MovieChat Forums > Star Wars: Episode IX - The Rise of Skywalker (2019) Discussion > New Episode IX Trailer Confirms Disney I...

New Episode IX Trailer Confirms Disney Intent on Ruining Star Wars

posted 5 years ago by Threadkiller (2952)
35 replies | jump to latest

https://pjmedia.com/video/new-episode-ix-trailer-confirms-disney-intent-on-ruining-star-wars/

On Friday, Disney released a new teaser trailer for the latest Star Wars movie, and it confirms fans' worst fears. The trailer is slick and fun to watch, but it reveals Disney's intent to complete the ruination of the Star Wars film franchise.

Disney reveled that Star Wars Episode IX: The Rise of Skywalker will play to fan service in the same way The Force Awakens did, perhaps trying to undo the disastrous mistakes of The Last Jedi. The problem is, such a thematic shift will only worsen the damage of Episode VIII.

The Rise of Skywalker will bring back Ian McDiarmid as Emperor Palpatine, the ultimate villain in the first six films. "No one's ever really gone," Luke Skywalker (Mark Hamill) says in the trailer, followed immediately by Palpatine's maniacal laugh. Disney confirmed this reveal by having McDiarmid speak at the Rise of Skywalker panel.

The rest of the trailer also appealed to fans: shots of Rey (Daisy Ridley) embracing Princess Leia (Carrie Fisher), a heartwarming moment with Lando Calrissian (Billy Dee Williams) with Chewbacca going into light speed on the Millennium Falcon, and the reveal of a title featuring "Skywalker."

The shots of Rey fighting a TIE fighter with her lightsaber and the new worlds that will be featured in the film are riveting, and many fans are very excited for this movie. The problem is, each of these artistic decisions bode ill for the film and what it means for the Star Wars franchise.

If Emperor Palpatine did not die at the end of Episode VI: Return of the Jedi, that changes the meaning of the entire trilogy, and the one before it. Episodes I-III, the prequel trilogy, told of the tragedy of Anakin Skywalker, as orchestrated by Palpatine. Episodes IV-VI, the original trilogy, narrated Anakin's redemption and the rise of Luke Skywalker, together with the ultimate defeat of Palpatine. If Palpatine is not dead, that cheapens the celebration of Return of the Jedi.

By far the worst thing about the new trailer is the title. The original titles were: Star Wars, The Empire Strikes Back, and Return of the Jedi. The sequel titles were: The Phantom Menace, Attack of the Clones, and Revenge of the Sith. Notice a trend? Both The Force Awakens and The Last Jedi followed this trend — vague thematic words that describe the episode. The Rise of Skywalker is far too specific. It also feels cheap compared to the others.

Worst of all, the first two trilogies had a singular thematic arc. The shocking reveal of Darth Vader as Luke's father was completely in keeping with the clues in the first two films. While the prequel trilogy was predictable, it filled in the story of Anakin and built on the style of the first three films. Hayden Christensen's acting and Jar Jar Binks aside, the prequels had a great deal of the spirit of the first three.

The sequel trilogy is a mangled jumble of themes. The Force Awakens was clearly designed to interest fans of the original trilogy, and it went out of its way to mimic the original films. The Last Jedi was designed to shake things up, to "subvert expectations." The problem is, each of the answers to questions The Force Awakens set up — Who is Snoke? Who are Rey's parents? What happened to Luke? — was worse than a let-down. The death of Snoke, the poo-pooing of Rey's parentage, and the devolution of Luke into a crotchety old man were not just let-downs — they were clear rejections of the themes of Star Wars.

In the epic science-fiction fantasy of Star Wars, parentage matters. The identity of a mastermind emperor matters. And Luke Skywalker is a hero who would never give up on the Jedi Order. The Last Jedi didn't so much subvert these expectations as eviscerate them.

Even worse, the way The Last Jedi treated light speed destroyed the basic mechanics of the Star Wars universe. If a small ship can destroy a big ship by slamming into it at light speed, then every battle in history would be different. The Rebellion wouldn't have tried to fly X-Wings close enough to the Death Star to blow it up — they would have just sent one X-Wing at light speed into the Death Star and destroyed it easily.

Sadly, Disney needed to start over with The Last Jedi, to rework the basic storyline and make it fit as a Star Wars film. Instead, it decided to go forward with the next cash cow.

