogma but as a ongoing process of recreation & adaption.
Exactly
THIS
I disagree with where you draw your lines.
‘Modern Star Wars’ didn’t start with the Disney films.
The series almost entirely abandoned the mythological elements over the course of episode 5, and Lucas began deconstructing the Jedi starting with episode 6.
The issue is that directors are still slavishly following Lucas’s ideas decades later, without meaningful innovation.
We’ve been deconstructing the Jedi for 7 consecutive films and 2 shows, and no director has actually tried to reconstruct them, to write what comes next.
Never even thought about watching the new gladiator, I love the original too much. The sountrack, the acting, the cinematography, the one liners, the heart ache and the sense of retribution. Its a masterpieces. Just because someone labels a movie as an instalment of a previous story, it doesn't mean it actually is, take the Star Wars Holliday Special for example, sometimes its just best to forget they exist. 🤣
Fun video!! The real issue is the prophecy and what it reveals about the Force. The Promised One was to restore balance to the Force. Like all children growing up watching the original trilogy, I asked the natural question: What imbalance in the Force was the Promised One supposed to rectify? The prequel trilogy's central lore function was to illustrate this imbalance. It turns out, Lucas created something bigger than he understood himself. He mistakenly thought the imbalance in the Force was that a Jedi had to choose whether to focus on the Living Force, like Qui-Gon Jinn or the Cosmic Force, like Yoda. The hope [pun intended] was that the Promised One would enable the Jedi to channel both the Living and Cosmic Force simultaneously and without conflict. Instead, it turns out that the only way to resolve the internal structure of the underlying mythology was to reveal that the Jedi unknowingly utilized fear to access the Force and that all their talk of peace was self-deception. We all noticed that the primary motivation of the Jedi was to avoid turning to the Dark Side. [They justified kidnapping children and turning them into child soldiers by asserting it was to stop the children from growing up to be Dark Side.] But being afraid of the Dark Side is doubling down on the real problem: being afraid of fear is still fear and Fear leads to the Dark Side. Thus, since all Force-Users are based on fear, there are no Force-Users on the other side of fear to balance it out. This is why Sidious knew the Jedi Council were helpless and clueless about his schemes.
Some conclusions: 1) if the main issue is structural then it makes sense that the only Jedi stories that can be told would be post-structuralist or not really about the Jedi [i.e., they would be just some generic space wizard and the Force would have no spiritual role to play in the stories, much like the Lantern Corps in the DC comics.]
2) the best way to understand what the Star Wars stories are is to think of the Force as the main character. As with any other character, their actions have to make sense within the context of what we know about the character. Knowledge about any character may be both conscious and unconscious. Yoda is constantly speaking of what the Force wants. He is, it turns out, wrong about what the Force is up to. And this mistake is essential to the story.
3) if the Force is the main character [in a Fifth Business sort of way no less] the stagnancy is structural. That is, since all Jedi stories must be structured by what we know about the Force, the Force seeks balance while we want more Jedi stories. The imbalance was in us all along.
4) As the Old Republic is a story of a technologically and socially stagnant society, stagnant for millennia no less, so is the nature of any story we can ever tell about the Force. No narrative choice can ever resolve the conflict between the character of the Force as revealed through its prophecy and our clamoring for more Jedi stories. But we can do better than the Jedi. We could choose to be at peace.
5) When writing fiction about mysticism, write what you know. Lucas did not fully understand what it would take to keep your balance when thrust into the Unifying Force, i.e., all irl mysticisms have some mystical union with the Divine, or the Universe, or the Real etc. It looks like he relied too heavily on Joseph Campbell and his f@scist theory of a monomyth to smokescreen his shortcomings.
6) The sequel trilogy does right by the Force. For the most part.
You clearly have no clue what fascist means.
@@clareornias1120 You fool. Meaning supervenes on context.
I think people get confused by the prequels' interpretation of the Jedi, and think that that should be peak Jedi. When in reality, those Jedi being deeply flawed was the reason their ineptitude ushered in the worst dictatorship the galaxy had ever seen. (Well, except the Rakata I guess, but nvm them for a moment). Luke should've been seen as the pinnacle of actual Jedi philosophy, when he used love to turn Vader away from the Dark Side. Anakin had it right when he said Jedi are encouraged to love; his attachment was a result of his fears, not his emotional connections to his family. Real love is not attachment, because real love allows whatever energy a person brings to a relationship to exist: it calmly redirects and transforms the negative energies, rather than blocking them outright.
