Star Wars: The Last Jedi

The Last Jedi is the spark that lit the fire that fueled a whole lot of internet nerd rage.  That nerd rage is why I was a little reluctant to write down my thoughts on the movie and put them someplace the entire internet can see them (Not that the entire internet reads this, but you know what I mean).

The Last Jedi is a controversial movie.  Audiences either love it or hate it, seemingly without much in the way of middle ground.  The great thing about controversy in film is it allows you to form your own opinions.  If a movie is crazy popular, you are expected to see it and like it by default.  Love it or hate it movies generate more discussion because they bring out passionate reactions.  Viewers will talk more about them because they either want to understand the opposite point of view or covert the other party to their way of seeing things.

Most people who hate The Last Jedi seem to focus primarily on the way Luke Skywalker 'Acts out of Character'.  This is fueled in part by actor Mark Hamill expressing his concern over the way Luke was written.  Fans are rallying to defend Luke's honor, and I kind of get that.  But personally I thought his character evolution made a lot of sense?  So, I don't see what the problem is?

I'll get into my thoughts on Luke's character arc a little more later on, but first here's a list of things I did and didn't like.  Spoilers to follow.

Liked - - - Paige Tico and her relationship with her sister, Rose.  The movie opens with a big space battle and a heroic sacrifice from a character we'd never met before.  Paige is somebody we've known for only 5 minutes, but her death left a bigger impact for me than all of the deaths in 'Rogue One: A Star Wars Story' combined.  I enjoyed Rogue One, by the way.  Not hating on Rogue One.  Just stating the facts as I see them.  This death gives us clear cut motivation for newcomer Rose Tico, and was brilliant use of shorthand to make us like and care about her.  Unless of course, you aren't some one who liked and cared about her.  Seriously, why do so many people hate Rose Tico?


Liked - - - Poe Dameron's story arc.  After I saw 'Star Wars: The Force Awakens' I was like - 'Yeah! That was so cool! I loved all the new characters, like Rey, and Finn and...um, was there a third one? I'm not remembering anyone else...'  Poe left zero impact on me in the previous installment.  He's really given a chance to shine this time around.  We have here a subplot about recklessness vs. responsibility, consequences for our actions, and how bucking authority so we can go do our own thing isn't always the best plan of action.  I felt like this was a deconstruction of Luke and Han's carefree daring-do in the original trilogy - you know, the way they just sneak around the Deathstar and always come up with a plan of action on the spot, sending the message that 'Yeah, you can totally live your life flying by the seat of your pants. It'll all turn out okay in the end!'  But it real life you can't always fly by the seat of your pants.  And sometimes our actions have consequences.


Liked - - - C3PO.  He didn't have a huge role, but he had more than a cameo appearance this time around.  This is the first Star Wars movie in a long time where C3PO shows up on screen and I wasn't going 'Why is he even here?'  In Rogue One - and again, I like Rogue One, C3PO have the worlds most pointless, most in your face cameo that was basically 'Hey, remember these guys? Well, they're still here!' and that really really irked me.  Either give the droids something to do, or cut them out entirely.

Liked - - - Rey and Kylo Ren's force head games.  Rey and Kylo Ren spend large portions of this movie communicating long distance through the force.  These were actually my favorite parts of the story.  It felt like a psychological thriller, and how cool is a Star Wars psychological thriller?  Rhetorical question, because it's all kinds of cool.

Didn't like - - - That casino planet.  This didn't bother me as much as some people, but visually the casino on Canto Bite really looked like something out of the prequel trilogy.  It felt out of place with the aesthetics of the rest of the film.  Now you could say that this is Disney/Lucasfilm trying to put a band-aid on the prequels - throwing in the occasional visual callback to the trilogy as if to say, 'Yeah, that kind of visual COULD work in Star Wars. See? It's not such a glaring anachronism!'  As the giant tentacle slug monsters Han Solo was smuggling in 'The Force Awakens' also look like something from the prequel trilogy this seems like a plausible theory.

Didn't like - - - So...BB8 has superpowers now...?  There's a scene on Canto Bite where Finn and Rose are escaping from a prison cell, and they round a corner, and BB8 is there with a bunch of guards who have been knocked out and tied up.  A wide eyed Finn asks, 'Did you do that?'  Funny moment right?  Right.  The problem comes later where they take it a little too far - a little over the top.  If you've seen the movie you know the part I'm talking about.  It's the part where Finn and Rose are captured by the First Order when somebody driving an AT-ST walker comes to their rescue...and it is revealed that that somebody...is BB8.  BB8 stole an AT-ST.  That's really over the top and really really dumb.

