Yea but she did hear the story how Ben pretty much saved her as a child, so knowing that story she probably likes him a bit.
I'm going to assume they left out the bit where he lopped off her dad's legs, remaining flesh-arm, and dropped him in lava before leaving him for dead.
But seriously, does he, really? I mean, he fucks Anakin right up, but Bail volunteered to take Leia when Yoda said they had to split them up, then Obi-wan went "Yeah cuz I'll keep an eye on the other one no worries ay." Apart from slapping down Anakin, he didn't really have much of a role in her saving, beyond being present when it was decided, and not objecting to Bail's adoption plans.
And all that aside, She still wouldn't have heard that story about Ben saving her, she would have heard the story about how Obi-Wan Kenobi saved her. Bail had no reason to know his cover name, albeit, his very poorly chosen cover name. Or maybe Kenobi is like the Smith of Star Wars, who knows.
They might have named Young Ben after Old Ben because he was a Galactic hero - but again, as Obi-wan, not Ben.
What I don't get is how after the Empire was disbanded and the First Order no-longer had the legitimacy of being the galactic government and the fiat that comes with it, they manage to build an even bigger base than, as the Empire, they did twice before, when even the Death Star was ridiculously, insanely, huge.
The only explanation being that the people they hired to make those first ones were getting pretty good and had already invested in the infrastructure and as Rey shows, it's baiscally still all Empire tech that's cookie-cuttere'd into place so I guess they just kept bolting more shit together until they had the base built?
The official explanation is the most hardline of the Empire took their best and brightest and a crap-ton of resources and rebuilt in the Unknown regions away from any New Republic Weapon inspectors. In the same vein of how Nazi Germany managed to rearm after the First World War.
What I don't get is how after the Empire was disbanded and the First Order no-longer had the legitimacy of being the galactic government and the fiat that comes with it, they manage to build an even bigger base than, as the Empire, they did twice before, when even the Death Star was ridiculously, insanely, huge.
The only explanation being that the people they hired to make those first ones were getting pretty good and had already invested in the infrastructure and as Rey shows, it's baiscally still all Empire tech that's cookie-cuttere'd into place so I guess they just kept bolting more shit together until they had the base built?
The official explanation is the most hardline of the Empire took their best and brightest and a crap-ton of resources and rebuilt in the Unknown regions away from any New Republic Weapon inspectors. In the same vein of how Nazi Germany managed to rearm after the First World War.
Also space is huge. It's actually little surprising how easily people find stuff in Star Wars.
I did enjoy that they paid a decent amount of attention to Kylo Ren fucking up so much. It just seemed appropriate given that he's trying to step into some pretty big shoes.
However I guess Darth Vader also sort of fucked up in the same capacity. Just a little less embarrassingly so.
BTY the new Star Wars Marvel comics so far have been all pretty great. if you are looking for a Star Wars fix that's "Canon" Most of it all takes place between A New Hope and Empire Strikes back.
So, I watched this on Christmas Day. My thoughts...
On the one hand, it was nice to see a Star Wars movie in theaters that wasn't mind-numbingly dull. Disney was clearly listening to all the fan complaints about the prequels and made sure these new movies were anything but that. On the flipside, though...
The Force Awakens felt like an overproduced retelling of A New Hope. It hits pretty much all the same story beats as Episode IV and felt the need to make everything seem bigger than its 1977 counterpart.
I'm really not sure how to feel about Kylo Ren. It was nice to see them try their hand at a villain with character development instead of another Darth Badguy, but I'm not sure if it was really executed that well. If there's one trope I'm sick to death of, it's having the threatening villain look like a pretty boy. Ren looks like he stepped out of a YA novel. They could have left his mask on the entire movie and the mystique of his presence wouldn't have been lost.
I'm glad that J.J. was only here to make one movie. It seems like he's better at jump-starting abandoned franchises rather than sticking with them in the long term. (His Star Trek reboot was pretty good, but Into Darkness? Eh...) Now that we have two more movies to go, hopefully his successors can really bring the franchise to new heights. TFA isn't the best movie, but it's a good launching pad for what's to come.
JJ Abrams made his name as a re-boot specialist with Mission Impossible 3, which cleared the air for a series of better followup movies from other directors. They should have done the same with Star Trek!