Prequels Jedi? Blocked and denied things. That is why they failed.
The fact that modern writers refuse to write "straightforward" mythical good versus evil stories is by far the biggest problem. It all needs to be cynically gray, "complex", and "realistic", and that just doesn't work for something like Jedi and Sith. It makes it all feel terribly hollow and pointless.
Dave Filoni was a disaster for my interest in Star Wars. The difference between Andor’s deep and personal storytelling contrasts *starkly* with his shows that feel like a kid smashing his toys together while debating power levels with his friends
Another banger comment.
What Star Wars stories should keep revisiting over and over is that it sucks to join the Dark Side. Aside from the obvious recurring theme that the Dark Side will uglify and deform you one way or another, there's the subtle theme that the Dark Side is ultimately a lonely place to be. This point was delivered poignantly during the Stover novel of Revenge of the Sith.
At the final hour, when Darth Vader was lifted off the operating table for the first time and asking about Padme, as he writhes in torment at the news, he realized ultimately what the Dark Side offers. After all that's said and done, after all the promises of flashy lightning powers and physical might, at the end of the day, after the logical result of putting yourself first, is that yourself is all you'll ever have. You will never have friends you can laugh and cry about life with, no loving children jumping into your arms at the end of a long day, no lover you can share your most intimate thoughts with. You will have no one to trust, no one who will care for, nothing. And that, is the crux of Darth Vader's torment and self-loathing.
All Star Wars stories should hammer this point over and over, as a warning on the wages of self-centerness.
Ok, Brother, Now We Are Aligned. ("Look at Us" - Paul Rudd) The first half of this video was rough but we got our groove back just in time 21:54
The most important part that is often missed when it comes to deconstruction is that you have to reconstruct as well.
Something that is missing is that the codification and fleshing out of the Jedi is something that have happened multiple times. It was already done before the prequels in the RPG and novels. Where IIRC they kept more of the nomadic master-apprentice formula rather then such a centralised command structure intertwined with the state. Then the prequels changed it all and then even more with the sequels yeah. These days the various substantive contributions to Star Wars of the late 80s and the 90s are often forgotten.
18:35 Yes! Someone finally said it. I never understood why people said Last Jedi was so different when it regurgitated so much iconography from previous films, brought back so many familiar elements just to go "yoink" when something brand new would be better, introduced so many ideas that didn't go anywhere within its own story (Finn being introduced to war profiteering only to declare himself Rebel Scum anyway) and has tonal inconsistencies throughout.
I always thought the sequel trilogy's main theme would be Reformation, and that desire is kinda there in Last Jedi. But because it spent two hours spinning its wheels just to re-establish the status quo, and that's why it failed in my eyes.
The main thing to take out of this is just one: the lack of vision. Most of Disney Star Wars just throws out many interesting ideas to come of as visionary and like it has something to say, but in reallity it only exists as pure product, made to milk one of the biggest franchises of all time.
Star Wars was best when it was influenced by Joseph Campbell's The Hero with a Thousand Faces. It was a myth with sci-fi dressings. Now it has turned into a sci-fi with robes and lightsabers. We have gotten to the point where can't accept religion as a force for good in the world, so we can't accept it in Star Wars either. Unfortunately, it can't exist without it's spiritual and mythological roots.
Yes, but the hero's journey has been done to death. It was over after the original trilogy. Retelling the story in the same franchise doesn't really work.
Foundations of star wars by . is one of the most influential aspects of how I view the franchise in full. Embrace the good, let go of the bad.
Same thing happened to the Star Wars Galaxies MMO. When there was maybe 1 or 2 Jedi on an entire server, the game flourished. When they made it a starting class that literally everyone could play, the game keeled over dead practically overnight.
Now Star Wars Galaxies is itself the mythical era, most people have never experienced 😀
Star Wars is done and over for me. There were some good projects in there, but the lack of vision/direction and incompetent writers killed it.
I really appreciate you. You serve two purposes for me. You educate me with your analysis of films and its so insightful and thoughtful.