As you can probably see, things I liked vastly the things I didn't so far.  And the things I don't like are pretty minor.  They might take me out of the story for a few moments, but they don't ruin my overall enjoyment of the movie.  So, without further adieu, here's my read on the Luke Skywalker story arc.

 Luke has seen a lot since 'Return of the Jedi'.  In the original trilogy he was an Idealist, and now he is rather Cynical.  Can a series of traumatic events completely change one's world view?  Can idealism be crushed?  Realistically speaking, I think it can.  'Return of the Jedi' ends with Darth Vader returning to the Light Side and the Rebel Alliance overcoming the forces of the Empire.  But history has a nasty tendency to  repeat itself.  Between trilogies Luke attempts to restore the Jedi Order.  His apprentice Ben Solo turns to the Dark Side and tears down everything Luke had built.  The First Order rises, and from Luke's point of view everything he's fought for has been in vain.  This, quite realistically in my opinion, leads to apathy and depression.
 
Luke does what Obi Wan and Yoda did before him - decide that the problems of the galaxy are too big for him to face on his own.  He goes into a self imposed exile.  When Rey finds him he's had a lot of time alone to think about just how fragile the Jedi Order is.  How fragile it has always been.  Interestingly the writers of this trilogy seem to have swapped Luke and Han Solo's views on the Force.  In 'The Force Awakens' Han Solo has a little bit of Luke's Idealism: 'I thought it was a bunch of Mumbo Jumbo. A magical power holding together good and evil - the Dark Side and the Light? Crazy thing is...It's true. The force, the Jedi...all of it. It's all true.'  Han Solo has a new found faith in the Force, whereas Luke sees the Jedi order as something that does more harm than good that is always doomed to failure.

People make a big deal out of the flashback scenes where it's revealed why Ben Solo turned to the Dark Side - Luke foresaw that he would turn and tried to kill him first.  Fans everywhere where upset that Luke would try to murder his apprentice.  Except that's not what happens.  If you were actually paying attention to the story you'll notice that Luke never tried to kill Ben.  They explicitly spell out that in a moment of weakness the thought crossed Luke's mind, but he wouldn't have gone through with it.  LUKE DIDN'T TRY TO KILL BEN SOLO PEOPLE.  But Kylo Ren thought he did.  And that's why he turned.  It's like a Greek Tragedy where knowing the outcome of the future and trying to change that outcome causes the outcome.

And the other thing people complain about is the ending.  They think Luke didn't get the wow moment he deserved. To which I have to ask - did we watch the same movie?  Luke coming back when the rebellion needs him most to face off with Kylo Ren and the armed forces of the First Order - ALONE - so they could make their getaway.  And to me at least it really doesn't matter that Luke was just a force projection.  Let me spell out why.

Reason 1: This new Force Projection was really well set up.  In those scenes with Rey and Kylo Ren we see them touch hands through the force.  At one point Kylo Ren is sopping wet because it's raining were Rey is.  And when she fires a blaster at him, he's knocked across the room.  So whats going on in the environment where the Force User is projecting to has some effect on them.  Meaning that all of those shots that were fired at Luke and that part where Kylo Ren stuck his Lightsabre through his chest?  Yeah, Luke potentially felt every blow.  Also the fact that Luke is a projection is foreshadowed really well.  He doesn't leave footprints in the salt (Kylo Ren does) and he's using a Lightsabre that we saw get broken just a few scenes earlier.

Reason 2: The final battle really reminds me of the Spaghetti western film 'A Fistful of Dollars'.  In this movie Clint Eastwood returns to town specifically to rescue a hostage.  He overcomes the villains by using his wits.  Earlier in the movie the main villain, Ramón, whilst showing off his skills with a gun boasts about always shooting a man through the heart when he kills.  So Clint Eastwood's character stuffs a bulletproof metal plate up his poncho and taunts Ramón to aim for the heart.  Our hero appears to be bulletproof and the unnerves the villains, throwing them off balance, long enough for Eastwood's character to overcome the odds of their superior numbers.  

