Chen G.

Palpatine got fried at the end of the movie. John Williams has written a lot of music for this series. Naturally, within such a long body of work within the same idiom, some similarities are going to crop up. The kind of similarity that Rey’s theme shares with the Emperor is shared with any number of unrelated thematic ideas in the scores.

There's nothing in The Force Awakens that intentionally sets-up Palpatine's return.

When you end a film the way The Force Awakens ended, you naturally leave a certain vague traejectory for the sequels to follow: In coming out of The Force Awakens in 2015, it didn't require a PhD to guess that Kylo and Rey will cross blades again, that Luke will be reluctant to rejoin the fight for some time, that he would probably die (I think most people expected that to happen in IX rather than in VIII, though), that Rey will become a Jedi, etcetra. That's not "having a plan" - that's just common sense - and to my mind that's what Abrams is talking about here. We also had Terrio say things to that effect. Its like how in 1975, George Lucas said the series "ends with the destruction of the Empire." That's not the result of some incredible storytelling foresight: its just the natural conclusion of the scenario set-up by the original film. That's essentially the story on a log-line level, for the whole trilogy.

My summary was for the whole trilogy.

The Godfather: Part II Its exquisitely well-made, especially in the visuals, which are gorgeous. But as someone who doesn't glean much enjoyment from crime dramas, I had my fill with the original film. That film showed Michael fall from a virtuous man (who just happened to be born into a mafia family) into a mob leader himself, which was very compelling. This film...just has him fall some more. ***1/2 out of *****

I know that was George Lucas' original concept. He even brought it back up during story conferences for Return of the Jedi, so you know it lingered. But the issue wasn't adressed within the films themselves until the prequel trilogy, where using the Force is re-established as something one is born with. Honestly, its one of those instances where Lucas' retconning actually fooled me, and I initially just accepted that the Force is hereditary. Frankly, it fits better with the fairytale nature of Star Wars. Not to me. I only watch/consider canon what I like and find that contributes to the story. The end of the saga are the victory celebrations on Endor in Return of the Jedi. But as an end for the sequel trilogy? Yes, I would have preferred - and had preferred since 2015 - for Kylo to die unredeemed and for Rey to be a nobody.

If it'll cause your conspiracy theories to be a little less cryptic, sure. Those born with the ability to use the Force. Rey, an orphaned Force-user, is thrust into the struggle for the galaxy between the Ressistance and the First Order, led by Han Solo's corrupted son Kylo Ren.

Supposed fourth film, you mean. It thinks its an Indiana Jones film, but it isn't.

And yet each film had a different director and different writers. Even when Abrams was brought back on-board with IX, it was with a different co-writer to The Force Awakens. If you have a robust plan, you might as well make the films back-to-back (it saves a lot of money) or at least entrust it to one filmmaker. That Lucasfilm didn't tells you everything you need to know about any supposed "plan".

I think its evidence enough. I'll always wait for substantial evidence before I would assume disingenuousness on the part of the filmmakers, and until such time, their statements on their own films is the best evidence you'll ever get. Its also how movie trilogies generally work, how Star Wars trilogies have worked in the past, and is inherent in the fact that they've made the films two-years apart and with different filmmakers each. When there is a plan, you can feel it from watching the films: which is not a sense I got watching these films. I like densly-plotted movies and don't usually have a problem following the intricacies of the plot, but The Rise of Skywalker rushed through its own plot so quickly that there were a couple of moments where it took me a while to catch up with the film. I specifically remember not getting what the deal was with the beacon that directed Palpatine's fleet. I was just: "I don't know what's going on anymore, lets just watch the flashing light show" - that's what I call "nearly incoherent."

No, that's your own conjecture.

No. No one is insinuating. People are flat out stating it. And by "people" I don't mean myself or @Demodex, I mean Colin Trevvorow (who said bringing back Palpatine was an idea of Abrams' when he was brought on-board IX) and Chris Terrio, who said they came up with Palpatine's return in story conferences for IX, after Trevvorow was disposed with.

Ah, Fandom, the place where if you write one bad movie you're suddenly a bad writer and should be shamed and exiled in perpetuity.

@Mattris' point - and he'll correct me if he's changed his mind since then - is that once we see the inevitable fourth trilogy, we will finally understand The Rise of Skywalker and it will magically become good after the fact.

That's because it didn't end after Return of the Jedi. It ended with Return of the Jedi.

Is that what you thought in 2005?

I also like The Last Jedi, but I do still think The Force Awakens is the most enjoyable. All three are extraneous and shouldn't have been made.

Yeah, they’re completely extraneous to the story.

Same place I’m at. I suppose I’ll maybe one day want to re-evaluate The Rise of Skywalker, but otherwise I have no plans to revisit that movie.

@Demodex you prefer Attack of the Clones to The Rise of Skywalker, I take it? I'm not sure which I prefer, myself.

The very lowest outside of saying its better than Attack of the Clones.

Better than The Rise of Skywalker, that's for sure.

Reading too much into a joke (which is really something coming from me) perhaps?

Nevertheless, Callen's sense of there being interference (and its never presented as more than a sense or hunch) is quite insubstantial evidence.

And yet its at odds with the words of another actor, the filmmakers themselves and any other piece of evidence we have. There's a bit in the behind-the-scenes which I love where Jackson informs Stephen Fry that the scene they're currently shooting (where the Master chomps on some bollocks) was rewritten without informing the studio, so "they'll see the rushes before they know the scene had been changed." That tells you everything you need to know about how unfettered these filmmakers are, and I love it.