Also when i struggle to sleep. I put on your videos that ive already seen because your calm voice helps me sleep really well. Thank you
Lucas did say that he was worried that Disney would turn the Force into "gobbledygook"
I'm still bitter that TFA gave us Iko Uwais and Yayan Ruhian in a movie with lightsabres and they didn't fight. Yes, I want Star Wars: The Raid.
that was just dickriding on the popularity of The Raid
The collective consciousness is exhausted with Star Wars (and most forms of modern storytelling) because stories are no longer there to temporarily take us into a quiet space and give us something thought-provoking that we can take back to the real world. Franchises are the destination - the end in-and-of themselves. The complexity of life, coupled with the technological capacity to create endless media, derail the integrative superpower we have to make action out of meaning. Instead we're left with endless, fantastical worldbuilding that only serves to sap our lives, take our money, and delude us into a false sense of safety, which we masturbate to every night through high-definition visual archetypes.
Please, LSOO, break your own statis and get back to myth, sincerity, and real intellectualism.
THANK YOU for turning your keen eye toward Star Wars. They need all the help they can get.
To be honest I completely disagree with the interpretation that the message is TLJ is that - "the Jedi must end".
The message is opposite - the sacred Jedi texts are saved from the old, decrepit scaffolding of a dead temple and brought back to the world, Luke proclaims that how won't be the Last Jedi, the broom boy enamored by the myth will be the part of the new generation of the Jedi. It is essentially the story of the new generation learning from the old values and reinvigorating them in a new way. The story of the Phoenix burning in its own flames to be born anew.
The reason people think "letting it all die" is the message is that it is expressed by Luke, and later by the villain of the story - Kylo Ren. But the movie clearly states - they are wrong! The fact that people buy into this message means that Kylo is a compelling villain with interesting motivations, that go beyond "Unlimited Powah!!", not that he is correct.
Yeah lets not go down the rabbit hole of everything wrong with TLJ lol
@anthonyml7 TLJ has its flaws but I think it is overhated, and grifted over by some edgelord inluencers.
With the level of malice and bad faith criticism anything can be made to look awful. I bet that if the ESB were released today these edgelords would complain about:
- how AT-ATs are stupid camel-like boxy machines, how defeating them with towing cables was unrealistic,
- how the damsel Luke saved in original Star Wars was stolen from him by bad boy Han,
- how Luke in general is presented as a soyak and loser, losing nearly every confrontation, and being made fun of by a Muppet,
- how the entire chase sequence through asteroid field is stupid, without Falcon shooting back, with asteroids in unrealistic distances and with stupid space worms
- how Han hiding Falcon by attaching itself to command tower of a Star Destroyer was beyond nonsensic,
- how "No, I am your father" reveal destroyed the characters of Luke, Obi-wan, Vader and the Jedi as a whole at the same time,
- etc, etc.
All of the above is technically true... You just have to give the most malicious interpretation of this movie. I bet if this was the climate around the movie you would not have a lot of fun. The difference these days is that we pay attention to these grifters, whereas in the past we would call them what that are - not reviewers or critics but true killjoys.
@ idk what an "edgelord" is or who's grifting off of TLJ but yeah it was pretty dam bad. Like I said lets not go down that deep hole lol
@anthonyml7 Nah, it was good.
@@mreszotnik I agree. In Johnson's work you can see more of the Lucas' philosophy, even though visually he tried to separate his work from all the previous movies. JJ copied almost everything, but he still didn't get, what Star Wars is really about.
Ngl, I kinda like RotJ. I respected it's ability to actually SAY and DO things and stand by them.... until the next movie got scared and walked it back
Problem is that Star Wars thinks good vs evil is a simple concept, so they try to abandon that good vs evil stuff. Andor is often credited for being morally grey and abandoning the good vs evil thing, but I think the opposite. It does what the prequels do(with better quality obviously) and shows that good people, good intentioned people play a heavy hand in the rise of evil. It shows that evil doesn't need to defeat good to win, it just needs good to be complacent. That's why it resonates with so many Star Wars and non-Star Wars fans alike. It doesn't do the whole "good and evil are the same thing, it's just perspective dude" and proceed to equate a clearly more morally sound side seem as bad as the literal embodiment of evil. When you do that, it turns people off and/or(no pun intended) makes them rather nihilistic. Nuance doesn't = everything is the same, therefore good and evil don't exist.
