[Scotty]

Amusingly enough, that one is actually one of the coincidences you mentioned that's actually explained.

HAN (CONT'D)
           Where'd you get this ship?

                          REY
           Niima Outpost.

                          HAN
           Jakku?! That junkyard?

                          FINN
           Thank you! Junkyard!

                          HAN

                          (TO CHEWIE)
           Told ya we should've double-checked
           the Western Reaches!

                          (TO REY)
           Who had it, Ducain?

                          REY
           I stole it from Unkar Plutt. He
           stole it from the Irving Boys, who
           stole it from Ducain.

                          HAN
           Who stole it from me! Well, you
           tell him Han Solo just stole back
           the Millennium Falcon for good.

[karajorma]

No. That's not an explanation. Why that planet out of every planet in the galaxy? Why the same planet that Rey just so happens to be on. Why so close to her that she has actually been on board and knows what modifcations have been made? Why is such a massive coincidence not explained?

If we're talking about talking past each other, you just did it to me.

[Scotty]

So why can't I say the same about Ben Kenobi in A New Hope?  Why the same planet that Luke just so happens to be on.  Why so close to him that he actually knows by reputation, and where he lives?

These are things we can answer based on information provided in other movies.  The Empire is supposed to be such a huge place, after all.  These are things we cannot answer with just the information provided in A New Hope.  Luke and Leia's familial ties were not even hinted at in A New Hope for its original release.  There is no connection anywhere in the script for Episode IV between Leia's father (whom Ben served in the Clone Wars) and Luke's father (who was a Jedi like Ben).

These are not unforgivable coincidences even in a movie that never even pretends to be part one of three and never even tries to explain it.  Yet they are in a movie that actively embraces that it is part of a trilogy, and that there's still more story to tell?

No. That's not an explanation. Why that planet out of every planet in the galaxy? Why the same planet that Rey just so happens to be on. Why so close to her that she has actually been on board and knows what modifcations have been made? Why is such a massive coincidence not explained?

If we're talking about talking past each other, you just did it to me.

You asked

Okay then, how DO you explain the Falcon being on Jakku?

The answer I provided was factually accurate.   The Falcon ended up on Jakku after changing hands several times after being stolen from Han Solo.

[karajorma]

And you knew I was complaining about the massive coincidence of it being there. Your factual answer doesn't satisfy as an answer to that problem.

So why can't I say the same about Ben Kenobi in A New Hope?  Why the same planet that Luke just so happens to be on.  Why so close to him that he actually knows by reputation, and where he lives?

We don't need the other films to explain that. Ben states that Luke is Anakin's son. It's not the slightest bit surprising he'd want to keep an eye on Luke in the hope he might become a Jedi, especially if Ben is the last remaining Jedi. He even kept Anakin's lightsabre to give to him! Hell, even if Ben flat out knew Luke wouldn't be a Jedi, it wouldn't be surprising that he decided on a hiding place that allowed him to keep an eye on his friend's son.

For all we know from A New Hope, Ben might even come from that planet. In fact, you could even take Ben's comment that Luke uncle fears he might follow Obi-Wan on some idealistic crusade as an indication that Obi-Wan was the one who tempted Anakin to leave the planet. The problem in a New Hope is not establishing a sensible reason why they are on the same planet but picking from a large number of choices which is the correct one.

[Scotty]

So why can't I say the same about Ben Kenobi in A New Hope?  Why the same planet that Luke just so happens to be on.  Why so close to him that he actually knows by reputation, and where he lives?

We don't need the other films to explain that. Ben states that Luke is Anakin's son. It's not the slightest bit surprising he'd want to keep an eye on Luke in the hope he might become a Jedi, especially if Ben is the last remaining Jedi. Hell, even if Ben flat out knew Luke wouldn't be a Jedi, it wouldn't be surprising that he decided on a hiding place that allowed him to keep an eye on his friend's son.

The wild coincidence here is that the Obi-Wan Kenobi that served Leia's father during the Clone Wars is actually the same person as the Ben Kenobi that was a Jedi with Luke's father.

Regardless, we're getting bogged down in minutiae here (the death of internet conversations everywhere).

My point being:

1) We have been explicitly told that there are two sides to the Force: good and evil, the dark side and the light.
    a) These two sides work at cross-purposes
    b) Neither side is infallible (Anakin falling from light to dark, Darth Vader's redemption, Luke's brush with the dark side in his fight with Vader, Kylo Ren's entire existence)
2) That the Force has consistently through every Star Wars movie influenced intuition and decision making for a number of characters in varied and diverse situations.
    a) Intuition isn't always followed
3) The title of Episode VII being "The Force Awakens"
    a) This strongly implies that the Force (or it's light/dark components) are actors, not merely tools.  See 1b) for why this isn't "Force as a God" territory.

