Jump to content

THE LAST JEDI - OST Album MUSIC Discussion (No Movie Spoilers)


Jay

Recommended Posts

Luke's theme appears a second time during the opening battle, and a third when Luke is reunited with R2-D2. So yeah, it's only used three times in the entire score.

 

I suppose it makes sense for Williams not to use Luke's theme often, as the Luke in TLJ is a much different and more disillusioned character than he is in the original trilogy; associating his character with his previous upbeat and heroic march would feel out of place in a movie like TLJ. Williams' new melancholy, yet still heroic-sounding theme fits the character much better.

 

That being said, I would have liked it had Williams quoted his theme a final time in the movie, perhaps as Luke's cape drifts away after his death. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Taikomochi said:

It seems pretty clear to me that Luke’s theme no longer really represents Luke. It’s usage in TFA was more as a feeling of nostalgia and for the occasional “fuck yeah” moment like Scherzo. I’m not sure why people keep expecting it to be associated with him because that would not be consistent with how Williams has been using it as of late.

 

That’s not to say I wouldn’t like more thematic material associated with Luke used in TLJ but that theme in particular represents him in name only at this point.

 

Well, whether it represents Luke or not, it represents Star Wars, and I'd have liked to have heard more of it instead of the umpteenth presentation of the Force Theme.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That’s fair. I just think there’s a few themes in Star Wars at this point that Williams uses pretty loosely like that and the Rebel fanfare. It’s futile to hope for him to use those in intellectual and motivated ways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, JohnSolo said:

Luke's theme appears a second time during the opening battle. So yeah, it's only used twice in the entire score.

 

I suppose it makes sense for Williams not to use Luke's theme often, as the Luke in TLJ is a much different and more disillusioned character than he is in the original trilogy; associating his character with his previous upbeat and heroic march would feel out of place in a movie like TLJ.

 

But that's where Williams' brilliance comes in. Luke's Theme doesn't have to always be presented as heroic and upbeat. For example, in the "Battle of Yavin" cue in Episode 4, Williams shifts the theme into a minor mode, then modulates it, making it sound anxious and unstable.

Yavin.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Smaug the iron said:

Luke’s theme appears 7 times in the score, not counting the main title and the end credits. 

  1. During the opening battle 
  2. Luke reunited with R2
  3. BB8 fighting with the guards on Canto Bight
  4. BB8 disguise himself with a trash can
  5. Leia stuns Poe
  6. Leia and Holdo saying goodbye 
  7. The slave children are playing with a Luke Skywalker doll.

2, 3, 7 = OST

1, 7 = FYC

4, 5, 6 = unreleased 

 

Ah, I missed those. I stand corrected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought Luke's theme had been repurposed as the general heroic theme for whatever in SW. It shows up rather randomly in the previous four movies that didn't even feature Luke. It wasn't even used at the end of TFA. It was, however, used when Han sees the cockpit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Philippe Roaché said:

I thought Luke's theme had been repurposed as the general heroic theme for whatever in SW. It shows up rather randomly in the previous four movies that didn't even feature Luke. It wasn't even used at the end of TFA. It was, however, used when Han sees the cockpit.

 

To me, from the moment it underscored Obi-Wan and Qui-Gon slashing battle droids, it became the "Star Wars Adventure Theme."

 

You can also look at it like Leia's theme at Ben's death, Yoda's theme during Leia/Lando/Chewie's Bespin escape, the Emperor's theme underscoring Snoke, etc - any number of Star Wars themes that Williams has used flexibly despite not having any relevance to the action onscreen.  Themes don't have to be so rigid that they can't appear under things just because they're musically right or exciting.

 

There's no Doug Adams handbook painstakingly lavishing over the importance of Williams' rigid thematic use in Star Wars (yet ;)) - and even in that series' case where people tend to get more pedantic, the door was always open to something like wiggly use of the Nature's Reclamation theme, or Nazgul music underscoring Grumpy Ol' Thorin because the filmmakers thought it was right.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, mstrox said:

There's no Doug Adams handbook painstakingly lavishing over the importance of Williams' rigid thematic use in Star Wars (yet ;)) - and even in that series' case where people tend to get more pedantic, the door was always open to something like wiggly use of the Nature's Reclamation theme, or Nazgul music underscoring Grumpy Ol' Thorin because the filmmakers thought it was right.

 

Prepare to receive a lengthy response from Chen G. on how the usage of Shore's themes were fully justified and work well to underscore the drama in said scenes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that themes don't have to be rigidly attached to someone or something. There's the JW "Short Round Helps Out" approach where every character has a theme whenever they appear on screen for that sequence and then there's the ESB we'll just use the love theme and Yoda's theme as anthems for the good guys during these escape scenes approach. Both are perfectly valid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, JohnSolo said:

 

Prepare to receive a lengthy response from Chen G. on how the usage of Shore's themes were fully justified and work well to underscore the drama in said scenes.