Wow. Thank you for bringing up the concept of the Schroedinger plot. Finally I managed to see put into words a feeling that I could never express properly and that is generally keeping me from being involved in following the plot of modern tv series.
the acolyte was a mess but at least it was an attempt to expand the timeline parameters. imagine having to sit through yet ANOTHER show/movie where protagonists fight Stormtroopers/the Empire
The idea of setting a mystery in the high republic era was great. It just failed in the execution.
@@TheChristianPsychopath yup, the execution of it was a problem. i really loved the premise, though.
This scene (0:15) has bothered me since I saw it at the movies. Dooku turns away from Anakin, who could simply slash across Dooku's back and end the duel. Yet he just lowers his lightsabre and does nothing.
The superman comparison is spot on. I think we have to examine the finer points of what is good and what is evil and what do good people have a duty to stop when there is so much evil. I also feel like theres nothing wrong with the jedi through organizational dogma becoming corrupt and needing the be torn down to be rebuilt. At the end of the day our heroes have to be heroic and have to be good in a way that most everyone can agree is good.
Star Wars Origins, highly praised, including by Mark Hamill himself, gave us something most significantly refreshing. Especially having it set on Earth which I’m sure a lot of fans were hoping for.
Nope, Long Ago in a Galaxy Far, Far Away... keep it away from Earth. Plenty of other earth based sci-fi. (I don't mind this stuff in fan films, but not for the story canon.)
“Schrodinger’s story” is a wonderful and perfectly apt term for modern franchises. If only Kreia had her way and the force ended entirely. This is what the response to the cycle should be.
It's interesting. I feel like KoToR II dealt with this kind of things as well. How to place the Jedi in the universe and how the force should relate to those beings in the universe at large.
All great points. Thank you for your commentary.
Btw I'm looking forward to your next video - when I finished watching Gladiator 2, I was sure there were originally two scripts (probably for even entirely different movies) and they just stitched them together to make it "somehow" connect with Gladiator 1. Interested in your thoughts!
I paused at around 15:40, and I have to say - I love that the video didn't end here. I think I was almost expecting it to, as so many video essays are content with diagnosing a problem and expressing it and then stopping there. Not that it would have been a bad thing either, but thank you for adding these last 10 minutes on potential solutions!
You could almost say Lucas Film Star Wars was Fantasy, Disney made it vaguely science fiction
You could except they can't figure out how hyperspace works...oy. But I get what you mean about it being more political than mythic.
The Jedi were a kind of 'space knight' and 'space monk': a paladin, a warrior cleric. It was a way for people to identify with a construct that was both strong and noble. The Superman/Batman contrast was a good one: Superman is a person with unbelievable power who uses it for the benefit of others. The Superman story is a story yearning for a protector, and the Jedi story is a story yearning to *be* the protector.
For some reason, some people think it's innovative to re-imagine a story, flipping the villains and the heroes. Well, what if Superman is actually 'bad', what if The Wicked Witch is actually good, etc. Mankind has an intrinsic desire to believe in a hero and to be on the side of good, but in reality, that gets complicated. So we can fall back on stories...except the newer people working in the world of the creator want to reimagine the components of that creation. It's 'edgy'.
It's a cycle of destruction we see over and over, redefining the heroes as villains and the villains as heroes...or as 'understandable' villains who have trauma.
One of the biggest things I had to learn in life, period, was to stop identifying with the villain (and their trauma) and to be able to identify good people.
15:40 The Last Jedi tried to move the Jedi story forward. Kylo Ren even said it: "Kill the past." Then Disney gave in to the fan backlash.
The way you present your argument is almost as if "being stuck" is the only problem of the franchise.
I agree vision cohesion is part of the issue, but the stories being told are just bad. Bad in quality, bad in ideas, bad in morals, bad in logic.
Even in isolation, none of the ideas presented by Disney worked, thats why they tried A and it didn't work, then tried B and found out it also didn't work.
The writers dont understand Star Wars. And I think you don't understand it either. Your description of what a Jedi is, was very superficial.
For a really good analysis of What a Jedi is, check "What JEDI Used To Be" from youtuber schnee.
If you can't understand the Jedi, you can't create a Star Wars film WITH the Jedi. That's part of the reason the only stories that worked, didn't use the Jedi.