The Rise of Skywalker seems a return to the style of The Force Awakens — Disney is going out of its way to bring discontented fans back into the fold. Disney seems unwilling to put in the hard work to make Star Wars what it originally was — and that work would require revisiting The Last Jedi, perhaps even just scrapping Episode VIII altogether.

Rather than telling a coherent thematic story, this sequel trilogy is a hodgepodge of disjointed films. Disney can certainly do better.

[–] Truthtalker (1870) 5 years ago

Bingo

[–] HarlemEagle42 (16175) 5 years ago

Christ you idiots cannot be pleased at all.

[–] SocialJusticeNow (0) 5 years ago

[deleted]

[–] bond998 (1206) 5 years ago

Frankly Star Wars was ruined about 12 years before Disney got there hands on it.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Nah. the prequels sucked...but they did nothing to undo core characters or key events. Under Disney both have occurred.

[–] bond998 (1206) 5 years ago

Yeah, But i think they should have stopped making Star Wars movies after 1983 anyways.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

I won't argue with that... although as a kid back then I knew some day the prequels would happen and looked forward to that day. When that day arrived I was underwhelmed...but not disappointed like with the sequel trilogy thus far.

[–] bond998 (1206) 5 years ago

[deleted]

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Then what would happen to Episode 1-3?

[–] mikethemartian (6066) 5 years ago

Agreed

[–] AnubisRaydeen (7897) 5 years ago

Ummm ... they made Vader's origin an embarrassing spectacle of low intelligence and sour character flaws. Also: Midichlorians.

But the preqs did have some moments of quality. Certainly better than TLJ and Solo.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Sure the vader reveal was cringy...but nothing about his actual origin was changed. Midichlorians were ditched before they could do any harm.

[–] AnubisRaydeen (7897) 5 years ago

Not just the reveal. All of Anakin's youth was an embarrassing study of an annoying simpleton.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Anakin was bad...but Darth Vader was not effected as he is still the most popular and recognized character in the franchise.

[–] Frogarama (12942) 5 years ago

"But the preqs did have some moments of quality."

For all their flaws, the prequels had some amazing art direction and designs.

[–] AnubisRaydeen (7897) 5 years ago

Agreed. I also loved the Maul fight. The buddy Jedi stuff leading up to it too. Each movie has that one action scene that pleased me.

But alas, you can never go home.

[–] bond998 (1206) 5 years ago

Overall i don't hate the prequels. I find them to be somewhat entertaining. In same way a car crash is entertaining. Its interesting to look at. But you know something bad is happening.

[–] PrimeMinisterX (8292) 5 years ago

Revenge of the Sith is probably the best film in the entire franchise.

[–] PrimeMinisterX (8292) 5 years ago

I actually like the prequel trilogy more than the original trilogy.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

agreed 👍👍👍👍

[–] FilmBuff (6691) 5 years ago

Utter nonsense.

[–] Martoto (4162) 5 years ago

It's incredible that they let people in mental institutions release such gobbledygook into the sane world.

[–] Frogarama (12942) 5 years ago

"If Palpatine is not dead, that cheapens the celebration of Return of the Jedi."

This, along with complaints about the First Order just being The Empire and erasing the defeat at the end of ROTJ, are interesting because SO MANY Sequel Trilogy haters are focusing on badmouthing Disney, and many of them are right in the same league as the complaints that Disney de-canonized the sequel books published years ago (even though they were never true full canon, only films are, so even the de-canonization complaint was irrelevant!).

Those sequel books kept the Empire rolling on, and had backup Palpatine clones, and are very well liked books... But no, Disney is the problem. Why? Just like people who call Rey a Mary Sue yet make excuses for Luke being a Gary Stu and rationalizing their way into turning a blind eye to the obvious.

"Worst of all, the first two trilogies had a singular thematic arc. The shocking reveal of Darth Vader as Luke's father was completely in keeping with the clues in the first two films."

There were no clues about Vader in A New Hope. The movie was written specifically with Vader being a warlord who had supposedly killed Luke's father, who Lucas was planning to bring back in the future so Luke and his father could defeat the Empire together (that part, the important element, of course still happened, and YES it was an improvement).

