**Beware SPOILERS** Obi-Wan Kenobi Series on Disney+ **Beware SPOILERS**

[ajp4mgs]

He ran the entire film, certainly didn't sacrifice himself to go into the chamber in someone else's place. Nothing heroic about being tortured or "put into carbon freeze".

The fact that he was rescued in ROTJ was just more of a reason that he owed a debt to Luke and the Rebellion... that could have been beautifully paid back with a dramatic sacrifice.

Han wasn't running when Luke was missing and presumed dead on Hoth. His "Then I'll see you in hell" line made it pretty clear well before ROTJ that Han was already at the point of character evolution to make the ultimate sacrifice for selfless purpose. And when no one else there was willing to.

Luke rescuing him from Jabba in the next movie was a way of paying Han back for that earlier selfless sacrifice. That's why I think another one (except this time actually being fatal) would be redundant enough to be unnecessary at that point. Without adding any new layer to the character, killing Han could've easily come across more as mere shock value for its own sake.

I guess I'm just failing to understand how Han dying would've added any layer to his OT arc that hadn't already been evident in ESB. Oh well, just another difference of opinion to add to an ever-growing list.

 

[Wor-Gar]

Han wasn't running when Luke was missing and presumed dead on Hoth. His "Then I'll see you in hell" line made it pretty clear well before ROTJ that Han was already at the point of character evolution to make the ultimate sacrifice for selfless purpose. And when no one else there was willing to.

Luke rescuing him from Jabba in the next movie was a way of paying Han back for that earlier selfless sacrifice. That's why I think another one (except this time actually being fatal) would be redundant enough to be unnecessary at that point. Without adding any new layer to the character, killing Han could've easily come across more as mere shock value for its own sake.

I guess I'm just failing to understand how Han dying would've added any layer to his OT arc that hadn't already been evident in ESB. Oh well, just another difference of opinion to add to an ever-growing list.

You can certainly pull a specific beat to say Han wasn't running. Quite honestly, I expected you to pick the fact that Han came back to get Leia out of Echo Base.

In regards to Han rushing out into the snow, Han was not confronted with certain death anymore than he usually is -- never tell him the odds -- he's resourceful and believes he's not going to die out in the snow. He charges out to find his friend. A good deed, not a sacrifice in the sense that I am using it here. That said, if you see that early action as Han's "sacrifice" then we can agree that Han's character arc grew no further in the series.

If we're going to talk about Han's rescue of Luke on Hoth, then you should mention Han's understanding of that moment: That's two you owe me. So technically, he's still one up after his own rescue from Jabba.

But you miss the forest for the trees -- Han is on the run the entire film, from Jabba, from the Empire, from responsibility. His driving motivation is to get away. And the irony is he runs right into a trap.

I can't "make" you understand why a Han sacrifice could have been great in Jedi because it wasn't done; there is no story structure to that point, no extra layer because it was not realized. If you do not see the natural value in a character arc that grows from "self-serving" to the "ultimate sacrifice" then I cannot explain it to you here in a few simplified sentences.

 

[ajp4mgs]

You can certainly pull a specific beat to say Han wasn't running. Quite honestly, I expected you to pick the fact that Han came back to get Leia out of Echo Base.

In regards to Han rushing out into the snow, Han was not confronted with certain death anymore than he usually is -- never tell him the odds -- he's resourceful and believes he's not going to die out in the snow. He charges out to find his friend. A good deed, not a sacrifice in the sense that I am using it here. That said, if you see that early action as Han's "sacrifice" then we can agree that Han's character arc grew no further in the series.

If we're going to talk about Han's rescue of Luke on Hoth, then you should mention Han's understanding of that moment: That's two you owe me. So technically, he's still one up after his own rescue from Jabba.

But you miss the forest for the trees -- Han is on the run the entire film, from Jabba, from the Empire, from responsibility. His driving motivation is to get away. And the irony is he runs right into a trap.

I can't "make" you understand why a Han sacrifice could have been great in Jedi because it wasn't done; there is no story structure to that point, no extra layer because it was not realized. If you do not see the natural value in a character arc that grows from "self-serving" to the "ultimate sacrifice" then I cannot explain it to you here in a few simplified sentences.