I mean he essentially said that they're not particularly well written either way, so I don't know what you're on about
Bingo
my favourite Star Wars story of recent years has to be the Force Awakens video game. aside from just very much liking Cameron Monaghan, I appreciated how it was a small story about an individual overcoming his trauma and past, even if he was a Jedi and thus linked to the greater galactic narrative. he wasn't a Skywalker or a Palpatine or whoever, he was just a random dude with some shit to deal with. the secondary characters and villains were also quite good imo
unfortunately I'm a PC gamer so I never made it through Survivor :(
Balance was the end game, but how to bring personal balance to a Galaxy is the story telling challange.
Your videos and your voice are unmatched. Beautiful work with incredible insights, thanks for your channel my friend ❤
It's simple - bring back the Expanded Universe, LucasArts stories, Admiral Thrawn, Kyle Katarn, and Mara Jade.
The EU was never canon. There was a 10 year turf war with George Lucas that he already won, no reason to start it up again once his back is turned.
Great points about the Jedi!
One key element here is: who is the desired audience?
Disney wants to sell the Star Wars property to as many people as possible… they have tried different shows for different audiences, so there most definitely is not a singular vision.
Making money by throwing stuff at the wall and seeing what sticks with these different audiences is why Star Wars has suffered (tremendously) in quality.
Its world building, characters, mythology, and story telling has been very messy.
Lucas had a singular vision and goals for what Star Wars could achieve, warts-and-all - while Disney doesn’t have a passionate vision (beyond making money out of the property).
I personally love Star Wars - and I always will, similar to how an unlucky sports fan stays true (and is stuck) with a sub-par team. I’ve had some great times and memories with Star Wars - and I’m grateful… but more importantly, there’s hope for the future being better. An awesome action movie, a deep story with complex characters, some worthwhile extensions to the lore… that’s what keeps fans like me on the hook. I’ll pick up a book, rewatch the movies looking for missed details, try out the new Disney plus shows, and buy merchandise out of a desire to relive the happiness of the best moments. Escapism is a real thing - and while I’d like to see more mature interpretive stories, I don’t have much hope for that here in the Disney era.
Andor is in that camp - and I’m super grateful to have it.
Stuck? Imagine how stuck the Mona Lisa is. She is sitting there forever.
This is why shows like Mr InBetween are so good. They don't try to last, and last, and last. 3 shorter seasons. In, out, done. Character arcs galore, with a finality that is both satisfying and even kind of realistic given its tone. We need more series that not only know HOW to end, but also WHEN.
the two courses of action you speak reminds me of the duality that Modernism deals with: 1- myth - heart/soul - (modern) 2- sociopolitical examination of matters of the world - grounded de-constructionism (postmodern) = metamodern oscillation between ernest / ironic
Why there has never been a Noir-like smuggler or other story based on Nar Shadda is beyond me
Sounds like Star Wars 1313 which was canceled
Because WB strangled it in the crib
I agree a lot. But one thing to mention is that, with what can be done with visual effects, since basically the first X-Men movies and The Matrix, it's hard to find how to compete while still staying true to the Jedi lore, and it may have influenced many bad or questionable decisions. The Mandalorian and Andor gave the opportunity to free the story of what the audience would expect if Jedi were involved, and it must ve deeply felt that almost any scene with Magneto in the X-Men made him look way more powerful than any Jedi. They don't just have no idea what story to tell, they don't know how to make it as great as the competition.
I love your work LSOO. Thank you so much for nurturing our passion for art and films
I'm definitely more of a fan of the course correction back to the jedi in original+prequel series framing. I think that black and white framing is actually best for it because people can instill their own sense of gray for it. The original framing worked because it was a black and white story, so of course black and white jedi fit into it. The prequel worked pretty good because it could imply the gray without having to state it - if white can become black, is there gray? The sequels intent is planted in the gray and thus fall short because, in our desire to instill meaning, it makes the intent feel bland in the first place. We can sense where the gray is even without being directly told what is gray and what isn't.
Fire all writers. Hire any with a clue. Problem solved
An alternate timeline where TLJ didn't have the epic fan backlash would be nice to peak into.
Order 66 was dramatic and good at the time but in retrospect, this story decision was a mistake in my opinion. It basically prevented almost all future jedi/sith potential story ideas.
One of the big things that makes the old republic so cool is that the jedi order and sith still exist. There’s a deep lore and mythos that’s just not as present in the current timeline. All the cool stuff happened in the past.
