MovieChat Forums > Star Wars: Episode VIII - The Last Jedi (2017) Discussion > It'll be interesting to see how Abrams t...

It'll be interesting to see how Abrams tries to fix this


He setup some interesting character questions in TFA. When Rian Johnson took over, he said fuck it, none of that shit is important. And I think Johnson is a good director but a bad writer. I mean Looper made no sense either. So it will be interesting to see where Abrams takes this next. I'll bet my bottom dollar he didn't expect Johnson to make some of the choices he made, especially with regards to Luke and Snoke.

reply

Looper made no sense???? LOL

reply

The way time travel is handled in the film makes no sense.

reply

Please elaborate.

reply

Rian Johnson does his best to head off the complaints of those paying attention. “If we talk about time travel we’re gonna be talking about it all day, making diagrams with straws,” protests one of the characters. And yet this is a time travel movie, one in which the plot revolves around people being physically yanked back in time and trying to change the past. If it were just a story about how we wouldn’t take the advice of our older selves if it were on offer, the plot mechanic could have been something nice and low-budget like mysterious emails from the future. Instead we have Bruce Willis with gold strapped to his back and gunplay galore.

If a director claims they’re making a “serious” time travel movie, rather than some Hollywood nonsense starring Arnold Schwarzenegger, we’d expect them to at least acknowledge, if not grapple with, some of the intricacies science fiction novels (and indeed physicists) have been dealing with for decades. On this front Looper isn’t Primer or Donnie Darko, or even the best time travel movie starring Bruce Willis (that would be Twelve Monkeys). It blithely ignores the Grandfather Paradox, or contingent vs quantum-forking models of time travel, or the Hitler’s Murder paradox. The only way to send a message to your future self seems to be to carve it into your skin, rather than get a discreet tattoo, or just memorise it as done in one movie with a more sophisticated theory of time travel, Bill and Ted’s Excellent Adventure. Nobody in Looper seems to have thought of sending time machines and maintenance manuals back in time, which would create the bootstrap paradox we see in the Terminator movies (starring Arnold Schwarzenegger). Even Jeff Daniels’s ability to affect the future with terse hints (“I’m from the future. Go to China.”) is dealt with better in a time-travel episode of My Little Pony. Seriously, it is.

reply

But if Rian Johnson doesn't want to talk about time travel because it gives him a headache and reminds him of dull afternoons doodling in the margins of his math textbook. Here are some plot holes that don’t revolve around mind-bending time paradoxes.

A central plot conceit is that loopers execute themselves. You’re sent a victim, it turns out to be you 30 years older, but hey, old-you comes with a big pile of gold to help make the next 30 years more bearable. Of course, if you recognized your older self it might be hard to pull the trigger (a hesitation required by the plot) of your really, really inaccurate gun (also required by the plot). Telekinesis, however, is completely superfluous to the plot and just an excuse for some cool CGI.

Why do loopers exist? Because it’s impossible to inconspicuously murder people in the future. Forensic science in 2074 is so amazingly advanced that victims are sent back to 2044 to be shot in broad daylight and stuffed in an incinerator (no chance of future cops noticing that, I’m sure!) Meanwhile, in 2074: “So our nanobots and DNA sniffers have traced the kidnapped man all the way to the door of this illegal time machine, and then he just disappears. Oh well, file this one under Unsolved.”

But OK, let’s accept that premise: time machines are used to dispose of bodies. So why send the victims back alive? Or, if creating a corpse would still be too messy, why not at least render them unconscious? A wee knock on the head, if not a lethal injection, and there’s much less chance something might go terribly wrong in the past.

But for some reason victims must be sent back alive and conscious. Why, though, have loopers murder themselves? Isn’t that just asking for trouble? Instead have them execute a retired looper they’ve never met, from far away, preferably someone who doesn’t even speak their language. Much safer.

reply

You know what? You have a time machine. Can you really not think of a better way of disposing of people without leaving a trace? Go send them to play with dinosaurs or watch Krakatoa erupt.

Hold on—why, exactly, are retired loopers executed? It can’t be to keep them quiet—they’re left peacefully alone for 30 years, and could at any time blab the awful things they know about the impending discovery of time travel and all the people they killed. Why not just send back a pile of gold and a thank-you card and let them have a dignified retirement and die of old age? There’s plenty of gold to spare, as time machines can make piles of it in a few hours. (Wait, what? See below.)

Also, those retired loopers may not be conveniently available for execution. It would be a bit awkward, wouldn’t it, if a looper died of cancer before their 30 year retirement was up. Or committed suicide the day before they were kidnapped, or spent those 30 years finding some foolproof way to hide. Or became President. Or ascended the criminal ranks until they were the one in charge of retired-looper execution. Or sneaked into a time machine after 29 years and got sent back to live their retirement a second time, except older and wiser and knowing when the stock market crashes.

