I don't agree with this. He shifted the trajectory and tone of the story, which is uncomfortable for OT fans, but unique and fresh for the younger generation. Like some of us have commented, TLJ is far from great, but it was still awesome is some instances.
What was "unique and fresh" about it? I would grant that for Rogue 1. It's tone felt really different than other SW movies. But what was so unique and fresh about this one?
It was visually incredible for the most part, I loved that. However, kind of like box office receipts go up because of inflation, you expect effects in extremely high budget films to look better and better as technology improves. But RJ certainly passed that test with flying colors (Mary Poppins, the evening gown admiral, space horses, and golden bath robes excluded).
The same vague political themes that it featured are explored in every third movie. Not fresh.
The emphasis on strong female characters is constantly discussed everywhere, all the time. I guess you could say that was fresh in that it took that up a notch, but only in staying with a well-developed trend (not starting one).
Every decent director tries to make his characters multi-dimensional. How did RJ do?
- Leah: fail- she was right about everything at every turn and was just not a good actress. She was literally comatosed for exactly as long as the plot demanded, like a soap opera.
- Luke: fail: This reminded me of Zach Johnson with Superman. Because SM is not morally conflicted, artsy directors think he is boring and have trouble telling a good story with him. They like Batman. Same with Luke. What is the drama if he is not morally conflicted? Well, how about Obi Wan Kenobi having to decide whether to fight Vader, or refuse to kill? For Luke, it could have been non-moral failure and weakness--Snoke and Ren literally out-matched him and he needed to figure out what the heck he was going to do (again, kinda like Yoda and Obi-wan). Anyway, MH did an excellent job, but the character Luke was written so he was wrong about everything, at every turn, and his huge tragic flaw was exactly the flaw that he had already overcame in the original trilogy. Again, the freshness was achieved by simply contradicting the past story.
- Rey- she "struggled" with being alone and a nobody by constantly succeeding in everything she did and mastering the force without training. We get it, she's effortlessly awesome at everything. The biggest reason she needed a back story was to explain why she was so good so fast. Hopefully, the "your parents were drunks" throw-away will be a KR or Snoke deception.
- Kylo: Bad, good, bad, good, bad, good, horrible.
- Poe: caricaturized as man controlled by emotions at every turn so Admiral Hondo and Leah could demonstrate cool, ambitionless, selfless leadership
- Finn: no development
- Rose: inserted for perfect moral compass ("Do you feel bad for leading a stampede through a packed casino? Nope, they all deserved it . . . But don't kill those you hate!"). Also probably a composite of target audience who Disney wants to buy more SW stuff.
- Snoke and Hux: total caricatures
As for the plot, I felt like it was written to defy every expectation, at every turn. Whatever you expect, we'll do the opposite. And the big theme was a contradiction: "We don't win wars by killing those we hate, but by saving those we love!" So why was Hondo's sacrifice noble, but Finn's was not?
I just thought it was cool to look at and kind of fun in a forgettable way if you don't have any interest in the characters previous stories.