Star wars emptied the tank of cool jedi stuff in the story prior to the new movies and they never filled it up with more cool stuff. They just kept trying to pump from an already empty tank.
You should check out Legends. Pre-2014, Star Wars had a tons of stories exploring thousands of years of history and different phases of the Jedi Order. What's most baffling about the new films is not letting Luke keep his New Jedi Order. It was easily the most fascinating part of the lore and he had to start from scratch and regrow the order, and an easy to insert a diverse cast and new conflicts. They allowed marriage, partly because no one had told him differently, and while I wasn't the biggest fan of the Del Rey period, they did actually struggle with the positive and negative aspect of attachments.
They just couldn't keep it simple. The less we knew the better the Jedi were. The more we've learned the more they've unravelled and pissed people off.
Luke is recruited to become a jedi. Otherwise the story would ended there.
The young boy fighting old men war.
Let's be clear here: The issue with the Jedi began when Disney took over. And Disney's issue is (despite producing outrageously stupid scripts and having no unified vision) that they fundamentally misunderstand (deliberately or not) that you CAN explore the flaws of the Jedi (as the original 6 films did, to some extent) without making them either completely incompetent, absolutely moronic, cartoonishly villainous or insanely ridiculous. They misunderstand that Jedi and Sith are not equal minded and that the Jedi - despite having flaws, as everyone does - strife to be better, to improve themselves, to help the people and protect them. They strive to be heroes. And that is also a weakness, often exploited by the Sith.
The way I see it, most movies and series made under Disney would have to be removed from canon somehow to even be able to start fixing this.
To your point of antagonists and connections to the past: There is no lack of antagonists that are not Sith in both Books and Series. The issue is not a lack of possible antagonists for the Jedi but an absolute lack of creativity and arrogant decisions in the past, de-canonizing basically all extended universe narratives.
The Jedi striving to not get involved in politics (or at least prioritizing Ideals over Politics) does not mean that they do not serve the people of the republic, which may get them involved in politics. As you explore in your "Solution 2": There are many ways to actually explore different avenues and I firmly believe there is a lot of material already out there just waiting for the silver screen. Just stop the deconstruction and de-mystification. Escapism is - in my view - the most fundamental reason why fantasy and science fiction works for most people and that has been lost over the past decade. There are no mysteries, everything has to be explained, deconstructed and analyzed. But for me that is just not entertaining. That is just more of what I do every day.
The Clone Wars did all of this WAAAAY worse than Disney.
There are literally people who think Mace Windu is a badguy because of that nonsense. And he didn't even do anything bad in Clone Wars, they just hyper-empathized with Ahsoka and Anakin while they acted like douchebags constantly and got away with it. 😂
@@MrBazBake And now you can think about who wrote Clone Wars and who is in charge of Star Wars at Disney. And then you will know, why I did not cite Clone Wars as a good example. It is not entirely bad but it layed the groundwork for a lot of the issues.
Also, you cannot tell me that Clone Wars is worse then the Acolyte.
Am I the only one who's wanted to see a movie or series exploring the Sith giving us more perspectives on the rest of the SW universe
‘The Last Jedi was not subversive enough’… Yup you get it. It raised the possibility of new possibilities but not enough to get really excited and truly feel like the GFFA was opening up to be a bigger stage.
In the prequels, Jedi order is already fully political. They are the enforcers of the republic, elite bodyguards, special forces, protectors.They are attached with the republic, they falter (can’t see the slow rise of sith under their nose) as the republic falters. In the OG trilogy, the Jedi spearheaded the rebellion to get back to the republican ways. It is quite clear what they always were: A praetorian guard of sorts without an emperor.
I'll never forget the day it was announced that Disney had bought Lucasfilms. I said, boldly, 'this is the best possible thing for Star Wars. Too many people love this universe for it to fail. You could make a strong argument that there is no one less qualified to make a Star Wars than George Lucas at this point' and man. This must be what it's like when flat earthers see the 24 hour Sun. I've never been so wrong in my life.
In the original trilogy, Jedi are space samurai/cowboys. The magic is in the creative synthesis of samurai movies and westerns in a science fiction setting. Everything else after is various degrees of death of the author.
