Current Events > TROS is the big problem with the Sequel Trilogy, not TLJ *SPOILERS*

(+) Yeah! (+)

I think The Last Jedi, independent of its quality as a movie, sets up an interesting shake-up to the status quo of the Star Wars universe that, if it were properly expanded upon, could have made for some interesting storytelling.

Kylo Ren sees both the Sith and the Jedi as flawed ideologies. He could take that one step further and reach the conclusion that Jedi will always breed more Sith and thus, would seek to eradicate both groups to allow the galaxy to be free from either doctrine.

Luke is a tamer, less genocidal version of this, believing similar to Kylo Ren that the Jedi create more problems than they solve and believes the galaxy would be better off if the Jedi stop getting involved entirely.

Rey believes that the Jedi Order can be rebuilt into something better than its predecessor, stripped away of many of the outdated, impractical beliefs that led many Jedi to turn to the dark-side for answers.

Unfortunately, The Rise of Skywalker comes along and does nothing with any of this and instead just redoes Return of the Jedi, but with more pandering fanservice. We're literally in the exact same status quo as we were in post-RotJ except now Luke, Han and Leia are dead.

---

I think they're both the problem with the sequel trilogy. Rise of Skywank is a worse movie, but I wouldn't necessarily say it makes it a bigger problem for the trilogy as a whole.

---

The worst part is Trevorrow had some really great ideas in his script, and most of the dumb stuff would have been written out in rewrites. Unfortunately he would have forced in ReyPoe, but at least it wouldnt be fucking Reylo.

---

DeadBankerDream posted...

I think they're both the problem with the sequel trilogy. Rise of Skywank is a worse movie, but I wouldn't necessarily say it makes it a bigger problem for the trilogy as a whole.

The Last Jedi for me is a lot like the Prequels. Good ideas, but either poorly-executed or need to be expanded on. You can make a sequel to it that would make for a good, even great Star Wars movie.

You can't really do anything with Rise of Skywalker because it doesn't present a single original idea.

---

They both suck.
But I'm more forgiving of TROS because it had to clean up the mistakes of TLJ

Nah, TROS didn't have Canto Blight, killing off Snoke, taking characters absolutely nowhere, and delivering on its themes of "failure" by taking everything mildly intriguing about TFA and tossing it out the window.

---

I think Rise of Skywalker is a lot more like the prequels, in that there's no good idea to be found among them, and the terrible ideas they do present are executed as poorly as possible. Last Jedi actually does have some good ideas, but as you say, they're not very well implemented.

---

I know, but I've long stopped trying to convince people.

---

Tbh I always thought TFA was a bad start as well. But RoS is the worst by a mile.

---

DeadBankerDream posted...

I think Rise of Skywalker is a lot more like the prequels, in that there's no good idea to be found among them, and the terrible ideas they do present are executed as poorly as possible. Last Jedi actually does have some good ideas, but as you say, they're not very well implemented.

I think The Clone Wars cartoon showed that the Prequel Trilogy had enough to work with to make for compelling storylines.

---

TROS is the worse movie, but TLJ totally took a huge shit on how the Star Wars universe works. TROS was a terrible attempt at fan service that didn't really fix or make anything worse from what TLJ did.

---

They're both trash

Kylo Ren wasn't even written that way in TLJ though, he just killed Snoke and then did the exact same shit

Jabodie posted...

Tbh I always thought TFA was a bad start as well. But RoS is the worst by a mile.

TFA was just a soft reboot of the OG Star Wars. It also set the stage for horrible world building in the sequel movies. It is funny how TROS is clearly the worst movie of the bunch, but TFA and TLJ did more damage to the overall Star Wars universe and how it works.

---

DarthAragorn posted...

They're both trash

Kylo Ren wasn't even written that way in TLJ though, he just killed Snoke and then did the exact same shit

Kylo Ren definitely says something along the lines of destroying the past, which seems to hint at him seeking a future without the baggage from the old factions of the galaxy. But again, poorly-executed and something that could easily be remedied through a proper sequel.