 

I wouldn't disagree with him - my ideal film score is one that makes the movie better, even if it doesn't conform to preestablished thematic rules.

 

(Of course, he and I would disagree about this - I feel that "making the movie better" in The Hobbit's case was just polishing a turd)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Smaug the iron said:

 

Rose’s theme>>>>>>>> Any new theme from Rouge One. 

 

Sure, take the only new theme in TLJ that can also barely be heard outside the concert suite, in order to disprove a point I didn't make. 

Holdo's little motif and that rhythmic Island idea don't apply to my point.

 

Giacchino tried to pay hommage to the OT without outright quoting it, which is for damn sure more than I can say about Williams and TLJ. 

The director and/or producers clearly wanted a vintage Star Wars Sound from TLJ, and Williams helped himself by directly quoting his own OT scores. I prefer this "blame the director/producers" assumption because the other assumption, namely that it's all on Williams, would be way more negative towards John Williams himself, and I don't want to be that negative.

 

But fact is that I haven't listened to TLJ in at least a month, and the reason is that it's a strange conglomerate of TFA themes and OT cues, with barely anything worthwhile in between.

TFA themes should be there, but especially with the First Order themes, those also receive near identical statements.

The rest is John Williams music that could be from any random adventure film.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, gkgyver said:

Sure, take the only new theme in TLJ that can also barely be heard outside the concert suite,

What? Rose’s theme is in 4 more tracks on the album with multiple appearance on each track. Plus it appears in many unreleased cues. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, I wouldn't consider the desperation (Holdo) theme to be little at all.  It appears at least four times in the film including the big and powerful statement at the climax of the Resistance's most desperate hour.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JohnSolo said:

 

But the only memorable bits from Rogue One's score are when Giacchino does just that.

 

Yeah, the only time I remember really noticing the music in ROGUE ONE when I first saw it in the theater was when Krennic meets Vader on Mustafar and Giacchino quoted both the Empire theme from ANH and Vader's theme, and at the end when Vader is watching the Tantive IV escape and Giacchino gave Vader's theme a neat little flourish.

 

The only other musical aspect of the film that struck me was the absence of the traditional STAR WARS opening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Philippe Roaché said:

How dare they use elements of the prequels in those crappy spinoffs.

 

Um... Darth Vader is an element of the prequels.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rogue One brought a fair bit of stuff from the prequels: Senator Organa, to name one.

 

Even The Last Jedi tried to retcon the prequels' handling of the Jedi order, and some of the design aesthetics felt prequel-y.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TLJ wasn't too offensive because Luke says Darth Sidious. It's one of the best parts of the movie.

 

Rogue One was a turd. It doesn't even deserve a cameo by Jar Jar stepping in shit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Namedropping is one thing. But the way Luke explains the downfall of the Jedi is not. Its trying to find a narrative justification for what was simply bad writing in the prequels.

 

Any audience member worth his salt watching the prequels will understand that the films are making out the Jedi to be idle, incapable of dealing with the rise of evil and generaly unlikeable, not as part of some clever commentary on hubris, but simply because George Lucas thought that he was making them stoic and zen. Rian Johnson is not fooling anyone with his interpertation other than himself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

Namedropping is one thing. But the way Luke explains the downfall of the Jedi is not. Its trying to find a narrative justification for what was simply bad writing in the prequels.

Everything Luke said about the Jedi failure with Sidious was true. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I mean is that Lucas didn't intentionally make the Jedi the way he did in order to comment that they fell because of hubris or whatever. I think he just thought he was making them appear very stoic and zen by having them: sit idly and be indifferent to the predicaments of the protagonists (namely, Anakin's premonitions).

 

But here comes Johnson and has Luke Skywalker himself tell us that the Jedi fell because of their flaws. To me, that felt tacked on, because that's clearly not how George Lucas devised his prequels. Even if he did have Yoda say as much in the making of Revenge of the Sith, its not evident in the previous two films, and I have to imagine that he came up with it late in the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be honest, whatever that half line of rushed dialogue is meant to say about the Jedi is the least of the film's problems.

And honestly, it would have been Abrams' job to explain what happened after Episodes IV-VI.

 

And I don't even know why the film(s) refer(s) to the prequels at all.

 

TFA begins years after the events of Episode VI, and decades after Episode III. So, it's somewhat unclear to me why the discussion, also within TLJ, harkens back to Episodes I-III, when it's a continuation of IV-VI. None of the main protagonists in TLJ were alive during the prequels (except Yoda), so I'm not sure why they talk about the rise of evil and something like Darth Sidious, as if they were there.

