Why you are wrong when you say 'The Force Awakens' sucks
After seeing "Star Wars: The Force Awakens," many fans (and non-fans) raced to the internet to provide their own comments to reviews, articles and other posts to share their opinions on the movie. As can be expected, there people who thought the movie was great, as well as people thought the movie was horrible.
I saw the movie with my husband and two oldest children. We were among those who loved the movie, and think those who made negative comments didn't fully understand the movie, or perhaps didn't have three other people to bounce ideas and thoughts with immediately after the movie.
(Probably the most shocking comment- which I wish I screenshot when I had the chance- said they were disappointed that reading the books gave away too much information. Does anyone who read "The Hunger Games" or "Harry Potter" say that after seeing the movie?)
As a result, we have decided to provide this service to help those who insist on posting "TFA sucks," or the much longer explanation of why they thought it sucked.
Probably the biggest and most often heard complaint about the movie is that it is the same story as "A New Hope." And, yes, there are similarities, but aren't many of those similarities also in "The Phantom Menance," the other start to a Star Wars trilogy?
All three involve a Force sensitive lead being found on a desert planet. All three have a female lead, perfectly capable of taking care of things herself, needing some sort of rescue. All three have a mentor who dies.
Perhaps there is a reason history keeps repeating itself. Star Wars is the story of Anakin Skywalker. People all the time find themselves doing something exactly as their parents would have, and Anakin's family already has a the similarity of being not only Force sensitive, but extremely powerful in the Force. While there is always someone who wants to cultivate their power, there will probably be similar circumstances members of the Skywalker family will find themselves in.
Plus, if you look hard enough, you can find similarities between a variety of movies and stories. For example, you may have seen the meme below:
While I may have alluded to Rey being a member of the Skywalker family, that wasn't exactly confirmed in the movie. Sure, she has power you would only expect from a member of the Skywalker family, and Anakin's lightsaber called to her. But, unless I'm mistaken, she only says she is waiting for her family to come back for her. She may not know who her parents are, and is simply waitng for her Jedi family (Anakin and Obi Wan do refer to each other as brothers) to come back. In fact, there is even a post floating around claiming that she could be a Kenobi.
Probably the only major thing really explained in the movie is that Kylo Ren is Ben Solo, Han and Leia's son.
Is this really a problem? Only in the information now society.
Back in 1977, when "A New Hope" was released, we didn't know Darth Vader was Luke's father. We didn't know Luke and Leia were twins. We didn't know C-3PO was built by Darth Vader back when he was little Anakin.
There are two more movies in this trilogy, as well as a few other movies and other media (like books) to explain what has not been explained. Did you really want C-3PO to go on about his arm and continue to delay Leia and Han's reunion? (If you want to know more about the red arm, there will be a comic book for that.)
First of all, this seems like an unprovoked attack on both the Philadelphia Eagles and Hillary Clinton, but that's beside the point. Bad grammar aside, Kylo Ren was supposed to seem immature and unstable, while the Empire coming back to power is actually quite plausible. Destroying the Death Star didn't automatically get rid of 25 years of Imperials running through the galaxy, it just meant they didn't have Sith lords protecting their hinds. Still, all it really did was destabilize the galaxy like when the U.S. goes into these Middle Eastern countries and removes evil governments, which are immediately replaced by a less stable, possibly just as evil government.
"Hero girl," I'd like to argue, did not learn how to control the Force in six minutes. The movie is titled "The Force Awakens" for a reason. It appears through Rey's vision/memory from touching the lightsaber that she was at Luke's Jedi Training Camp (that may not have been the proper title of his school, but in future references, if any, it will be referred to as LJTC) as a small child before being left on Jakku by her "family."
We know from past movies that children were taken from their families to learn the ways of the Force at a very young age, and that a nine-year-old Anakin was considered too old. Luke, wanting to avoid another Anakin, likely followed this method, if possible.
By Kylo Ren's reaction to there being a girl with the droid, it appears he knows who she is. In fact, his reaction resembled Darth Vader's when he put the pieces together that his son was there.
It is very possible she was always a Force prodigy, possibly even being part of the reason why Ben became so frustrated in his own abilities and turned to the Dark Side.
Imagine if you witnessed something traumatic, like it appears Rey witnessed, possibly at the age of five. While some think her mind was Force swiped, it is also possible the experience caused her to repress those memories of the LJTC until those memories were "awakened" by the events in the movie. She was trained, the Force was in her, and it was up to her to find it within herself and let it go.
The movie was all about finding Luke, so, yes, Mark Hamill's character, although only seen briefly twice (at the most), was the star of the movie.
James Earl Jones allegedly thought his part as Darth Vader was so small in "A New Hope" that he was not even in the credits of the movie. I think most of us would argue now that Vader was a huge role.
This is also not the first time a movie has credited someone as starring when the actor was barely in the movie. Marlon Brando was the top billed star of "Superman" and he dies about a fourth of the way into the movie. "Scream" starred Drew Barrymore, who died in the first scene. In "Star Trek III: The Search For Spock," Leonard Nimoy doesn't appear until the very end. This not only draws in the star's fans, but (in some cases) helps hide what will happen in the story.
In conclusion, this is definitely a movie meant to be seen many times, with something new to find each time. If you did not like the movie and already feel you have wasted your money on it (as some people have said), go ahead and wait until the movie is available on television and see it again. You may see something you didn't before and change your mind.
- Review: Is 'Star Wars: The Force Awakens' kid-friend...
A review to help parents decide if the new Star Wars movie is appropriate for their child to see.
- Not So Lazy Days: Pursuit of Star Wars trivia domina...
The game plays just like regular Trivial Pursuit, only the questions are all about Star Wars. And, I mean ALL about Star Wars. Even the behind the scenes rumors. This is also a DVD-enhanced game, so when it's time to earn a pie, the DVD asks your que
- Which actor is "the special" of Lego minifigures?
Many actors have seen their characters turned into Lego minifigures, but who has received the honor the most?
© 2016 Samantha Sinclair
More by this Author
A review to help parents decide if the movie 'Batman v Superman' is appropriate for their child to see.
Review... Should you take your kids to see The Avengers?
Parents can take the superheroes of the big screen and colorful books and create a party kids will love.