Han being on the run from Jabba was only happening because he stuck around to help the Rebellion instead of rushing to pay his debt with interest and then go on his merry way. I doubt that sticking around was just because Han really wanted that Yavin medal. On the run from one in order to avoid running out on the other.

And of course Han is on the run from the Empire; every single one of the Rebels was on the run. They had to be. But how was he on the run from responsibility? I think sticking around to help the Alliance up until Hoth was a way of taking responsibility. Saving Luke's life at potential cost to himself is a form of being responsible. Getting Leia out of the base and escorted to safety is too. Sure, he was selfishly sweet on Leia, but probably still considered it his responsibility to keep her safe.

I don't dispute that Han's character arc grew no further beyond the first act of ESB. What I dispute is that this fact would make killing the character some kind of constructive narrative choice. I don't think it would because I don't feel that many members of the audience needed more evidence of Han's character evolution being complete. That seems to be where you think I'm missing something. And maybe you're right. But I'm clearly going to remain ignorant.

Ford (and Kurtz) said Han should've died because his arc had run its course. All I'm saying is: So what? Plenty of secondary characters in every story format imaginable live on past the point of arc conclusion. If it was about Han needing an ultimate sacrifice to complete his arc, they would've said so. And I'd still disagree with that assessment if they did.

Keeping him alive would allow his relationship with Leia to evolve into a parental role for potential sequels. And hey, that turned out great, right?

 

[matticus]

More like Harrison Ford is on the run from the autograph hounds. He wanted Han dead just to crush those people's souls.

 

[Wor-Gar]

Han being on the run from Jabba was only happening because he stuck around to help the Rebellion instead of rushing to pay his debt with interest and then go on his merry way. I doubt that sticking around was just because Han really wanted that Yavin medal. On the run from one in order to avoid running out on the other.

And of course Han is on the run from the Empire; every single one of the Rebels was on the run. They had to be. But how was he on the run from responsibility? I think sticking around to help the Alliance up until Hoth was a way of taking responsibility. Saving Luke's life at potential cost to himself is a form of being responsible. Getting Leia out of the base and escorted to safety is too. Sure, he was selfishly sweet on Leia, but probably still considered it his responsibility to keep her safe.

I wasn't being that literal. Let's take baby steps: Han is on the run from Jabba, correct? That's it -- there is no quantifying it. In the course of ESB, he is on the run from The Empire, correct? There is an entire sequence of his dodging ships, asteroids, etc. That is all I meant. Again, Han is running. I think that story aspect is an ideal set-up for a character who finally stops running and takes a stand... and he does when he joins the Rebels officially in ROTJ. That's all good. And that was the extent of Han's growth as put on film by the creator who wanted to keep him around because of toy sales, nothing else. It is fine not to proceed to the ultimate conclusion I am proposing. I'm just saying, from a story construction POV, the sacrifice ending is the ultimate way to go... not for you, clearly. But for me, even at a young age, felt Han should go out in grand fashion. I very much felt that was where his character was headed.

I don't dispute that Han's character arc grew no further beyond the first act of ESB.

OK, good.

What I dispute is that this fact would make killing the character some kind of constructive narrative choice. I don't think it would because I don't feel that many members of the audience needed more evidence of Han's character evolution being complete. That seems to be where you think I'm missing something. And maybe you're right. But I'm clearly going to remain ignorant.

Ford (and Kurtz) said Han should've died because his arc had run its course. All I'm saying is: So what?

So what? That's your argument in a nutshell.

Well, why didn't you just say from the get-go that you had no intention of entertaining the idea. I can't debate in fun with a closed mind.

Ford (and Kurtz) said Han should've died because his arc had run its course.
If it was about Han needing an ultimate sacrifice to complete his arc, they would've said so.

They did say so, and you even mentioned they did... and many others have as well. But I agree that most of the audience likely would not have wanted Han to die. And we all know it is important to give the audience what they want.

Your last sentence is well taken.

 

[ajp4mgs]

So what? That's your argument in a nutshell.

Well, why didn't you just say from the get-go that you had no intention of entertaining the idea. I can't debate in fun with a closed mind.