 

They could be referring to the rise of the First Order, but with the namedropping of Sith and Darth Sidious, it gives you the impression it's the prequels they talk about, which doesn't make sense.

Feels like an unnecessary addition to shoehorn in a connection to the prequels which by all intents and purposes shouldn't be there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, idealy you want the final chapter to be a culmination of all nine episodes. So calling back to the prequels makes sense. But, because they are the way that they are, referring to them is bound to make some of the audience nauseous.

 

8 minutes ago, Philippe Roaché said:

It's there in all the movies! 

 

Its not. Not in the storytelling, anyway. Fan theorem and extended universe aside, the prequels never comment on the character flaws of the Jedi, because they weren't concieved as character flaws.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought it made perfect sense. Luke doesn't want to repeat the mistakes of the Jedi, which had enabled Darth Sidious to take over the Republic. With history repeating itself far too much in this damn universe and Luke being the first of the new Jedi at this time, it's his call whether to train Ray in the old style or just end the Jedi altogether. The choice is clear! Time for those Jedi to end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Philippe Roaché said:

I thought it made perfect sense. Luke doesn't want to repeat the mistakes of the Jedi, which had enabled Darth Sidious to take over the Republic. With history repeating itself far too much in this damn universe and Luke being the first of the new Jedi at this time, it's his call whether to train Ray in the old style or just end the Jedi altogether. The choice is clear! Time for those Jedi to end.

 

How would Luke know? He wasn't there.

And Obi-Wan doesn't exactly look and act like he blamed the Jedi in the prequels, and that he gave that opinion of his to Luke. In fact, that's the whole point of Episode III. Obi-Wan doesn't look at Anakin as a mislead guy in the wrong place at the wrong time, he looked at him as a man turned evil. In his last words to Anakin, he blames him, and for not fulfilling that "prophecy".

There is nothing in any of those six previous films that would indicate Luke learned the Jedi were idle or complacent. In fact, every Jedi he met was kind of awesome.

 

And what would be those "mistakes" of the Jedi? Not assuming a chancellor is an evil guy in secret? How would they know? Wasn't their mistake that they didn't trust Anakin? 

In fact, Padme appointed Jar Jar as her replacement in the Senate, to cast a vote of mistrust or whatever against the current chancellor, so Palpatine even got his chance. That was Padme. What the fuck do the Jedi have to do with it? 

 

You're trying to make sense of a pile of shit storytelling (prequels and TLJ) that was never gonna make sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Their mistake was not having compassion. Luke's love for his father triggered his turn back. Preventing Jedi from taking wives, getting blowjobs from escort girls on Coruscant or that green guy with the tentacles that Darth Sidious killed from hooking up with that blue tentacled chick with the nice body caused them to basically become soulless and blind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Philippe Roaché said:

Their mistake was not having compassion.[...] Preventing Jedi from taking wives,[...]caused them to basically become soulless and blind.

 

At no point in the prequels are the Jedi's rules regarding celibacy being presented as misguided.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

At no point in the prequels are the Jedi's rules regarding celibacy being presented as misguided.

 

I'm pretty sure Justin was being jocose when he said that, Chen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He said it better than I did. You just can't blame Anakin for sleeping with Padme, yet they would have expelled him from the Jedi order! Jesus! He's the chosen one. Let him get his rocks off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Luke Skywalker said:

In Attack of the Clones Yoda talk about the Jedi being arrogant, looking at mace windu. And also their blindness not seeing the war unfolding. Anakin fall is because the rigidity of Jedi laws....

 

Yes, he is talking about Anakin.

 

And Anakin's fall to darkness only proves the veracity of the Jedi's rules: He did fall to darkness because he took a wife, because he had attachments, because he feared for his loved ones. The movie isn't providing commentary on it - you are. And to be fair, I've met film professors who also fall into your viewpoint, as well.

 

12 minutes ago, JohnSolo said:

I'm pretty sure Justin was being jocose when he said that, Chen.

 

Ah. So, can I play the "my native tongue is semitic, so I dont spik inglish veri gud" card again?:lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Jedi aren't perfect good guys. They're imperfect, and they struggle to keep the balance not only across the galaxy but within themselves. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Chen G. said:

 

Yes, he is talking about Anakin.

 

And Anakin's fall to darkness only proves the veracity of the Jedi's rules: He did fall to darkness because he took a wife, because he had attachments, because he feared for his loved ones.

 

 

He didn't fall because he took a wife. He fell because he felt guilty for doing it and needing to hide it from the other Jedi. If he'd been allowed to date and marry openly, no one would know the name Darth Vader.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

That's what you deduced. Its not what George Lucas, as a storyteller, is choosing to comment on.

 

It's what I saw on screen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.