Han and Leia: Lucas Era vs. Disney Era

[Winter]

Han and Leia were my OTP before I knew what an OTP was. There arguably THE Reason why I'm such a romantic and why I got so into shipping and are really one of the best fictional couples in pop culture as they manage to avoid so many issues that others couples in fiction can't seem to avoid. They argue with one another but it's more akin to a battle of wits with them trying to one up the other and both always finding themselves evenly matched, and when they work together they're like a well oiled machine that is a match for anything the galaxy has to throw at them.

And while it had it's issues I also loved their relationship in the Original Expanded Universe, especially in the Thrawn Trilogy where we saw them working together as a married couple with kids on the way. I love how Han got worried about Leia's safety but knew her well enough to know that she could take care of herself. And again, while it had it's ups and downs (what relationship doesn't) I love how they remained together for their whole lives and continued to be a shining example of what a couple should be... And then the Disney Sequel Trilogy happened.

As Red over on Overly Sarcastic Productions said in her tropes talks about Sequels I HATE when writers break up couples in between sequels in order to create conflict where none need exist. Han and Leia were happily married, in and out of universe, for over 20 years and then TDST goes the cheap route and breaks them up For No Reason. Not only that but unlike in the Lucas Era, where Han became a high ranking member of the New Republic and a good father who stuck with his family even during the hardest times (until Legacy of the Force).

But in the Disney Era, Han actually regressed as a character as he became a smuggler, again. Who leaves people when things get to tough, Again! And only helped the heroes out because he found himself in over his head... AGAIN!!!

And I have to disagree with Red on one point in her Trope Talk, I honestly think that Leia was just as badly treated as Han and Luke was as she also regressed as a character. She's just as cooled as she was at the start of the series, if not more so. She's leading a rebellion against an evil Empire only this new Rebellion is one that gets progressively worse as the story goes on as it Keeps Screwing Things Up! And she dies because she gave her son a call.

It really bugs me how the Original Trio were handled as they all regressed as characters and everything they accomplished was rendered pointless. This is why, for all it's faults, I prefer the Lucas Era in terms of how the Original Trio was handled.

Yes, Han and Leia still lost a son to the dark side. Yes, they lost friends. Yes, they did have one or two fights but in the end they were still together and still had their daughter and got to live long lives and in the end they did accomplish something.

But in the Disney Era, it was all for nothing. They broke up, lost their Entire Family, and in the end Palpatine won. It also doesn't help that Leia doesn't even mention Han's name after his death, or for that matter, show any sighs that she misses him at all.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

I think I've said it here before, but I like it more when Lois Lane is in the know about Superman and they're together.

Breaking up people up artificially seems misguided. It's not like Ross really got funnier in Friends when they made him a doofus again without Rachel.

[Beastro]

It really bugs me how the Original Trio were handled as they all regressed as characters and everything they accomplished was rendered pointless. This is why, for all it's faults, I prefer the Lucas Era in terms of how the Original Trio was handled.

This is the character development equivalent of making a new character look smart by forcing the regulars to become utterly stupid.

But in the Disney Era, it was all for nothing.

Of course it's all for nothing, Disney can make more by making it all for nothing.

I know movies are an industry, but this is why I'm so repelled by modern tv and film. These movies are so nakedly made simply to make money there's nothing of value I can take away from them.

[Madner Kami]

I know movies are an industry, but this is why I'm so repelled by modern tv and film. These movies are so nakedly made simply to make money there's nothing of value I can take away from them.

Outside of a very select few, all movies have been made with the intend of making money. The critical difference between a cynical cash-grab and a (sometimes flawd) masterwork, has always been the "boots on the ground", the director, the actors, the screenwriters. If those fail to make the best out of it or are, worst case scenario, just there to make money, then we end up with stuff like the Star Wars Sequels.

[Winter]

I know movies are an industry, but this is why I'm so repelled by modern tv and film. These movies are so nakedly made simply to make money there's nothing of value I can take away from them.

Outside of a very select few, all movies have been made with the intend of making money. The critical difference between a cynical cash-grab and a (sometimes flawd) masterwork, has always been the "boots on the ground", the director, the actors, the screenwriters. If those fail to make the best out of it or are, worst case scenario, just there to make money, then we end up with stuff like the Star Wars Sequels.

I think that's one of the reasons the Prequels have begun to get something of a revaluation. They weren't made because Lucas wanted to make money but because he had a story he wanted to tell and he was allowed to tell it. I've seen a ton of reviewers who were VERY Harsh towards the Prequels who went back and re-watched after Rise of Skywalker and many of them admit that they aren't as bad as they remembered.

Again, I fully admit that the Prequels are flawed but personally I don't see them as anymore flawed then Hook or The Legend of Korra. It also helps that the Prequels, in the end, had a more positive effect on pop culture then a negative one. It could be argued that because of the Prequels we got Knights of the Old Republic and with it, Dragon Age and Mass Effect and it there's no argument that it gave us The Clone Wars which is easily one of the best Star Wars Stories of all time.