This is why Ben told Luke that Vader had killed his father -- Because it was true at the time (other than Ben being incorrect and not knowing that Luke's father had survived and would return).

The line in Empire about "certain point of view" was a RETCON. This is all fact and it all comes from Lucas himself.

Leia was unrelated to Luke and Vader until ROTJ. If she had been related in Empire, Lucas probably wouldn't have made her kiss Luke.

[–] MoviesSuck (964) 5 years ago

“Luke’s just not a farmer, Owen. He has too much of his father in him.”

“That’s what I’m afraid of.”

This line is from Episode 4: A New Hope, and it clearly indicates that Vader was intended to be Luke’s father should a sequel ever be made.

[–] Frogarama (12942) 5 years ago

You're just reading it that way. "Too much of his father" also means he's a rabble-rousing idealistic warrior type who might dash headlong into a fight and get himself killed by someone more powerful.

Lucas changed Vader into Luke's father when he wrote Empire.

Lucas HIMSELF stated these things about the changes! I'm not making this up, seriously. This is why Ben "lied" about Luke's father and why that "lie" had to be retconned with dialogue in Empire.

Yes, Luke's father was planned to return and defeat the Empire with Luke. By the way, THAT idea lived on past the change -- Yoda's line "no, there is another" was originally written about a lost/hidden Jedi who was going to RETURN for REVENGE (because ROTJ was originally Revenge of the Jedi), taking the place of what Lucas had planned for Luke's father.

When that idea got ditched, Lucas made Leia into Luke's sister and made her Force sensitive.

That line you quoted about Luke LUCKILY turned into "ominous" after the change, but before that, it would have been "concerned for Luke's safety."

[–] millsey72 (9557) 5 years ago

Wrong. Lucas changed his mind while making episode 5 making Vadar his father. Thats why Luke uses the last name of Skywalker in episode 4. It makes no sense really that Luke uses his last name in episode 4

[–] Frogarama (12942) 5 years ago

Part 2:
Even A New Hope itself has vestiges of changes that were made while it was filming. Lucas either didn't write Alderaan being destroyed originally, or it was after the escape from the Death Star.

When Lucas changed the structure and created or moved the destruction of Alderaan in order to raise the stakes on the drama, he had already filmed all scenes with Luke and Leia and Han. The budget and the time frame did not allow reshoots to compensate for Leia's attitude.

This is why Alderaan gets destroyed, Leia's friends and family and home world destroyed in a horrific genocide, yet afterward Leia is cracking wise about Luke's height, instead of being a blubbering mess of damaged emotions.

This is why Leia is seen comforting Luke about the death of Obi Wan, a man he knew for like a day, making it look like Luke is the only one who matters, and making Leia look like she is cold-heartedly unaffected by her extreme tragedy.

Lucas has stated that he regrets the way it plays out now, and anyone who truly pays attention to the movie can see this sticking out like a sore thumb.

[–] ramcha (62) 5 years ago

"This is why Alderaan gets destroyed, Leia's friends and family and home world destroyed in a horrific genocide, yet afterward Leia is cracking wise about Luke's height, instead of being a blubbering mess of damaged emotions."

i noticed that and always get cringed during that scene. didn't knew about the background.

[–] Frogarama (12942) 5 years ago

One more thing... I'll again compare this "ruining" idea to Terminator 2, a movie that erases the meaning behind the finale of the first Terminator, a movie that is literally a bigger-budget remake of Terminator (per Cameron) and contains elements he wished he'd had the money for the first time around....

Yet T2 is essentially WAY more popular and beloved than the first.

This is how it should be. Some people take action-fantasy WAY too seriously.

[–] Roguemail (1564) 5 years ago

I have to ask the blatantly obvious question here...why would any film company seek to actively kill a cash cow?

Let's leave aside all the silly comments about how stupid they are etc...these people are not stupid. They are dealing with a multi million dollar franchise.

We may not always understand and indeed may never know the reasons why certain decisions are made. But when I read things about film companies seeking to alienate the fans and destroy lucrative franchises...nah. It just does not scan.

[–] Bubbathegut (17225) 5 years ago

They are not actively trying to kill a cash cow, they just have no idea on how to make a SW movie.

[–] Martoto (4162) 5 years ago

That's funny because this thread seems to be accusing them of trying to too closely resember previous, successful SW movies. So they clearly have some idea.