I'm repeating myself here somewhat but it bears repeating. A few things so far give me hope we're not getting pure Nostalgic rehashing in The Force Awaken, but the over all picture isn't hopeful.
I'd be satisfied even if what's new is largely Superficial. Just showing us new worlds and new species like the Prequels did, even though the Prequels didn't elaborate a lot on much of what it introduced, it gave a young imagination something to work with.
I've had people mock me lately for praising what was new and inspiring about Jurassic World. Giving it the most bare bones plot summery possible to say "see, same thing as the first movie", but those are mostly similarities required for it to even still be the same genre much less franchise. By that standard King King (1933) is a rip off of The Lost World (1925) and Godzilla a rip off of The Beast from 20,000 Fathoms.
Haters can easily if they want to write off what was new and different about Jurassic World as "gimmicks", but those gimmicks sparked my imagination, and that's why I fell in love with Jurassic Park, and Star Wars to being with, their ability to spark my imagination.
What does NOT spark my imagination is showing me the same thing but calling it something different. That Desert Planet isn't Tatooine, it's Jakku, that Snowy planet isn't Hoth, that Forest Planet isn't Endor, that Planet shaped Super Weapon/Battle station isn't a Death Star, and that Villain dressed in black using the dark side of the force and wielding a Red Lightsaber isn't a Sith.
I'm fine with the trilogy having all those things, mostly, but they need to also have more.
You want to say that the Jedi and the Sith aren't the only Force Users, that's great, but you need to have an actual substantial difference. Otherwise there is no point is trying to sell us on Kylo Ren not being a Sith.
Tatooine was the only OT world revisited in the PT. Because of that it's the only world I really cared about the new Tirlgoy revisiting. It's at the narrative center of the Star Wars story. But I'd be fine with it not being in Episode VII if the reason was they wanted to not revisit any prior worlds to assure the audience the new films weren't gonna be all rehashes. Instead we get Jakku, which is different because there are ruins of an old battle there, that could still have been done on Tatooine, there was plenty of room. And it sounds like the Jakku battle took place after ROTJ ended anyway.
From what we've been shown so far, every location in this movie is just a reminder of something from the OT. And I would honestly be less upset by that if they didn't pretend they were different places.
BrosWatchPLLToo said in their podcast about people complaining about the Death Star similarity "who cares if it's another Death Star, your getting a new Star Wars movie" and my response is, no the pseudo Death Star is evidence we are NOT getting NEW Star Wars, we're getting old Star Wars with different actors. If I want to see the Rebels destroy a planet shaped Super Weapon/Battle Station, I have two movies I can see that in already.
It is part of Star Wars that a lot of it's ideas repeat, but they repeat differently. In the Prequel Trilogy everything that echoed the OT was at the same time introducing something new. The Force Awakens needs to do the same thing if it will keep Star Wars alive. If it does, Abrams is making a point of hiding it. But what he made a point of hiding about Star Trek: Into Darkness was that he was rehashing an old villain. So I have good reason to be worried.
No comments:
Post a Comment