By the way, did everyone notice that Bruce Willis was kidnapped in China, but appeared in a cornfield in Kansas? That means time machines are also teleportation devices that can move something human-sized from one spot on Earth to any other, undetectably. And instantaneously; in fact you can arrive a few minutes before you leave (which I suppose gives you time to make a quick phone call and confirm to yourself that you’ll get there safely). The people who own time machines could easily dispose of bodies by just teleporting them to the bottom of the ocean—no risk of time paradoxes.

reply

In fact, since these outlaws with time machines can, and do, send themselves into the past to live and run criminal gangs, why aren’t they already in charge? Why haven’t they gone back to 2012, or 1812, to mess with history to their own advantage, so that when time travel is invented they’re ruling the world rather than having to hide murders from the authorities? They should be the authorities; after all, they have huge amounts of gold.

That’s because it’s easy to make staggering riches with a time machine; you just need a gold bar and a bank vault. Send the gold to the vault a week into the past. Go to the bank, check the vault—yep, one bar of gold—withdraw it, and repeat the process: send bar back, go to bank, withdraw bar, send bar back—all day if you like. Next, send yourself a note, a few days in the past, with instructions to go to the vault, withdraw the huge pile of gold that’s accumulated there, cash it in, and bank the proceeds, but—very important—leave one bar behind. Finally, check your bank balance: hey, you’re rich. Not bad for a day’s work, and no tedious messing about with ancient savings accounts and compound interest rates.

But what if past-you withdrew, oops, EVERYTHING from the bank vault and didn’t leave any seed money. Does the pile of gold suddenly disappear? Do you create a new parallel universe where past-you rich but a different future-you finds the vault empty? Now we’re dealing with time paradoxes. I’ll stop because we could be here all day. Making diagrams with straws.

reply

Did the movie set out the rules of its time travel theory? Not the rules you or I believe but the rules that it wants?

Time travel in this movie works in a way that only the present has any effect. So while killing himself kills his future self, it doesnt stop all that came before including the reason for killing himself.

I get why you dont like it and honestly I thought you were going to say something else about why it made no sense. But yes, it makes sense if you follow the rules of the movie. Kinda like back to the future. Its full of nonsense, but its good.

reply

"Looper made no sense???? LOL"

Yes, besides some back-asswards methods of maintaining a time-traveling assassination business, the time travel loop itself is completely broken. Rian messed it up, so the loop can never actually start the first time. It self-contradicts.

Also, the telekinesis was a gimmicky setup that was completely ignored in the movie until it was required in order to manhandle the broken plot.

=)

reply

Depends on what set of rules you have for time travel. Remember that time travel is made up.

reply

The movie directly contradicts its own logic setup. It's internally flawed. The event at the end (was it his mother getting killed? I forget the exact details) can never happen the first time.

I always judge a movie by its own merits, and this was a fail. It's pointed out in many other reviews, too, so I could find the actual details if I needed to.

reply

The mother is killed which creates the rainmaker. Joe travels back in time to kill the rainmaker, but is actually the reason for the rainmaker. Young joe figures this out and kills himself.

We all have preconceived ideas of how time travel works. but they are just that, ideas. We dont know. For me time travel will never make any sense. No matter what you travel back in time to do, it wouldnt be possible as once you did it, you wouldnt have a reason to travel back and would never do it. This movie gives the idea that what we do now, even if the cause of that action is from the future, it stays done. Which would imply that timetravel in this instance is no different that moving forward through time as we do now, but we can go to any point and keep going forward. Like a loop on a race track rather than a ring.

reply

I believe this is a breakdown of the problem I saw: https://www.cinemablend.com/new/Infographic-Illustrates-Major-Flaw-Looper-Ending-33458.html

Ned pointed out to us that in the first timeline we see - the one where Young Joe kills Old Joe and lives 30 more years - The Rainmaker is still created, causing chaos and killing people. If this happens in a timeline where Old Joe doesn't jump back and to try and kill Cid as a child, this means that Joe didn't actually have any effect on The Rainmaker and that his rise is inevitable.

From what I remember now, the basic concept is that the Rainmaker can never be "caused" the first time, according to the movie's logic.