---

TLJ painted everyone into a corner .Because the KK was out to make the new fans happy who found Kylo Hot there was no way he was going to be big bad. So with out snoke there was no real bad guy that they could have.

That racist RJ , wasted a whole movie worth of development for Finn.

There were like 25 "rebels" left.

TROS was bad on it's own, however TLJ made sure it could not be good.


---

Never saw tros because tlj sucked so bad

---

cjsdowg posted...

TLJ painted everyone into a corner .Because the KK was out to make the new fans happy who found Kylo Hot there was no way he was going to be big bad.

I'm not sure I'm seeing the argument here. TLJ painted the writers into a corner because Kylo Ren can't be the bad guy because of potentially angry fangirls? This sounds like a huge stretch.

---

A better shake up would have been Rey joining Kylo in exchange for letting the remaining rebels go.

---

people who think ix > viii are on the same level as people who like sword art online

---

iPhone_7 posted...

A better shake up would have been Rey joining Kylo in exchange for letting the remaining rebels go.

That would definitely be an interesting twist.

---

TRoS is a big problem because TLJ becomes a big problem.
they're trying to undo a fuckups with another fuckups, so of course TRoS would be worse.
but imagine, if TLJ is not such a big fuckups, TRoS could be much better because it didn't have to undo TLJ's fuckups.

---

Never saw TROS, and have no interest in seeing it. But from what I understand, the big issue with the sequel trilogy is that none of the movies wanted to work off of what the previous ones did, so instead of building something up over three movies, you just had each movie throw away what the previous one did and try to drag everything into a different direction.

---

RchHomieQuanChi posted...

I'm not sure I'm seeing the argument here. TLJ painted the writers into a corner because Kylo Ren can't be the bad guy because of potentially angry fangirls? This sounds like a huge stretch.

I think what they are saying is the Kathleen Kennedy mandated that Kylo could not be end up as the main bad guy. Don't know if this is true though, wouldn't doubt it since the original director of episode 9 was essentially fired by Disney.

---

If Rise of Skywalker had been the endgame all along, it could have been presented well. The problem isn't the story itself, which is actually cool if you fill in the blanks--Palpatine hunts for the last remaining Skywalker heir to twist him against his family and use him to exterminate the bloodline, while simultaneously grooming his own descendant to take up his place on the throne of the Sith and the Empire.

That could be awesome. And both Adam Driver and Daisy Ridley were excellent casting choices who could have pulled off some amazing scenes together in that context. If the Skywalker vs Palpatine bloodline had been set up at the end of TFA or the beginning of TLJ, thus giving it more time to develop, it could have been a fantastic route to take. Maybe even have Rey leave her friends at the end of TFA because she finds out she's the Emperor's granddaughter, and she finds Luke so she can ask him for help since he knows the feeling--being Vader's son and all.

The clumsy reveal and rapid shoe-horning of Palpatine's plan into the final movie of the trilogy is why it fell flat at the end. There was no time to really dwell in the setting. We got exactly one movie with even a whiff of Palpatine in it. In the original trilogy, the Emperor is mentioned early on in the meeting room on the Death Star--he had just dissolved the Senate and swept away the last remnants of the Republic. This sets him up as the big bad, the final threat, right from the get-go. He appears physically in ESB, which further adds to his looming presence. By the time we meet him in RotJ, we know he's a bad motherfucker who's powerful enough to keep Darth Vader on a leash. That's serious street cred.

In the new trilogy he gets retroactive credit, but none of the previous movies even hinted at his existence. I think the only time he was even mentioned was when Luke was telling Rey that the Jedi's arrogance is what allowed Darth Sidious to eliminate them at the height of their power.

I think a trilogy needs more of a through-line. It was clear that RoS was an afterthought meant to 'fix' the complaints about previous movies, but it over-corrected and stuffed too many plotlines in without enough foreshadowing.

---

RchHomieQuanChi posted...

That would definitely be an interesting twist.