Time will tell of the Disney Sequel Trilogy will add anything of equal quality but as of right now the best story from the Disney Era, IMO, is The Mandalorian which is great but honestly that's about it.

[Captain Crimson]

I know movies are an industry, but this is why I'm so repelled by modern tv and film. These movies are so nakedly made simply to make money there's nothing of value I can take away from them.

Outside of a very select few, all movies have been made with the intend of making money. The critical difference between a cynical cash-grab and a (sometimes flawd) masterwork, has always been the "boots on the ground", the director, the actors, the screenwriters. If those fail to make the best out of it or are, worst case scenario, just there to make money, then we end up with stuff like the Star Wars Sequels.

I think that's one of the reasons the Prequels have begun to get something of a revaluation. They weren't made because Lucas wanted to make money but because he had a story he wanted to tell and he was allowed to tell it. I've seen a ton of reviewers who were VERY Harsh towards the Prequels who went back and re-watched after Rise of Skywalker and many of them admit that they aren't as bad as they remembered.

Again, I fully admit that the Prequels are flawed but personally I don't see them as anymore flawed then Hook or The Legend of Korra. It also helps that the Prequels, in the end, had a more positive effect on pop culture then a negative one. It could be argued that because of the Prequels we got Knights of the Old Republic and with it, Dragon Age and Mass Effect and it there's no argument that it gave us The Clone Wars which is easily one of the best Star Wars Stories of all time.

Time will tell of the Disney Sequel Trilogy will add anything of equal quality but as of right now the best story from the Disney Era, IMO, is The Mandalorian which is great but honestly that's about it.

I think Beastro said it best, and I'll add on to that. They are being made by people who so blatantly want to make money, by people preaching the evils of money as per the leftist view, that you can barely take anything away from them. The times I've said it succeeded, it was in spite of itself.

[Beastro]

Outside of a very select few, all movies have been made with the intend of making money. The critical difference between a cynical cash-grab and a (sometimes flawd) masterwork, has always been the "boots on the ground", the director, the actors, the screenwriters. If those fail to make the best out of it or are, worst case scenario, just there to make money, then we end up with stuff like the Star Wars Sequels.

I get that and appreciate it. In fact, that element needs to be there to prevent tv and film from degenerating into naval gazing artsy crap; I do not like how split products are into those of utilitarian value and "art for arts sake" - everything should be art and balance the two.

The issue is, a Lucas or a Spielberg, you get that they want to balance things, or at least did when in their element. I do not see anything like that in a man like Abrams. I mean, even Michael Bay seems to love doing what he does, but Abrams comes off as so strictly trying to engineer and orchestrate something "epic" without dedicating the effort into actually making it that.

He reminds me of the president of the UFC, Dana White. Everything that comes out of White's mouth is what he thinks will help sell tickets, but you get a deeper feeling from him: If he could, he'd just get people to give him money for nothing, like a gangster fleecing people for protection money. He chafes and always looks irritated at trying to hype fights, he hates having to appeal to people to coax them out of their cash.

That's the thing. Abrams doesn't make movies, he makes things trying to appear to be that are engineered to rake in money with the minimum of effort.

[ChiggyvonRichthofen]

Engineered is the word for it. A lot of blockbusters today really do seem to be the result of studio analysts breaking down the most favored movie elements of audiences/focus groups, be it a specific look, a specific type of quip, a certain kind of hero, etc., then throwing a bunch of those elements together and calling it a movie. There's no reason to care when it's clearly more formula than story. Even the Marvel movies suffer a bit from that. There's some heart too, but there are clear, overly orchestrated "epic moments" that I don't necessarily think will age well.

Of course Spielberg and Lucas wanted to make money in the 70s and 80s, but there's nothing inherently wrong with mass appeal. The crucial difference is that they took ideas that they were passionate about and made movies in the hopes that other people would love them too. Too many blockbusters today reverse that process- beginning and ending the creative process with whatever has been proven to put butts in seats.

Not every director needs to be an auteur, but I do respect those directors that are clearly way past caring what critics, studios, or even audiences think because they're the lucky few who earned enough clout to do what they want. Someone like David Lynch outside the system or Scorsese inside it. Of course the problem with not caring is sometimes you're going to make something that nobody except you and a few critics will like. To Rian Johnson's credit, he definitely went his own way with The Last Jedi- the problem is he did it at the worst possible moment with the wrong characters.

Finally, it should be said that this is not at all a new problem. Orson Welles made freaking Citizen Kane, and he proceeded to be plagued by issues with studios, be it harassment in the editing process or outright refusal to finance his films, for the rest of his career. He made other great movies, but mostly stuff enjoyed by film buffs. A lot of potentially great stuff was left unmade. There are also still great directors and great movies being made today, including within the sci-fi/fantasy genres. It's the major blockbusters/franchises where these problems have been most prevalent.