Leading to the hypothesis: The Force's component parts actively work to influence what would normally be seen as coincidence.  Fortunately, this is a falsifiable hypothesis!  We'll be able to conclusively rule in one direction or the other as we see the trilogy unfold.

[karajorma]

The wild coincidence here is that the Obi-Wan Kenobi that served Leia's father during the Clone Wars is actually the same person as the Ben Kenobi that was a Jedi with Luke's father.

What the **** are you on about?  I see absolute no coincidence there, let alone an unexplained one.

Regardless, we're getting bogged down in minutiae here (the death of internet conversations everywhere).

My point being:

1) We have been explicitly told that there are two sides to the Force: good and evil, the dark side and the light.
    a) These two sides work at cross-purposes
    b) Neither side is infallible (Anakin falling from light to dark, Darth Vader's redemption, Luke's brush with the dark side in his fight with Vader, Kylo Ren's entire existence)
2) That the Force has consistently through every Star Wars movie influenced intuition and decision making for a number of characters in varied and diverse situations.
    a) Intuition isn't always followed
3) The title of Episode VII being "The Force Awakens"
    a) This strongly implies that the Force (or it's light/dark components) are actors, not merely tools.  See 1b) for why this isn't "Force as a God" territory.

Leading to the hypothesis: The Force's component parts actively work to influence what would normally be seen as coincidence.  Fortunately, this is a falsifiable hypothesis!  We'll be able to conclusively rule in one direction or the other as we see the trilogy unfold.

I'm sure we will see. My point is that it's not necessarily a good idea to take the Force in that direction.

[Scotty]

There are more factors we still don't know, too.  Unkar Plutt was Simon Pegg, and there's no goddamn way they'll pay him what they had to have paid him and only have him for less than a full minute of screen time.  He'll show up again.  Whether we get a better explanation of why the Falcon was right there or not obviously I can't say but it's certainly not out of the question.

If JJ Abrams were directing Episodes VIII or IX I'd probably hate the idea on principle.  But he's not.  Rian Johnson is.  Given Johnson's previous work (including arguably the single finest hour of television ever produced, Breaking Bad's "Ozymandias; and though I admit I haven't seen it I also haven't heard anything bad about Looper) does not disappoint, I'm more than willing to wait and see.

[karajorma]

My problem is that the each of the first three films (I couldn't give a **** about the prequels) were consistent on their own. They didn't need other films to explain mysteries. If you're going to introduce massive coincidences you really should explain them OR have the characters actually look surprised by them. Instead we have no surprise that Han Solo turns up out of the blue to find his old ship which just happened to be sitting on the same planet as Rey. We have no surprise that Luke's old lightsabre is sitting in the basement of a bar that the heroes just happen to end up visiting.

This sort of thing breaks me out of the film because they are such massive coincidences. You can try to claim that this is cause of the Force but even if it is, this sort of thing requires planning. And that's why I think it's an even worse idea than lazy scriptwriting. I'll thank you for one thing though, I'll actually be very happy if the problems in the film were just lazy scriptwriting now. The alternative is much, much worse.


Oh and I still have no idea what you were on about earlier Re: Obi-wan and Ben Kenobi.

[Scotty]

Instead we have no surprise that Han Solo turns up out of the blue to find his old ship which just happened to be sitting on the same planet as Rey.

They don't exactly find it on the planet.   I feel like this is partially another victim of JJ Abrams's utter lack of scale (or perhaps I should say I wouldn't be surprised if it was).  Other than that, Rey was absolutely surprised that Han Solo turns up out of the blue, so I'm not entirely sure what you mean by that one.  "You're Han Solo?  This is the Millennium Falcon!?"  Do you mean surprise by us, the audience?

We have no surprise that Luke's old lightsabre is sitting in the basement of a bar that the heroes just happen to end up visiting.

This one I'll freely admit you've got a point, and in the same thought remark that this is par for the course for Disney in general.  There's no way we don't get a movie or short film or TV series that explains that one, especially considering it's flat out lampshaded in the dialogue.

Oh and I still have no idea what you were on about earlier Re: Obi-wan and Ben Kenobi.

I'm not trying to 'win' an internet argument, so I dropped it.

[karajorma]

I couldn't even figure out what it meant, which is why I asked again. I literally spent 3-4 minutes trying to figure out what point you could be trying to make cause the sentence made no sense at all. I'm not asking so I can win, I'm asking cause I think I've already made it clear I don't like mysteries which are never solved. I don't think any explanation you give now needs an reply from me why you're wrong, but I would like to know what on earth you meant.

Instead we have no surprise that Han Solo turns up out of the blue to find his old ship which just happened to be sitting on the same planet as Rey.

They don't exactly find it on the planet.