• Rey joins Kylo,
• Kylo lets the rebels go.
• movie ends with the gang needing to rescue Han So- I mean Rey
• In the next film were all led to believe that Rey is the First Order spy leaking intelligence to the rebels

---

Ricemills posted...

TRoS is a big problem because TLJ becomes a big problem.
they're trying to undo a fuckups with another fuckups, so of course TRoS would be worse.
but imagine, if TLJ is not such a big fuckups, TRoS could be much better because it didn't have to undo TLJ's fuckups.

The problem is TRoS didn't have to undo any of TLJ's "fuckups". The biggest problem people seem to have with TLJ is that a) Snoke ended up being a nobody who died anyway (and tbh, who cares?) And b) Luke Skywalker's characterization, which I find to be a subjective matter and also less problematic in a series where characters can come back as spirits.

I also believe that any story can come back from a weak middle portion, but it's impossible to salvage a weak conclusion.

---

RchHomieQuanChi posted...

I also believe that any story can come back from a weak middle portion, but it's impossible to salvage a weak conclusion.

This is probably the biggest problem with TLJ haters. They expected it to be an ending, despite the fact it was always made as part two of a trilogy.
It was actually a very good middle, it just needed a part three that didnt immediately throw out everything it did.

---

Gobstoppers12 posted...

If Rise of Skywalker had been the endgame all along, it could have been presented well. The problem isn't the story itself, which is actually cool if you fill in the blanks--Palpatine hunts for the last remaining Skywalker heir to twist him against his family and use him to exterminate the bloodline, while simultaneously grooming his own descendant to take up his place on the throne of the Sith and the Empire.

That could be awesome. And both Adam Driver and Daisy Ridley were excellent casting choices who could have pulled off some amazing scenes together in that context. If the Skywalker vs Palpatine bloodline had been set up at the end of TFA or the beginning of TLJ, thus giving it more time to develop, it could have been a fantastic route to take. Maybe even have Rey leave her friends at the end of TFA because she finds out she's the Emperor's granddaughter, and she finds Luke so she can ask him for help since he knows the feeling--being Vader's son and all.

The clumsy reveal and rapid shoe-horning of Palpatine's plan into the final movie of the trilogy is why it fell flat at the end. There was no time to really dwell in the setting. We got exactly one movie with even a whiff of Palpatine in it. In the original trilogy, the Emperor is mentioned early on in the meeting room on the Death Star--he had just dissolved the Senate and swept away the last remnants of the Republic. This sets him up as the big bad, the final threat, right from the get-go. He appears physically in ESB, which further adds to his looming presence. By the time we meet him in RotJ, we know he's a bad motherfucker who's powerful enough to keep Darth Vader on a leash. That's serious street cred.

In the new trilogy he gets retroactive credit, but none of the previous movies even hinted at his existence. I think the only time he was even mentioned was when Luke was telling Rey that the Jedi's arrogance is what allowed Darth Sidious to eliminate them at the height of their power.

I think a trilogy needs more of a through-line. It was clear that RoS was an afterthought meant to 'fix' the complaints about previous movies, but it over-corrected and stuffed too many plotlines in without enough foreshadowing.

The Emperor coming back isn't inherently a bad thing, as you stated.

But if you're going to bring Palpatine back, his return needs to be re-contextualized. Having him come back just to serve the exact same story beats as Return of the Jedi is entirely pointless. Not only that, but his return puts Kylo Ren right back into the "Vader-lite" territory that The Last Jedi seemed to be trying to take him out of.

I think it would have worked if Palpatine had been trying to re-establish the Old Galactic Empire, while Kylo Ren was trying to steer The First Order in a new direction, it could have worked.

---

RchHomieQuanChi posted...

I think it would have worked if Palpatine had been trying to re-establish the Old Galactic Empire, while Kylo Ren was trying to steer The First Order in a new direction, it could have worked.

Honestly, and this is my real opinion--the biggest issue was that they tried to do another trilogy, when what they really should have done was turn Star Wars into another MCU. Storytelling in films has changed dramatically over the past twenty-odd years since the prequels.