My point with the "so what?" comment is that having a character with a completed arc doesn't mean that killing him off automatically makes for a constructive story choice. "His arc is done." I say: so what? The response from Kurtz and Ford (as I interpret it) was: "then let's kill him; he has no more purpose." And I'm capping it by saying he doesn't need further evolution of character to warrant his continued presence in the last film.

I'm sure the selling toys aspect didn't elude George when presented with the idea of killing Han. But I'm also guessing that he felt he had demonstrated Han's character to its fullest evolution and didn't agree that death would elevate that arc any further.

I would entertain the idea if Han's death could be presented in a way that would further his character growth. But if it's just some personal sacrifice (like dying to blow up the shield generator), I don't agree that Han needed to have a more demonstrable way of proving his nobility and selflessness.

I do agree that his arc was complete. I don't agree that a fatal sacrifice could've enhanced it. I'm not being stubborn; I'm probably just not making my point well enough.

 

[ZE_501]

That performance in ROTJ.. Ugh.

People keep saying this. I didn't notice as a kid and I'm not sure I can see it clearly now. If anything I'd blame the script and the direction.

 

[Wor-Gar]

And I'm capping it by saying he doesn't need further evolution of character to warrant his continued presence in the last film.

True, but the better characters are always growing in stories. Given that stories are such small capsules, each main character should really have some growth. Otherwise, why are they there and what purpose do they serve?

Ultimately, the story is not about Han so he doesn't really have to have a definitive arc. I am just on the side that felt he should have died to: 1) help the rebellion, 2) save Leia, and 3) allow Luke to complete his destiny.

Yes, that would take some reworking of the Jedi story. Perhaps it would have been well worth it.

 

[Dark_Knight_89]

Concept art of Hayden Christensen as Vader

OBI-WAN KENOBI Concept Art Reveals How Hayden Christensen Will Return As Darth Vader - SPOILERS

 

[GhostBeard]

Has anyone here read Kenobi? I'd think something akin to that story-line would be a good start to a series.

Yes I have and I'm interested if they go that route in small ways. I don't think there's enough action in the book to be based off it too much.

 

[GhostBeard]

This specific type of thinking of certain group of people is just exactly the reason why SW has been so *** up over the last few years

I have to admit I wouldn't mind retconning large elements of the PT, but ignoring them works well too. I watched the D+ Behind the Attraction and on the SW episode one of the "imagineers" commented they need to appeal to more than 45 year old men, which may or may not piss you off. Then later they talked about having to honor the 40+ year history of Star Wars ...

 

[Dark_Knight_89]

I have to admit I wouldn't mind retconning large elements of the ST, but ignoring them works well too. I watched the D+ Behind the Attraction and on the SW episode one of the "imagineers" commented they need to appeal to more than 45 year old men, which may or may not piss you off. Then later they talked about having to honor the 40+ year history of Star Wars ...

FTFY

 

[GhostBeard]

FTFY

LOL. I thought it was a typo and I fixed it. Well, sequel trilogy or prequel trilogy … ignoring works with both.There are moments I like from them, might result in about 10 min of viewing time total.

 

[GhostBeard]

Kenobi …

 

[Johnny Utah]

Brief sizzle reel released early. I was hoping for a trailer, this might be it tomorrow.

 

[Johnny Utah]

Concept art.

 

[Khev]

Better be a ****ing dream sequence, lol.

 

[Wor-Gar]

Another fiery fight? Maybe this will be the one that should have happened on Mustafar.... instead of the ridiculous gymnastics and balancing acts.

Looks like Vader has the 'high ground' in the above.


If Vader chops off Ben's hand, it will make us all rethink our Alec/Ben in ANH. Shall we all take bets on this happening?

 

[darth dennis]

Better be a ****ing dream sequence, lol.

Was there clarity in A New Hope on their last meeting? I thought it was sort of ambiguous and I would imagine that Disney would slide right into the DMs of that ambiguity for an opportunity to re-imagine a Vader/Kenobi duel.

 

[Wor-Gar]

...when I left you I was but the learner

Not so vague, but for those that want it to be so I'm sure it is. We have plenty of guys here who can turn obvious knowledge into questionable vapor.