=)

reply

Fix his? He basically was the one responsible for this mess. He blatantly rehashed ANH. He's in no position to fix anything.

reply

I knew something was off in the very first scene, where Hux is having that dopey conversation with Poe, a comedic moment at the beginning of what was originally supposed to be the darkest of the new trilogy, is not good writing.

reply

You wouldn't know good screenwriting if it smacked you the face - loser

reply

I hear ya. We'll see if JJ does better for IX, indeed.

reply

Yeap you almost know right away this movie is not gonna have the great Star Wars feel.

reply

Amen brother! I'm reminded of how great the opening dialogue is between Vader and his captains and admirals in the ESB. Then I go to what has been teased to be the darkest of the franchise and I get Poe and Hux having something that looks like it's out of a Marvel movie made for 15 year olds. I can't believe Kennedy and Lucas Film let this get to the final cut. It so out of place for a star wars movie. I get that's Poe's character but for heaven sakes are we really suppose to believe that Hux would go along with that nonsense he is a General in the Empire( I mean first order) he wouldn't have lasted as a janitor in the in original trilogy navy.

Makes me wonder how stupid and goofy the Han Solo movie was that Lord and Miller were making that they got fired.

reply

Yep, I had a suspicion during that opening scene but held on to hope and moved on. My suspicion was then confirmed as soon as Luke threw the lightsaber behind him like a piece of trash. Everything went downhill from there. 😕

reply

Snoke => Smoke => Smoke Monster ;)

reply

The Force Awakens was garbage. This new movie is a great improvement. How the F is Abrams going to fix anything when the first movie was so terrible?

reply

Please elaborate how the story got improved. At least Abrams copied an existing story from Lucas. This new story makes no sense whatsoever.

reply

force awakens was very entertaining, and felt like a star wars movie, TLJ was an experiment that failed miserably

reply

I disagree. It felt nothing like a Star Wars movie. No humor, flat characters and boring battles. The Last Jedi had everything that makes a Star Wars movie a Star Wars movie. Sorry, but you are wrong. I have been a Star Wars fan since the beginning. You sir, seem like an amateur.

reply

well millions of people beg to differ and when is the beggining for you 1999?

reply

And millions think it is a great Star Wars movie. I saw the original Star Wars movie in 1977 when I was six. I was nine when The Empire Strikes Back came out. Haven't seen a good Star Wars movie since. Rian Johnson at least made people feel something, even if it was hate for this movie, and that can't be said about most movie. Most people leave the theater feeling meh. This didn't and I love that.

reply

i believe alot of people had hate for the prequels , and as for Rian Johnson making people feel something yes your right , they felt it was a messy star wars films, think you should delve deeper on the interwap and look at the audience reviews , just cause you like it doesnt make it so

ill start you off

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2527336/reviews?ref_=tt_urv

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/star_wars_the_last_jedi/reviews/?type=user

reply

Insanity...

reply

and i dont recall previous star wars films especially the original trilogy having forced stupid humour , jokes about mothers, using the words, god, bastard, spunk and arse, TLJ has hardly any battles, Poes super skilled flying ability against a super star destroyer aka Dregnaut , single handedly disabled all its surface canons, where as in Jedi it took a the whole rebel alliance to bring down even a single star destroyer, the first order chasing the resistence cruiser until it ran out of fuel ? can destroy solar systems but has to wait until a ship runs out of fuel to destroy it? why not just send in a shed load of tie fighters? Handing Luke his fathers lightsaber that hes not seen since he got his hand sliced , just tosses it away as if it was a stick. everything TFA built up story wise has been tore down by TLJ, snoke, Rey , Anakins lightsaber, its not terrible , but its nowhere near as entertaining.

reply

When Snoke died, his evil force ghost escaped and possessed Rey, in the next Episode Rey kills Leia and everyone else in the resistance

reply

like lost

reply

He'll remake ET and hope nobody will notice due to the lens flare emitting from ET's dirty finger.

reply

He nearly remade ET with Super 8

reply

I had the same problem. A trilogy should have the same writers and director for continuity. A couple of questions in the first movie were never answered in this one.

reply

Even if Jar Jar Abrams wrote and directed all three movies in the new trilogy, the unanswered questions would remain, since he never resolves them. If you don't believe me, watch "Lost".

reply

I agree. I stopped watching Lost because he didn't answer questions. Abrams admitted that he didn't believe Lost would last so he made it up as he went along. What a hack!

I didn't necessarily mean Abrams, but any writer. It's as if Kennedy doesn't understand Basic Writing 101. Obviously story elements are going to be set-up in the beginning that will need to be carried out in the middle and end. How would different writers know what the original intended or would even care aka: creative differences?

Lucas is still a consultant. Now is the time that they use his creativity the way that Apple needed to bring back Steve Jobs when the company had lost its way.

reply

As long as the movies make tons of money, they don't really care if the fans love them or not.

reply