It was however on the same planet as Rey. And it had been sitting there for years.

I feel like this is partially another victim of JJ Abrams's utter lack of scale (or perhaps I should say I wouldn't be surprised if it was).

We're getting somewhere if you're going to say this was crappy scriptwriting rather than being deliberate.   What amazes me is that Abrams would do it again after the amount of **** he's taken over the years about Spock sitting in a cave which Kirk just happens to end up in.

Other than that, Rey was absolutely surprised that Han Solo turns up out of the blue, so I'm not entirely sure what you mean by that one.  "You're Han Solo?  This is the Millennium Falcon!?"  Do you mean surprise by us, the audience?

She's surprised that Han is there, she's not surprised by the amazing coincidence that he turned up at the same time as she stole the ship.

This one I'll freely admit you've got a point, and in the same thought remark that this is par for the course for Disney in general.  There's no way we don't get a movie or short film or TV series that explains that one, especially considering it's flat out lampshaded in the dialogue.

This is JJ Abrams, the man never explains all the mysteries cause people let him get away with it. Hopefully you're right but if the explanation isn't in the films, **** it. I'm with Plinkett when he says "And don't tell me it's explained in some book or comic." If it's not in the film (or 8 or 9) it's bad scriptwriting.

[headdie]

Its a JJ Abrams movie, go along for the ride you guys are taking it way too serious. If you are going to get over deep into it then Film 2 will have all the backstory in it which will hopefully handwave all the BS and number 3 will be the climactic conclusion of the story arc, ANH was supposed to be stand alone IIRC which is why it plot complete, every other film was designed to either follow on or start a trilogy so there are holes in them as stand alone.

Incidentally in 3D, freaking Star Destroyer nose inches from face is awesome.

[karajorma]

Its a JJ Abrams movie, go along for the ride you guys are taking it way too serious.

If JJ Abrams is arrogant enough to think he can carry on the Star Wars universe, he deserves every complain he gets for doing this bad of a job with the script. Yeah, it's a good film, but it easily could have been better. Films that are part of a trilogy should still be complete as films. The lightsabre thing is at least hinted as being something which will be covered at a later date but there's no signs that the other coincidences will be. Hell, there's no sign that they're even supposed to be considered as strange.

[headdie]

I'm sorry but you seem to be treating the SW franchise like it is a cultural masterpiece which it is not, dont get me wrong, they are awesome Sci-Fi action/space opera films and the original trilogy has a competent though flawed plot.  Ultimately though JJ Abrams in this case has managed something better than Lucas' own efforts in the prequals, which is visually engaging on a par with the originals for the era, has a number of memorable moments and generally enjoyable to watch, didnt drag out, left me looking forward to the next films, and there are certainly worse ways to spend £12.

[karajorma]

I'm sorry but you seem to be treating the SW franchise like it is a cultural masterpiece which it is not

Tap dancing on quicksand there my friend. That's a dangerous thing to say on any sci-fi board. Let alone one which actually hosts a Star Wars mod.

dont get me wrong, they are awesome Sci-Fi action/space opera films and the original trilogy has a competent though flawed plot.  Ultimately though JJ Abrams in this case has managed something better than Lucas' own efforts in the prequals, which is visually engaging on a par with the originals for the era, has a number of memorable moments and generally enjoyable to watch, didnt drag out, left me looking forward to the next films, and there are certainly worse ways to spend £12.

Hey, I said it was a good film. The fact that it's better than the prequels doesn't count for much, pretty much anyone on this thread could have written a more interesting trilogy than the prequels. I'd give the film a solid 7.5 / 10. The direction was actually quite good, the characters generally interesting and it was definitely very beautiful. My issue with it is that it easily could have been 8.5 or 9 had they given enough of a **** to not rely on lazy coincidences like incredibly convenient chasms opening up in the ground and separating people to end a duel.

[headdie]

ok, standing down

[StarSlayer]

On the other hand, I hated Han Solo's final scene. Han is a badass and deserved a good death. Not going out like an idiot who couldn't see that his son would obviously kill him. What really pisses me off about it, is how simple it would have been to make that scene better. A minor change like having the explosives on a timer and Han trying to distract Ren would have give the scene more impact. Yeah, he's still trying to turn his son, but something else is going on too and Han knows that it could cost him his life.

I need to disagree, while I was sad Han was killed(because Harrison Ford really nailed the role and I would have loved to get more him) it was probably the best possible close to his character.  When we start ANH he's a drug running criminal that pretty much lived for himself, as the trilogy progressed he became better person and hero of the Rebellion.  His character arc is going from the guy who shoots first to the the man who gives up his life to save his son.
 