Trilogies aren't big enough anymore. The MCU spoiled us with characters who show up in 5+ films before their arcs complete, and then they get new arcs to keep their development going. We get plenty of time to watch them develop, to get their relationships established, to explore alternate possibilities for their story lines, etc.

We can clearly see that Disney understands this now, with The Mandalorian basically serving like Iron Man for the Star Wars Universe--a jumping off point for other characters to have their own shows and spin-offs with limitless story and crossover potential.

The new trilogy had too many characters and too many good ideas to confine to a single trilogy. As it is, who even knows anything about Poe? Why didn't Phasma get more screen time? Who can answer a long list of questions about Finn's backstory? We only really know that he's a stormtrooper with enough force sensitivity to have a conscience about massacring villagers.

Films are gradually giving way to big-budget TV shows that are just as high-quality but with much more time to tell their stories. We can thank the MCU, but also Game of Thrones, for making the longer-term high budget approach more viable.

---

RchHomieQuanChi posted...

m not sure I'm seeing the argument here. TLJ painted the writers into a corner because Kylo Ren can't be the bad guy because of potentially angry fangirls? This sounds like a huge stretch.

It isn't, they have literally went back and retconned stuff to make Kylo look more sympathetic. Kk and JJ made Star Wars twilight.

---

cjsdowg posted...

they have literally went back and retconned stuff to make Kylo look more sympathetic

I mean...at what point was he not sympathetic? He was an angry, emotional young man who was corrupted and manipulated by powers far beyond his scope to comprehend. He did terrible things in the pursuit of what he thought was the right thing to do, but he was always at least somewhat sympathetic. We were told right from the beginning, in the scene with Max von Sydow, that Kylo Ren wasn't always a cruel person and that something happened to make him that way.

---

cjsdowg posted...

It isn't, they have literally went back and retconned stuff to make Kylo look more sympathetic. Kk and JJ made Star Wars twilight.

Wut? Kylo Ren was always supposed to be a tragic character. He's literally a Skywalker lmao. Not to mention the same exact thing can be said of Vader, who wasn't humanized until his 2nd movie as well (and who Kylo Ren is clearly based off of).

---

watch some different movies

---

Gobstoppers12 posted...

I mean...at what point was he not sympathetic? He was an angry, emotional young man who was corrupted and manipulated by powers far beyond his scope to comprehend. He did terrible things in the pursuit of what he thought was the right thing to do, but he was always at least somewhat sympathetic. We were told right from the beginning, in the scene with Max von Sydow, that Kylo Ren wasn't always a cruel person and that something happened to make him that way.

When he killed his father. There is nothing sympathetic about him in the first movie, he was cruel and evil. When people tried to help them, he would literally kill him. Kylo is literally a got damn incel and nothing more.

RchHomieQuanChi posted... Wut? Kylo Ren was always supposed to be a tragic character. He's literally a Skywalker lmao. Not to mention the same exact thing can be said of Vader, who wasn't humanized until his 2nd movie as well (and who Kylo Ren is clearly based off of).

Everything in the movie , was made to push up Kylo. Kylo put Finn in a coma, lets down play Finn's injury in turn it into a joke. Hux went from badass to joke , to make Kylo look better Snoke died to make sure Kylo could rule. Luke fucking Skywalker became a murder to give Kylo an excuse.


---

TROS honestly isn't that bad, it's still almost a masterpiece compared to Phantom Menace and Attack of the Clones but it was a disappointing conclusion. It's a shame that Rian didn't direct and write the 9th movie too because Last Jedi was easily the best ST movie since Empire.

cjsdowg posted...

When he killed his father. There is nothing sympathetic about him in the first movie, he was cruel and evil. When people tried to help them, he would literally kill him. Kylo is literally a got damn incel and nothing more.

Bro. The very scene when he kills his father is proof that he's a sympathetic villain. Seriously, how can you mention that scene and think it's anything but an example of how the corruption inside of him is tearing him apart and making him suffer?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yw-PFWJDObI

Watch that clip and really absorb it. Then look me in the eye and tell me there's nothing sympathetic about the character.

