comingupforblair:

john1106:

redcapediaries:

john1106:

redcapediaries:

The car is on fire, and there is no driver at the wheel.  And the streets are all muddied with a thousand lonely suicides, and a dark wind blows.  The government is corrupt, and we are all on so many drugs with the curtains drawn and the radio on.

We are trapped in the belly of this horrible machine.  And the machine is bleeding to death.

The sun has fallen down, and the billboards are all leering.  And the flags are all dead at the tops of their poles.

It went like this: the buildings tumbled in on themselves.  Mothers clutching babies, picked through the rubble, and pulled out their hair.  The skyline was beautiful on fire, all twisted metal stretching upwards, everything washed in a thin orange haze.

I said “Kiss me, you are beautiful.  These are truly the last days.”  You took my hand and we fell into it.  Like a daydream.  Or a fever.

We woke up one morning and fell a little further down, for sure this is the valley of death.

I open up my wallet, and it is full of blood.

….anyway, that’s my spoiler-free review of Star Wars: The Last Jedi.  Sorry it’s a bit late.

So what do you think of TLJ being like the BvS of the franchise in terms of deconstructing it’s core concept?? What about luke character?? Heard he is now much more jaded and cynical similar to BvS batman

I don’t necessarily think it’s a fair comparison.

For starters, say what you will about the tone of BvS, but at least it was consistent with itself.  The Last Jedi is all over the place, trying to tug at heartstrings with a dramatic slow-mo death scene of a total stranger barely five minutes after literally starting a space-battle with a prank phone call.  And while it plays the ‘deconstruction’ angle with Luke Skywalker to attack the tropes of the classic pulp-adventure hero, it then plays the same tropes completely straight with the new characters.  It wants to have its cake and eat it too, telling you that old-school adventure stories are silly and outdated while also still trying to tell an old-school adventure story.

Secondly, I don’t believe BvS and TLJ use deconstruction to the same effect.  BvS was about cracking a pair of timeless characters open and exposing them to a harsher and more critical world than they typically inhabit, then ultimately putting them back together better than they were before.  Clark starts the movie rudderless and unsure of himself, but finds his foundation and is willing to sacrifice himself for the woman he loves.  Bruce starts off consumed by his rage and anguish, but is shown there’s still a good person underneath all that and begins to become himself again.  It’s not the reverent kid-gloves treatment that many expect or demand, but IMO it still comes from a place of respect for the characters, in that they trusted the core of the characters would be strong enough to withstand a supreme stress-test and still come out on top.

TLJ, on the other hand, breaks Luke Skywalker and the Jedi Order down really just for the sake of breaking them down.  After watching him grow up from a wide-eyed farmboy to a principled adult, seeing him meet failure by running away and throwing out everything he ever learned comes off less as an attempt to flesh out his character and add more emotional depth to him, but rather an attempt to make him less likable and worthy of admiration in order to get him out of the way for Rey and company (much like how the Disney-owned Marvel Comics have spent the past four or five years making classic characters like Peter Parker and Steve Rogers more unrelatable and unlikable to more easily replace them with Miles Morales and the rest).  BvS puts Bruce and Clark through the shit in order to make you appreciate Bruce and Clark more.  TLJ puts Luke through the shit in order to make you appreciate Rey more.

And this may not matter to a lot of people, but I find it at least somewhat important that there’s a massive difference in how the actors playing these characters responded to the interpretations.  While audiences and critics may not have liked Snyder’s takes on Superman and Batman, both Henry Cavill and Ben Affleck (at least initially) have been extremely positive when talking about the director’s vision and his intent for exploring their characters.  Mark Hamill, on the other hand, has openly stated on multiple occasions how strongly he opposes Rian Johnson’s interpretation of Luke, and comes off as increasingly bitter and disillusioned about working for a studio that doesn’t value his input as a performer and a director that assumes he knows better than him.

Now, obviously, I’m extremely biased– I’ve made it no secret that I’m an unabashed fanboy of most of the DC movies and that I’ve grown incredibly weary of Disney’s properties.  And hey, maybe my opinion of The Last Jedi will soften over time, given another viewing or two and something to cleanse the palette of all the salt my first viewing generated.  However, I don’t believe this will be the case, and I don’t believe the various articles proclaiming the movie “genius” because it trashes the things I love about Star Wars to be anything more than people trying to piss on my leg and tell me it’s raining.

Well at least i know one thing for sure. All this review of TLJ by critics have downright shown me just how much hypocrites and double standards they are. Critics are literally praising TLJ for the same thing that they have rejected from BvS years ago and this is really pissing me off the more i read their review on TLJ. They praising on how much riskier and bolder TLJ is, and willing to shown just how much flawed characters are and that they are not the perfect character and this so called break down or deconstructionist are necessary in order to move the franchise forward. They literally praising all the stuffs that BvS have done it before and they are really so bias on that.

To be honest I never really fans of star wars ever since i last watch Revenge of the sith and force awaken literally make me lose interest in whatever the story they plan to do moving forward.

One last question about TLJ. What do you think of Luke trying to kill kylo in his sleep due to luke see promotions of kylo going to dark side?? Most critics find luke action are acceptable because he is now much more jaded and cynical and given that there is 30 years time gap betwen RoTJ and TLJ, of course luke will be a different character than the OT given that he must have experience alot things already during that time gap, therefore make it reasonable for him to become this jaded and cynical over time. Plus some people find it justifiable that luke would be scared of kylo future given that what we have seen of his action in force awaken but luke action literally is the reason why kylo going to dark side. This totally reminded me of looper effect which is another movie directed by rians johnsons about time traveller travel to the past trying to kill the child that will in the future will bring about the destruction, without realising that his action of travel into the past is the reason why that child become evil. Of course there are another interpretations that luke igniting his lightsaber when sensing kylo future is just him simply being too reactionary and that kylo awoken up at the wrong time. What do you think? Did the movie give enough context on what exactly push luke to even willing to kill his own family member when the OT have established that luke care so much for his own family including his father even if his father have done so many bad things?

It’s even worse because BvS is just one portrayal of Batman and Superman. There will be half a dozen of each at least in our lifetimes. There’s only one Luke Skyalker and Rian Johnson’s stuff is canon and forever.