I appreciate that you reasoned that there's nothing inherently wrong with the sociopolitical/deconstructive approach that gives the rebels/Jedi more of a Grey moral standing, and even defended the direction that Last Jedi hinted at rather than wholesale dismissing it. These ideas can, just like Marvel and DC and other universes, exist in the same franchise with more mythological and classically good vs evil stories. Lots of people might disagree, but getting new and conflicting perspectives of the wars and the jedi gives flavor and enriches the universe. It's how we get things like Rogue One and Andor, and although some of the other shows didn't execute it well, I still believe there's stories about the Jedi that can be told outside of the mythological framework.
The serious problem seems to be that they don't want to commit to anything, like you mentioned. They want to explore the greys, but then they remind you at the end that there's still light and dark and that light needs to win. But then they hardly change anything about the light side, and all you're left with at the end is this muddy taste. It's obviously beneficial to make us question the light side and "good guys" instead of having us believe they're just absolutely good, but idk, why not just go further in it and introduce a new concept at that point (like the Grey Jedi from Legends or whatever it came from). At the end, Disney still wanted to sell blue/green and red lightsabers. If that was the case, just stick to the mythological approach instead of blue-balling us by teasing something new. Either give us something new or stick to the classic, you can't have the cake and eat it.
13:21 oh my word! “It’s time for the Jedi to end” is the same film that says “and I will not be the last Jedi” and has kids playing Jedi and a force using kid being hopeful. How do people keep missing this?
A big part of this lack of direction from Disney is what is the Force supposed to be? Not just its powers , but what does it represent? You can play around with the concept of the Jedi especially as all characters will vary in personality and motivation, but what are the ground rules for those that try to channel the power of the Force for different ends?
The point about the "Mythical DC Universe" is a really good way of viewing the world of these works and it should be internalised by creators.
It becomes clear that there's a problem with the Jedi when the best Star Wars recently has had little to nothing to do with the Jedi. And, it's not a problem that some parts of Star Wars barely even mention the Jedi. It's a problem with the franchise as a whole. If a franchise wants to stay relevant it needs to have variety (especially if it churns out a lot of content). So, it's a problem that you can get good stories without the Jedi but once they become the center of the story it's hard to imagine it being a good story anymore. And, when you ruin an iconography you hurt the image (in this case brand/franchise) it's associated with. Also, it may sound cynical to refer to a group of stories as a "brand" or "franchise" but when it turns out an insane amount of lackluster content it's hard not to think of it as such. Finally, YAY a video that criticizes modern Star Wars without using the words "wOKe" or "DEI" Thank the lord.
I think the real problem with the treatment of the Jedi in the sequels was that they were in no way allowed to evolve.
We see that Luke attempted to build a new order, but it was once again wiped out and Luke becomes a bitter pessimist. And then ROS fully reset it, but added nothing new. Rey essentially replaced Luke and nothing in the world had changed.
Luke defeated the Emperor not by overpowering him or removing all emotion, but by showing his father compassion and mercy. Why this message was not properly carried forward, I don't know. In Legends, Luke married and had children, why would he stick to the celibate way if he'd learned the real value of familial love? Why do chatacters like Ahsoka and Luke seem to stick to the strict mantra of no attachements when they both know better? And both know that Anakin was undone by the Jedi's enforced stoicism?
These are questions that still frustrate me. Disney's failire to address or acknowledge them continues to stall the Jedi from any real evolution in terms of their ideology or value.
And I don't believe more movies about Rey will fix anything. Neither do I think a story about the Jedi's origin will give us satisfying answers.
My apathy for Star Wars has grown so big that, despite insta-clicking every LSOO the minute I see it, I almost didn't feel like watching this video. It just feels so futile to even discuss what's wrong with Disney's contribution - it's like trying to discuss what's wrong with pouring mayonnaise on a chicken, strapping bombs to it and entering it into a beauty pageant. Asking "what's wrong" almost doesn't even feel like a question that makes sense anymore, without even thinking about solutions.
Thankfully, in no small part due to this channel's influence on me, I've developed a wider range of love for cinema and I am opening myself up to so many other great films and film-makers. I'll watch Andor S2 since I enjoyed the first, but even then, I feel like I watch it less as a Star Wars story and more just as a fun space drama.
Thank you for once more putting into simple terms something I have been struggling to describe
They screwed the protagonist antagonist paradigm and now everyone is confusion and or annoyed 😠