Luke basically does the same thing, outwitting the First Order, appearing unstoppable, and stalling them long enough for the Rebel forces to escape.  What I see as a 'Fistful of Dollars' homage makes me especially happy because Star Wars has always been heavily influenced by westerns and Samurai films - 'Fistful of Dollars' is a western remake of an Akira Kurosawa Samurai film 'Yojimbo'.

Reason 3: How would fans expect and actual battle between Luke, Jedi Master, and Kylo Ren, Darksider who was Snoke's apprentice until about ten minutes ago?  You expect Luke to defeat Kylo Ren, right?  I know I would.  But Luke couldn't have defeated Kylo Ren.  Because they need a villain for the third movie in the trilogy.  And I don't think Kylo Ren is strong enough to defeated Luke.  So the only possible outcome of that hypothetical fight is a stalemate.  Kind of like that fight between Yoda and Palpatine in 'Revenge of the Sith'.  Fights that end in stalemates tend to be disappointing storytelling decisions.  Having Luke not be physically there for the fight was a brilliant way to sidestep this problem in my opinion.

'So, why did Luke just die?' is something a lot of fans are asking.  Some think he died from exertion from the force projection.  A lot of fans resent this, saying that that's like dying because of a supernatural Skype call.  I'd disagree with that statement because of the way they showed us how force projection works.  If Luke felt the effect of every one of those hits - like Kylo Ren felt the effects of Rey's blaster - I think that would totally be enough to kill somebody.

Others think he died because he was a peace.  He did what he had to do.  He saw Leia one last time, he made up for just walking away from the rebellion by returning when they needed him most, and he made (albeit one sided) piece with Kylo Ren.  He had said at the beginning of the movie that he came to the Jedi temple to die.  He just had some things he had to do first.  When those were done he gave himself up to the force, just like Yoda did in 'Return of the Jedi' because there was nothing more he could teach Luke.  It's an ending that's open for interpretation.  Personally I thought Luke fading away while looking off at the sunset as that theme from the original trilogy played (you know the one) was a beautiful moment.

I liked 'The Last Jedi.'  Personally I liked it better than 'The Force Awakens'.  If you're wondering about my current ranking of Star Wars movies it looks something like this:

1: Return of the Jedi
2: A New Hope
3: The Last Jedi
4: The Force Awakens
5: Empire Strikes Back
6: Rogue One
7: Attack of the Clones
8: Revenge of the Sith
9: The Phantom Menance

-Geekboy.

The Magnificent Seven (2016)

Here we go again.  Last installment of the Seven Samurai vs Magnificent Seven series.

The 2016 version makes a few subtle changes to the story we should be pretty familiar with by now.  Rather than bandits stealing grain we have an evil robber baron 'Bartholomew Bogue' out to steal the farmers land and the valuable mineral rights that go with it.  The seed for this idea of 'Thar be gold in those hills!' was planted in the 60's version with Harry Luck's obsessive notion that the bandits must be after buried treasure rather than grain.

Rather than turn to the local wise old man for advice the townsfolk meet in the Church to figure out how to deal with this.  Bartholomew crashes this little party, and burns down the Church building.  All this is to show us just how evil he is.  As if this isn't bad enough Bartholomew's men quite literally kick the Pastor while he's down.  The husband of our female lead, Emma, rushes to the Pastor's aid and is shot in cold blood.

We now switch to our heroes.  Or at least one of them.  There are seven of these guys after all.  Specifically we switch to Sam Chisolm, who is quick to remind you that he's a 'Warrant Officer' rather than a bounty hunter (but he's basically a bounty hunter).  We're given clues to his character arc and motivation through the sort of bounties he collects.  He's after a man who has murdered fathers, sons, and raped wives.  You don't mess with families around Sam Chisolm.

Chisolm is approached by Emma.  Unlike Seven Samurai and the '60s Magnificent Seven, Chisolm doesn't agree to help simply because it's the right thing to do.  His interest isn't peaked until he hears the name Bogue.  He's got history with Bartholomew.  He asks Emma if she's out for revenge.  Her response?  'I seek righteousness, as should we all.  But I'll take revenge.'

Now that our heroic leader is on-board we go about the recruitment process.  To save time Chisolm already knows most of the men he recruits.  And the ones he doesn't have history with are all like, 'Hey, I have a buddy who's an expert knife thrower!  Can they come too?'  So, that's a subtle difference between versions.  Another is Chisolm's recruitment methods.  They occasionally border on blackmail.  For example, he buys the horse Joshua Faraday lost in a dice game and is all 'My horse now.  If you want it back you have to do a job for me.'  And then there's Vasquez, an outlaw he promises not to turn in, but only if he joins the suicide mission.