Into Darkness was the movie that made me the most nervous about Star Wars, in that it would be all fan service and nothing original. Turns out that's what we got, but at least it was an entertaining and fun movie. Or enough so that I'd forgive it the complete pandering which felt inexcusable with Into Darkness.
I couldn't really tell what people didn't like about Into Darkness. I remember enjoying it well enough. Not as much as the original Star Trek reboot, but was still good. However I never really watched any of the original series movies so maybe I didn't have the knowledge to recognize any sort of fanservice. Like I understood Kahn was a character from the original series movies but that was about it.
I enjoyed into Darkness for the big stupid action sci-fi it was but that movie broke one too many rules of the Star Trek universe to be taken seriously. It lost me when Khan teleported from earth to the Klingon home world. No need for starships anymore.
It's the same problem with all these fan service movies:
Kahn didn't do enough in the Into Darkness movie to earn his place as a major villain. It relied on the audience knowing the character and story from the Wrath of Kahn to read into it any menace or danger.
Same thing with Blofeld turning up in the latest Bond movie. He didn't earn his place.
In both of these movies, the villains do a grandstanding announcement. "My name is.... Kahn/Blofeld!" The audience reactions should be "Who?" The villains aren't important in the universe created for/in the movie in question. The viewer could only appreciate them because they knew something from another movie set in the future/alternate reality/rebooted past.
The Force Awakens didn't have this problem, because in-universe the characters are known, are legends, are important.
The prequels DID have this problem. Characters would be introduced as important, but not earn their place in the movie, and just get in the way. The viewer could only appreciate them because they knew something from another movie set in the future.
I'm glad that J.J. was only here to make one movie. It seems like he's better at jump-starting abandoned franchises rather than sticking with them in the long term. (His Star Trek reboot was pretty good, but Into Darkness? Eh...) Now that we have two more movies to go, hopefully his successors can really bring the franchise to new heights. TFA isn't the best movie, but it's a good launching pad for what's to come.
That's how many of my long-term critic friends see it. Many people still had the idea that Star Wars were now defined by the prequels. (I even know people who wouldn't see it because they'd automatically assume it would suck) J.J. was a safe bet to reintroduce people to the wonder and majesty that was the original Star Wars trilogy. The Force Awakens returned us to the world and re-established what's important, but I believe the sequels will dig deeper into rich character development.
Just wait, next movie in the trilogy will be directed by Rian Johnson. (Brick, Brothers Bloom, Looper, several Breaking Bad episodes) You can expect greatness from that type of pedigree.
Here's why Star Trek Into Darkness didn't work for me:
It tried to recreate Wrath of Khan without understanding what gave the original Wrath of Khan it's impact.
Where it lost me was the recreation of the reactor scene. "Kirk's the one in the reactor, and Spock's outside! Aren't we clever?" No. Not when you introduce "Blood that can reanimate the dead." in the previous scene. The original Wrath of Khan worked because the actor were getting on in years and Nimoy had indicated that he wanted out of the Franchise. There was weight to the death because, it was very likely he wasn't coming back. You can't do that with actors signed to three picture deals in advance.
What JJ learned from Star Trek was "You can't just throw away 30+ years of history and expect people to be happy." True, they junked the old Star Wars EU, but it was a really mixed bag.
Also, I am king derp derp. Just realized Leia and Han named Ben after Obi-Wan.
That's honestly something I found a little odd. I mean, Leia had heard of Obi-Wan, but only from her father and Luke, she'd never met him. Han knew him for all of a few days, at most. Only Luke (and presumably other residents of Tatooine) knew him as Ben. But they name their child after the guy?
Space-people are fucking weird dude.
My money is on Leia chose that name, I mean, he did save her from the Empire.
Yeah, at no point did Luke talk to Leia about anything at all after the second Death Star blew up. No character knows anything they didn't know by that exact point in time.
Sayings that Force Awakens *doesn't even qualify as a movie* because it exists to sell merch? That quote is going to get this guy a lot of clicks, but how is this different than 1977?
He laments at the end about how Hollywood will eventually only make Star Wars and James Bond movies. It sounds like the whiny gamer who is scared that mass-market casual games will take over the world, and "his" games will never be made again.
