Star Wars: The Last Jedi (2017)

Lenardo said:

Spoiler

Time for the jedi to...... end
hmmm--jedi/sith merging to a new "order/cult/whatever" so instead of the light side of the force(jedi), and the dark side of the force(sith)... you just have.....the Force.

Click to expand...

did Ren and Snoke get retconned into being Sith or something?

In for the A and B Wings.

Gavinmad said:

did Ren and Snoke get retconned into being Sith or something?

Click to expand...

Not ... yet.

The very concept of "Sith" is a prequel-concept, like Midichlorians, from the Phantom Menace.

Prequels (and EU) retconned Darth Vader and the Emperor being Sith, despite the idea not existing at the time of the original trilogy.

TFA kept prequel/EU stuff at arms length, but if they eventually embrace it (which the "balance"-quote may hint at?), I could see Ren/Snoke getting the Dark Vader/Emperor-treatment of being turned into Sith without the word actually appearing in the movie.

Zweischneid said:

Not ... yet.

The very concept of "Sith" is a prequel-concept, like Midichlorians, from the Phantom Menace.

Prequels (and EU) retconned Darth Vader and the Emperor being Sith, despite the idea not existing at the time of the original trilogy.

TFA kept prequel/EU stuff at arms length, but if they eventually embrace it (which the "balance"-quote may hint at?), I could see Ren/Snoke getting the Dark Vader/Emperor-treatment of being turned into Sith without the word actually appearing in the movie.

Click to expand...

While you're technically correct that the word Sith was made up after the original trilogy, the Emperor and Vader were at the time considered to be Dark Jedi, and as such would be pretty much the same thing : wielders of the Force who are evil. That's a Sith in a nutshell. The name change is irrelevant.

I think Disney purposely steps around the word Sith because it reminds people too much of the awful prequels, but it's hard to see the difference thematically between Snoke/Kylo Ren and Emperor/Vader... hooded scarred mastermind and his masked enforcer henchman.

And anyway I'm thinking Luke's meaning is that there should be no more people able to use the Force, period. At least not to the extent the Jedi and Sith do. Because it causes too much trouble for everyone around them.

Runnen said:

While you're technically correct that the word Sith was made up after the original trilogy, the Emperor and Vader were at the time considered to be Dark Jedi, and as such would be pretty much the same thing : wielders of the Force who are evil. That's a Sith in a nutshell. The name change is irrelevant.

Click to expand...

Well, not really. Dark Jedi are just Jedi that are evil.

Sith implies a continuous history of evil Jedi following (as well as occasionally breaking) certain traditions, mainly the "Always two there are; no more, no less" quote from Phantom Menace (which was clearly modelled on the Vader/Emperor relationship, kinda how the Rebel-pilot-helm-with-sprayed-visor-found-in-the-Falcon that Luke used to train magically turned into something Jedi apparently always trained with all over the galaxy for some reason).

Nobody would doubt that Ren and Snoke are "Dark Jedi" or "Evil Jedi". But if people geek out about them not being "Sith", its usually about whether or not they adhere to that all-the-way-to-KOTOR-and-stuff tradition, which Vader and the Emperor were retconned into being part of (instead of just being nasty evil villains with space magic).

Zweischneid said:

Well, not really. Dark Jedi are just Jedi that are evil.

Sith implies a continuous history of evil Jedi following (as well as occasionally breaking) certain traditions, mainly the "Always two there are; no more, no less" quote from Phantom Menace (which was clearly modelled on the Vader/Emperor relationship, kinda how the Rebel-pilot-helm-with-sprayed-visor-found-in-the-Falcon that Luke used to train magically turned into something Jedi apparently always trained with all over the galaxy for some reason).

Nobody would doubt that Ren and Snoke are "Dark Jedi" or "Evil Jedi". But if people geek out about them not being "Sith", its usually about whether or not they adhere to that all-the-way-to-KOTOR-and-stuff tradition, which Vader and the Emperor were retconned into being part of (instead of just being nasty evil villains with space magic).

Click to expand...

The Rule of Two isn't necessarily representative of all Sith. It was only created after some Sith came to realize in-fighting was hurting their chances to take over the galaxy beause the Jedi were more united, but it's hard to unite when everyone around you is a raving mass-murdering psychopath.

If anything, while not named Sith (yet) the Knights of Ren are all force-wielding evil enforcers working for Kylo Ren, who himself works for Snoke, so definitely no Rule of Two there.

What I meant about being Sith or not is irrelevant is that it doesn't matter in a meta sense, you're still going to have evil Jedi / evil Sith going against goodie two shoes Jedi, because otherwise it's not Star Wars anymore to most people. That's why I found Rogue One refreshing, there was only one lightsaber in the damn movie (and it was in a kickass scene).

While you're technically correct that the word Sith was made up after the original trilogy

Click to expand...

Vader was called "Dark Lord of the Sith" way back in the original novel that predated the release of the film. I also distinctly remember Mark Hamill calling him that in some behind the scenes VHS thing from the 80s that I got for free after sending in UPCs from cereal boxes. Of course, it was just a word then.