He walked out on to that bridge even though it was probably going to end badly, because that is what a parent does.  He was either going to be successful or failing that plant the seeds of his son's redemption.  Do you think his sacrifice would have meant anything if he was holding a Thermal Detonator in his other hand?  No, that would have reinforced Kylo's belief in love and family being a weakness and that after all his old man was a ****ter.  Reaching out and holding his kid's face after being run through was the move that was needed to keep his son from fully committing to the Dark Side.  A blaze of glory would not have accomplished that.

As for the whole coincidence/Force thing I'd like to open the possibility that much of it part of some Zanatos gambit by Luke.  Yeah he could be just a depressed hermit that went to hide on Ireland, but its also likely he foresaw what the future held in store and took steps to set things up the way they are.  Directly confronting the First Order and Snoke from the outset would not have panned out or at least been a temporary victory and instead decided to play the long game.  Obi Wan and Yoda could have been actively fighting the Empire for the lead up to ANH but instead they realized that it was going to be up to Anakin's children to settle the issue and took steps to make sure that happened.  As a Jedi Master it is certainly within Luke's capability to make sure the star chart, the Millennium Falcon and Rey are all on Jakku and triggered when they did.  He could have located his father's saber and delivered it to Maz, programmed R2 to awaken at the right moment.  It also fits with the fact that Snoke seems more preoccupied with "The Force" and Luke than simply galactic domination.  He had to be convinced to nuke the Republic, not because it was the next step in setting up a new Empire but because it might have come into play in support of the Resistance.  Lets face it Leia, a wing of X-Wings and some support staff should not be the priority threat to the First Order and Snoke unless he is convinced its an important piece in Luke's gambit. 

Even if a lot of the plot coincidences are going to Luke's design we may not have it revealed till the last installment, I wouldn't be surprised if he plays the grumpy failure role in the next film.  Personally I am hoping this trilogy brings balance to the Force rather than a simple light side victory.  One of the major complaints I have with the universe is its a constant seesaw between light and dark.

[karajorma]

As for the whole coincidence/Force thing I'd like to open the possibility that much of it part of some Zanatos gambit by Luke.

Yeah, I considered that. But it's still lazy on the scriptwriters part to have everyone act like this sort of thing is normal even if that is the case.

[Akalabeth Angel]

Hey, I said it was a good film. The fact that it's better than the prequels doesn't count for much, pretty much anyone on this thread could have written a more interesting trilogy than the prequels. I'd give the film a solid 7.5 / 10. The direction was actually quite good, the characters generally interesting and it was definitely very beautiful. My issue with it is that it easily could have been 8.5 or 9 had they given enough of a **** to not rely on lazy coincidences like incredibly convenient chasms opening up in the ground and separating people to end a duel.

Actually saying "It's better than the prequels" counts for a lot, at least in the eyes of those who like it.   It's the justification for them enjoying a comparatively poorly-thought out movie.  There's such a backlash against prequels that almost anything could succeed. 

I'm sorry but you seem to be treating the SW franchise like it is a cultural masterpiece which it is not

Not sure what world you live in but like it or not, Star Wars is a culture icon. It is one of the most identifiable pieces of media out there and has permeated every aspect of western consumer culture.

Instead we have no surprise that Han Solo turns up out of the blue to find his old ship which just happened to be sitting on the same planet as Rey.

They don't exactly find it on the planet.   I feel like this is partially another victim of JJ Abrams's utter lack of scale (or perhaps I should say I wouldn't be surprised if it was). 

What Abrams lacks is not scale, it's world building. He can't create a convincing world because he can't create a story where characters actually think. Without characters who think, it's just full of actors and not alive, just people on a set. Characters know and do things without information, then they fail to do things without reason, from start to finish the movie is rife with these sorts of problems.  The movie is all flash with very little substance.

People are surprised that Han found the Falcon? What about being surprised that the Empire wasn't lying in orbit with a Star Destroyer? They're looking for the droid. They dispatched fighters and troops to the surface to find them and had two of their fighters chase the falcon for 5 minutes and yet when the Falcon hits orbit they're no where to be found. Why? Because the bad guys had to go pretend they were Hitler and let the audience know "we really are the bad guys".

[headdie]

I'm sorry but you seem to be treating the SW franchise like it is a cultural masterpiece which it is not

Not sure what world you live in but like it or not, Star Wars is a culture icon. It is one of the most identifiable pieces of media out there and has permeated every aspect of western consumer culture.

Read the words, I said cultural Masterpiece, not cultural Icon, I chose masterpiece because as a long running SW fan I am well aware of it's iconic status which has transcended decades, it however has the plot depth of a teacup recycling the same backwater kid turns superhero plot 3 times now.

Dosnt stop the films being enjoyable to watch though

[karajorma]

I don't think it's fair to complain about the original film because the prequels and new film copied it.