So.  On one hand this updated version feels a little cynical to me.  The storytellers decided to give most of the characters motivations to fight other than 'Yay!  Sticking up for the underdogs!  It's the right thing to do!'  Chisolm in particular feels a little jaded to me as we learn he's out for revenge on Bogue himself.  As leader of the seven he's the one you want to feel the LEAST jaded.  At times I feel like they were trying to make a Clint Eastwood western rather than a Magnificent Seven remake.

On the other hand we have themes of joining a common cause in spite of personal differences.  This message is downright humanitarian!  We have the Mexican outlaw Vasquez and Goodnight Robicheaux, whose grandfathers fought on opposite sides in the Battle of the Alamo, and we also have ex-Indian fighter Jack Horne and Comanche warrior Red Harvest fighting side by side.

The choice of the name Red Harvest - and this may be a bit of a stretch - seems like a clever Easter Egg to me.  Film Historians speculate that Dashiell Hammett's prohibition era mystery novel 'Red Harvest' may have inspired Akira Kurosawa's film 'Yojimbo' which in turn inspired the Spaghetti Western film 'For a Fistful of Dollars.'  And who directed 'Seven Samurai,' the film upon which 'Magnificent Seven' is based?  Also Akira Kurosawa.

Speaking of 'Seven Samurai,' the 2016 adaption doesn't seem to have a stand in for the Kikuchiyo character.  Not among the Seven at least.  I honestly think the closest equivalent is Emma.  She spends a good deal of the story trying to convince Chisolm to let her join the fight,  but not in a cheesy 'girl power' type way.  She doesn't have anything to prove, but feels as if they need every good shot they have, and wants an active part in bringing her husband's killer to justice.

I feel like Emma/Kikuchiyo parallel is particularly evident in the climax of the movie.  In a desperate attempt to escape from Chisolm's wrath, Bogue runs to the Church for sanctuary.  You know, that same Church that he burned down in the beginning of the picture.  Chisolm has him cornered, but like all dishonorable bad guys Bogue pulls out the backup weapon he had stashed on his person.  He's about to pull the trigger, and we hear a gunshot.  Not his gunshot, but Emma's.  She's avenging her husband's death and - like Kikuchiyo - becoming a full fledged warrior in the process.

And that's it for my Seven Samurai/Magnificent Seven series.  Hope you enjoyed, and if you haven't already, check out at least one of these movies - if not all three.  Each one has its own merits and I think it's worth studying the differences and similarities between adaptions.

-Geekboy.

The Magnificent Seven (1960)

Welcome to spot the differences...Magnificent Seven addition!  Now, the most obvious difference between 'Seven Samurai' and the The Magnificent Seven' is that 'The Magnificent Seven' is 'Seven Samurai' but with COWBOYS!

Okay.  That's it for this post.  Lets see, what should I review next?

What, you were expecting a more in-depth compare and contrast?

>Sigh<  Fine.

Remember when I said one of the major themes in Seven Samurai is the class differences between the farmers and the Samurai?  That's not really the case here.  The Gunslingers pretty much treat the farmers as equals.  This is a story about sticking up for the underdog and fighting for a cause because it's the right thing to do, rather than for personal gain.  Seven Samurai is also about fighting for a cause because it's the right thing to do, but it's more about personal honor and less about underdogs.

The film starts in a small Mexican village in a similar manner to Seven Samurai, only this time around there is actual interaction between the farmers and the bandits.  When one of the farmers tries to fight back he is gunned down.  So the villagers consult the old man and he tells them to scrape together everything of value they have so they can buy guns to fight off the bandits.

So they head north to find guns.  As we're cutting out all of that class difference stuff, we're also cutting back on the process of finding honorable Samurai who don't treat the farmers as if they're the dirt beneath their shoes.  The first thing the farmers witness when they arrive in town is two gunslingers risking their lives to give a dead American Indian a proper burial.  These gunslingers are Chris (played by Yul Brynner) who will be your Sensei Kambei for the evening, and Vin (played by Steve McQueen).  At first glance Vin seems to fill the role of Katsushirō, except there is no mentor/student dynamic between Chris and Vin.  Again, they are treated as equals.