Sith is not said in the original trilogy on screen but it is in all 3 screenplay's and is in the New Hope novelization
https://www.quora.com/Is-the-term-Sith-used-in-the-original-trilogy

"Lord of the Sith" was a title attached to Vader in the original screenplay and subsequently used in the Star Wars novelization. Since it was easier to have that novelization readily at hand in the pre-VCR era many people became used to the idea of there being something that was the "Sith" and it probably wasn't a good thing.

Royal said:

View attachment 132042

Click to expand...

I can't believe we had a family pic taken with him a couple weeks ago. It's sitting framed on the wall now.

Yes.

I know Vader was called Lord of the Sith. But other EU "evil jedi" were still dark jedi. There was no Sith as a historical organisation or institutions.

It was just a title. It had no more in common with the later flesh-out concept of "the Sith" than the original script-mention of Starkiller had in common with the Starkiller base in TFA.


Both Jedi and Sith really only got their big "history" and institutions in the prequels.


Jedi used to be "forgotten" in the original Star Wars. And in the original concepts conceived as something of a mix between wandering Space-Wild-West-Marshals and Ronin Knights, Kung Fu Caine wandering the land, even in their prime.

In Phantom Menace, they suddenly had an HQ at the biggest planet, training academies, military organisation, etc..

Same with Sith. It was a fancy-sounding title. Suddenly they had history, temples, traditions. Lucas main-schtick with the prequels to make things "epic" was to turn the family-level conflicts and concepts of the original trilogy into age-old institutions.

TFA at least side-stepped that and left it open. There is nothing in TFA, as in the original trilogy, that would contradict Dark Vader/the Emperor (later Ren) simply coming to their own villainous self on their own instead of being part of an "ancient secret society of space-villains".

Rogue One clearly moved closer to prequel-interpretations. Though they had no Jedi, they did have a prominent Jedi temple as a location. Kyber crystals are suddenly a thing. Etc.. It hints much more closely at a prequel-style view of Jedi being once the Catholic Church of Space, less then wandering warrior-monks of Space.

And, of course, lots of prequel actors showing up.

So I think it is not wrong to assume that Disney was getting more sympathetic to (some) prequel lore between TFA and Rogue One. A trend that may well continue with the Last Jedi.

We now can only speculate. Dark/light, balance of the Force... just to 2 things but a whole bunch of theories can be created from them.

About the poster.....really neat. 80's vibe all over it.

Getting HYPED!!!!

I wouldn't mind if Disney decided to cherrypick the best elements of the Expanded Universe (Legends) and even the prequels and decided to make some of it canon or modify it because it was a cool idea delivered terribly. Storywise, the Jedi and Sith having been institutions isn't a bad idea, it makes sense that Force users would rise to power thanks to their advantage over the unwashed masses, and power draws followers. The problem of the prequels was the delivery of the story, the terrible dialogue, cinematogaphy, editing, and a lot of the characters were terrible, but not everything should be thrown in a fire forever, just take the good ideas (like Maul was recycled into Star Wars Rebels and is now canon post-TPM).

Runnen said:

I wouldn't mind if Disney decided to cherrypick the best elements of the Expanded Universe (Legends) and even the prequels and decided to make some of it canon or modify it because it was a cool idea delivered terribly. Storywise, the Jedi and Sith having been institutions isn't a bad idea, it makes sense that Force users would rise to power thanks to their advantage over the unwashed masses, and power draws followers. The problem of the prequels was the delivery of the story, the terrible dialogue, cinematogaphy, editing, and a lot of the characters were terrible, but not everything should be thrown in a fire forever, just take the good ideas (like Maul was recycled into Star Wars Rebels and is now canon post-TPM).

Click to expand...

I agree.

But I also think some people went a bit too far with "Ren/Snoke aren't Sith, they are something different/more secret/Darth Plagueis playing 5th Dimensional Chess with the Sith", simply because they aren't referred to as Sith in TFA.

I think with TFA Disney (or JJ) were simply super-extra-over-hyper-careful to keep out anything remotely like a prequel reference.

Since then, they realised that most prequel-stuff is actually pretty ok with fans, if they simply simply stir clear of a handful of super-hated things (Jar Jar, Midichlorians) and, yes, improve the delivery (Sith actually being a fan-favourite, I think, is a direct result of Darth Maul being a "liked element" of the Phantom Menace and some EU games/books/comics making pretty good use of the idea of Sith).

ohkcrlho said:

About the poster.....really neat. 80's vibe all over it.

Click to expand...

It has a little flourish from the 70's as well.




One interesting thing from The Last Jedi panel today was when Mark Hamill made an obviously intentional slip of the tongue to get a laugh; he called Daisy Ridley "my dau .. err colleague". That's a pretty good indicator that Rey is in fact not a Skywalker.

Lenardo said:

Spoiler

Time for the jedi to...... end
hmmm--jedi/sith merging to a new "order/cult/whatever" so instead of the light side of the force(jedi), and the dark side of the force(sith)... you just have.....the Force.

Click to expand...

No.