Comments
But seriously, does he, really? I mean, he fucks Anakin right up, but Bail volunteered to take Leia when Yoda said they had to split them up, then Obi-wan went "Yeah cuz I'll keep an eye on the other one no worries ay." Apart from slapping down Anakin, he didn't really have much of a role in her saving, beyond being present when it was decided, and not objecting to Bail's adoption plans.
And all that aside, She still wouldn't have heard that story about Ben saving her, she would have heard the story about how Obi-Wan Kenobi saved her. Bail had no reason to know his cover name, albeit, his very poorly chosen cover name. Or maybe Kenobi is like the Smith of Star Wars, who knows.
They might have named Young Ben after Old Ben because he was a Galactic hero - but again, as Obi-wan, not Ben.
Help me Obi-Wan Kenobi, you're my only hope.
On the topic of Obi-Wan's significance to Leia, though, let's not forget his role in leaving Leia's grandmother as a slave on Tattooine
However I guess Darth Vader also sort of fucked up in the same capacity. Just a little less embarrassingly so.
On the one hand, it was nice to see a Star Wars movie in theaters that wasn't mind-numbingly dull. Disney was clearly listening to all the fan complaints about the prequels and made sure these new movies were anything but that. On the flipside, though...
The Force Awakens felt like an overproduced retelling of A New Hope. It hits pretty much all the same story beats as Episode IV and felt the need to make everything seem bigger than its 1977 counterpart.
I'm really not sure how to feel about Kylo Ren. It was nice to see them try their hand at a villain with character development instead of another Darth Badguy, but I'm not sure if it was really executed that well. If there's one trope I'm sick to death of, it's having the threatening villain look like a pretty boy. Ren looks like he stepped out of a YA novel. They could have left his mask on the entire movie and the mystique of his presence wouldn't have been lost.
I'm glad that J.J. was only here to make one movie. It seems like he's better at jump-starting abandoned franchises rather than sticking with them in the long term. (His Star Trek reboot was pretty good, but Into Darkness? Eh...) Now that we have two more movies to go, hopefully his successors can really bring the franchise to new heights. TFA isn't the best movie, but it's a good launching pad for what's to come.
Into Darkness was the movie that made me the most nervous about Star Wars, in that it would be all fan service and nothing original. Turns out that's what we got, but at least it was an entertaining and fun movie. Or enough so that I'd forgive it the complete pandering which felt inexcusable with Into Darkness.
Kahn didn't do enough in the Into Darkness movie to earn his place as a major villain. It relied on the audience knowing the character and story from the Wrath of Kahn to read into it any menace or danger.
Same thing with Blofeld turning up in the latest Bond movie. He didn't earn his place.
In both of these movies, the villains do a grandstanding announcement. "My name is.... Kahn/Blofeld!" The audience reactions should be "Who?" The villains aren't important in the universe created for/in the movie in question. The viewer could only appreciate them because they knew something from another movie set in the future/alternate reality/rebooted past.
The Force Awakens didn't have this problem, because in-universe the characters are known, are legends, are important.
The prequels DID have this problem. Characters would be introduced as important, but not earn their place in the movie, and just get in the way. The viewer could only appreciate them because they knew something from another movie set in the future.
Just wait, next movie in the trilogy will be directed by Rian Johnson. (Brick, Brothers Bloom, Looper, several Breaking Bad episodes) You can expect greatness from that type of pedigree.
It tried to recreate Wrath of Khan without understanding what gave the original Wrath of Khan it's impact.
Where it lost me was the recreation of the reactor scene. "Kirk's the one in the reactor, and Spock's outside! Aren't we clever?" No. Not when you introduce "Blood that can reanimate the dead." in the previous scene. The original Wrath of Khan worked because the actor were getting on in years and Nimoy had indicated that he wanted out of the Franchise. There was weight to the death because, it was very likely he wasn't coming back. You can't do that with actors signed to three picture deals in advance.
What JJ learned from Star Trek was "You can't just throw away 30+ years of history and expect people to be happy." True, they junked the old Star Wars EU, but it was a really mixed bag.
Saw the movie last night, it was alright. Worth $5 discount ticket night I suppose.
Sayings that Force Awakens *doesn't even qualify as a movie* because it exists to sell merch? That quote is going to get this guy a lot of clicks, but how is this different than 1977?
He laments at the end about how Hollywood will eventually only make Star Wars and James Bond movies. It sounds like the whiny gamer who is scared that mass-market casual games will take over the world, and "his" games will never be made again.