The act of heroism is also witnessed by a young Mexican wannabe Gunslinger named Chico (played by Horst Buchholz).  Chico seems to be Katsushirō and Kikuchiyo combined.  He has Katsushirō's youthful naivety, insecurity, and romantic subplot.  He has Kikuchiyo's pride, blustery goofball nature, and also plays the role as moderator between gunslingers and farmers.  Chris describes Chico as 'Young and proud.  And the graveyards are filled with young and proud gunslingers'.

So the farmers ask Chris to help them buy guns.  Chris advises them to hire gunslingers instead as 'Men are cheaper than guns'.  ...That's not cynical at all...  So they offer him all the money they could scrape together.  To which he responds: 'I've been offered a lot for my work...but never everything.'  Is that profound or what?

So after that Chris goes about hiring gunmen.  This section is more or less identical to Seven Samurai.  One think about Seven Samurai though, is after the main introduction of each of the seven only the three main characters get a lot of development.  In 'The Magnificent Seven' more of the gunslingers have defining characteristics.  We have Harry, the soldier of fortune, Lee, army deserter who caves under pressure, and Bernardo, who has a soft spot children in spite of his gruff persona.  Of course as we're spending more time with the gunslingers we're also spending less time with the villagers and the social commentary from the original.

One interesting difference between 'Seven Samurai' and 'The Magnificent Seven' comes in the form of 'Show Don't Tell'.  Seven Samurai has Kambei studying maps and surveying the land to determine the best way to defend the village.  Magnificent Seven merely shows us the gunslingers overseeing construction of stone walls and the placement of nets.  'Magnificent Seven' saves time in this manor, but 'Seven Samurai' shows us that Kambei to be a brilliant strategist.  Also in 'Magnificent Seven' Petra tells Chico through exposition that the fathers feared for the safety of their daughters and made them go into hiding.  She also tells Chico that her father will punish her for spending so much time with him.  In 'Seven Samurai' Shino's father forcibly cuts her hair so she'll look like a boy, and later gives her a beating after catching her with Katsushirō.  I don't know if Petra's exposition info-dump is to save time or because of the MPAA's stance on depictions of violence towards women at the time.

In general 'Magnificent Seven' is a lighter movie than 'Seven Samurai'.  For example, there's a scene where the gunslingers try to convince the wise old man to move into the village as they can't defend his home.  The old man refuses to leave.  In 'Seven Samurai' the houses on the other side of the river are burned to the ground and everyone but a small child is killed by the bandits.  In 'Magnificent Seven' the old man shows up again after the climax without a scratch.

Although the first half of 'Magnificent Seven' follows 'Seven Samurai' pretty faithfully, the second half starts to diverge.  Rather than sneaking off into the enemy camp to steal superior weaponry, Chico infiltrates the bandits to spy.  And instead of negative consequences for his reckless action, he is praised as a hero.  However, some of the farmers get cold feet after the initial skirmish and betray the gunslingers by letting the bandits into the village.

The bandit leader allows the gunslingers to live, but only taking there guns and force marching them out of town.  The seven decide to return to the town in spite of this betrayal, as they were paid for a job and that job is unfinished.  It's a combination of personal pride and sense of duty.

So they have a heroic last stand which many of the gunslingers die.  The most tragic is Bernardo, who dies protecting the three young boys who've adopted him.  Chico - and this is what I consider to be the biggest difference between the two versions - survives.  I was actually pretty disappointed about this the first time I watched 'Magnificent Seven'.  I hadn't seen yet 'Seven Samurai', but I knew from the anime series 'Samurai 7' that Kikuchiyo dies in the end and is buried with honor alongside his fallen comrades as a true Samurai.  Having Chico survive and stay with Petra to start a life as a farmer felt like the opposite of a character arc to me.

Watching it again, the change works pretty well.  The other gunslingers are predicting that Chico will die in battle because of his impetuous nature since the beginning of the movie, so it's kind of a plot twist when he doesn't.  Also part of what makes Kikuchiyo's death so effective is that he's atoning for his past mistake of deserting his post and getting people killed.  Also, Chico is a combination of Kikuchiyo and Katsushirō, and given the more optimistic tone of 'Magnificent Seven' it makes sense that Chico gets Katsushirō's happy ending.

Bottom line: 'Seven Samurai' and 'The Magnificent Seven' have a lot of similarities, but enough differences to keep things interesting.  If you watch one it is definitely worth your time to watch the other.

-Geekboy