---

Gobstoppers12 posted...

Bro. The very scene when he kills his father is proof that he's a sympathetic villain. Seriously, how can you mention that scene and think it's anything but an example of how the corruption inside of him is tearing him apart and making him suffer?

It was , but when he killed his father , that is when he made his choice. Then from there he tries to kill our two new hero. Finn is a bathed in the blue light ( he was the rouge Trooper how choice good, Kylo was the Fallen Jedi who chose the dark side. ) that perfect foils for each other.

---

cjsdowg posted...

It was , but when he killed his father , that is when he made his choice

It was the moment he fell further, yeah, but he was clearly conflicted about it. After it happened, as he stood on the bridge completely alone, he gradually became more and more solemn. He was realizing that none of the pain had gone away. That's why he was so distracted that Chewie could roar and shoot a bowcaster bolt at him from a long range without getting a reaction.

You've gotta watch for the subtleties. He obviously didn't become pure evil in that moment. He thought he would; he thought it would end his suffering. In fact, it only made his pain stronger.

---

Oh he killed his dad who was trying to help him but he felt bad about it. So sympathetic.

DarthAragorn posted...

Oh he killed his dad who was trying to help him but he felt bad about it. So sympathetic.

Oh Darth Vader saved Luke after blowing up an entire planet. So sympathetic.

Joel95 posted...

Oh Darth Vader saved Luke after blowing up an entire planet. So sympathetic.

That was Tarkin, not Vader, for one

DarthAragorn posted...

That was Tarkin, not Vader, for one

Vader didn't seem to care.

It wasn't even the Rise of Skywalker. It was the Rise of a Palpatine Claiming to be a Skywalker.

---

Gobstoppers12 posted...

It was the moment he fell further, yeah, but he was clearly conflicted about it. After it happened, as he stood on the bridge completely alone, he gradually became more and more solemn. He was realizing that none of the pain had gone away. That's why he was so distracted that Chewie could roar and shoot a bowcaster bolt at him from a long range without getting a reaction.

You've gotta watch for the subtleties. He obviously didn't become pure evil in that moment. He thought he would; he thought it would end his suffering. In fact, it only made his pain stronger.

The fact of the matter is he killed him for the sole sake of obtaining more power. Unlike Anakin who despite his character faults eventually fell for the sake of another(padme), Kylo fell for completely selfish reasons.

Nothing in regard to his backstory justified this behavior and betrayal otherwise unless you were a born monster through and through. Sure, Palpatine manipulated him but it took far more then just that to turn Anakin.

For Kylo it was as easy as....
https://youtu.be/Jr7L0N1FPY8?t=27

---

Prismsblade posted...

The fact of the matter is he killed him for the sole sake of obtaining more power. Unlike Anakin who despite his character faults eventually fell for the sake of another(padme), Kylo fell for completely selfish reasons.

Nothing in regard to his backstory justified this behavior and betrayal otherwise unless you were a born monster through and through. Sure, Palpatine manipulated him but it took far more then just that to turn Anakin.

For Kylo it was as easy as....
https://youtu.be/Jr7L0N1FPY8?t=27

What makes Kylo tragic is the fact that he was led to believe that his uncle tried to murder him, driving him insane and making him believe he was destined for evil

---

RchHomieQuanChi posted...

What makes Kylo tragic is the fact that he was led to believe that his uncle tried to murder him, driving him insane and making him believe he was destined for evil

His uncle was trying to kill him.
He never went insane, he was power hungry.
He sought evil/power.

For some reason he wanted to be like grandpa but nobody told him that what his grandpa did was bad/wrong? There's a whole lot of character development that never happened to justify any of the characters from the OT or the NT.

---

This whole trilogy was trash.

Nobody got what they want from it, tried to appeal to everyone and failed to create a good original story or memorable characters in a good way.
---

TLJ was so terribly bad that it killed any chance of TROS being any good. We already knew TROS was going to be bad way before it was released because of the crappy choices that were made in TLJ.

---