• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

[SPOILERS] Star Wars: The Force Awakens (Thread #3) - That's Not How the Force Works

Obvs:

*pic of Ezra*
Yeah, I mean if Snoke has to be a character we know, and I don't think that should necessarily be the case, this is the most viable option if you consider the known traits of Snoke. Beyond the distinctive nose, he's pre-OT (born on the day of the inception of the Empire no less), has force powers (his specialty being controlling other beings, amplified by the dark side), has tasted the power of the dark side, and [Rebels Season 2.5 spoilers, via trailer]
learns about Anakin from one of the people who knew him best Ahsoka, encounters Darth Maul (who asks him to call him Old Master), explores ancient (sith?) ruins (complete with a cross guard lightsaber), gets to know Leia pretty well, etc etc.
 
This is exactly the opposite of how Occam's Razor works.

Occam's Razor means that you choose the explanation that minimizes your reliance on unknowns.

So when presented with a line that could be referring to something that's already known (Kylo's existing displeasure at having received bad news, Kylo's recognition that there has been an awakening), Occam's Razor demands that you conclude that those explanations - the ones that are based on existing pieces of known information - are indeed what that line is referring to, not to an as-yet-unconfirmed story detail that could be revealed in the future.

You don't say "well, the story is better if _____, so therefore _____." At least, not if you arrived at your conclusion using Occam's Razor. (That's not to say that all interpretations must be arrived at through that lens; pretty much any guess as to who Rey's family is at this point involves some not-strictly-logical guesswork.)

This basically sums up my entire issue with that line of reasoning: it's being presented as if it's somehow the logical conclusion that follows from the evidence when instead it's simply a possibility that's left open by the evidence.

Precisely. In this instance it is applicable (to me) as it is the explanation with the most actual evidence to support it (one could argue she is just a random person, but given our knowledge of the Star Wars saga, that is probably not the case).

There's even a spreadsheet to break it down:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1bbIyfcyKGh5Ccpv3zZeusBPzjvEIdKQlX2YT4_Mau-M/edit#gid=0
 
Precisely. In this instance it is applicable (to me) as it is the explanation with the most actual evidence to support it (one could argue she is just a random person, but given our knowledge of the Star Wars saga, that is probably not the case).

There's even a spreadsheet to break it down:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1bbIyfcyKGh5Ccpv3zZeusBPzjvEIdKQlX2YT4_Mau-M/edit#gid=0

A lot of the evidence for her being Luke's daughter is pretty thin. Like the one where Daisey Ridley looks like Natalie Portman and Keira Knightely, that's flimsy as hell. Adam Driver doesn't look much like Harrison Ford or Carrie Fisher. Others are callbacks or mirroring such as Rey handing the lightsaber to Luke like Kylo does to Han; or contributed to story contrivances like R2D2 waking up when Rey gets back to the base. The one about her having characteristics to balance out Kylo Ren is more of a story function: heroes and villains usually share similar or complimenting traits.

I think the best evidence that Luke is not Rey's father is that she thinks he's a myth. She thinks everything about the Force is a myth. If she were truly Luke's daughter, she would have seen some Force-related stuff before she got abandoned.
 

-griffy-

Banned
Star Wars: The Force Awakens Speedrun

uqnyvjh6ezntk5rzlymm.gif
 
Precisely. In this instance it is applicable (to me) as it is the explanation with the most actual evidence to support it (one could argue she is just a random person, but given our knowledge of the Star Wars saga, that is probably not the case).

Any interpretation that adds the assumption "Kylo knows who Rey is" on top of the explanations for his statements and behavior that don't involve that assumption (one of which comes directly from the story group) is by default not arrived at using Occam's Razor.

That interpretation involves substituting unknowns (whether Kylo knows Rey from his past) for knowns (that Kylo's "it is you" statement refers back to the awakening).

It fails Occam's Razor in the most direct possible way.

A lot of the evidence for her being Luke's daughter is pretty thin. Like the one where Daisey Ridley looks like Natalie Portman and Keira Knightely, that's flimsy as hell.

On top of that, it also doesn't suggest she's the daughter of either of Padme's children specifically.

The one about her having characteristics to balance out Kylo Ren is more of a story function: heroes and villains usually share similar or complimenting traits.

Exactly, good observation.

Kylo Ren is also a foil for Finn, for example.

Really the best evidence for a Rey-Luke relationship stems from the scene where Maz explains the lightsaber's lineage. It reads very much like a family tree that runs from Anakin to Luke to Rey, with Rey literally "inheriting" the saber. And if it looks like a dog and barks like a dog...

But even that's not watertight, since we have to make a lot of assumptions about Luke (him taking a partner, having a child, etc.) and his isn't the only branch in the Skywalker lineage anyway.
 

belushy

Banned
Yeah, I mean if Snoke has to be a character we know, and I don't think that should necessarily be the case, this is the most viable option if you consider the known traits of Snoke. Beyond the distinctive nose, he's pre-OT (born on the day of the inception of the Empire no less), has force powers (his specialty being controlling other beings, amplified by the dark side), has tasted the power of the dark side, and [Rebels Season 2.5 spoilers, via trailer]
learns about Anakin from one of the people who knew him best Ahsoka, encounters Darth Maul (who asks him to call him Old Master), explores ancient (sith?) ruins (complete with a cross guard lightsaber), gets to know Leia pretty well, etc etc.

I can get behind this
 

eot

Banned
Really the best evidence for a Rey-Luke relationship stems from the scene where Maz explains the lightsaber's lineage. It reads very much like a family tree that runs from Anakin to Luke to Rey, with Rey literally "inheriting" the saber. And if it looks like a dog and barks like a dog...

But even that's not watertight, since we have to make a lot of assumptions about Luke (him taking a partner, having a child, etc.) and his isn't the only branch in the Skywalker lineage anyway.

Of course it's not watertight. They made it ambiguous on purpose.
 
Any interpretation that adds the assumption "Kylo knows who Rey is" on top of the explanations for his statements and behavior that don't involve that assumption (one of which comes directly from the story group) is by default not arrived at using Occam's Razor.

That interpretation involves substituting unknowns (whether Kylo knows Rey from his past) for knowns (that Kylo's "it is you" statement refers back to the awakening).

It fails Occam's Razor in the most direct possible way.



On top of that, it also doesn't suggest she's the daughter of either of Padme's children specifically.



Exactly, good observation.

Kylo Ren is also a foil for Finn, for example.

Really the best evidence for a Rey-Luke relationship stems from the scene where Maz explains the lightsaber's lineage. It reads very much like a family tree that runs from Anakin to Luke to Rey, with Rey literally "inheriting" the saber. And if it looks like a dog and barks like a dog...

But even that's not watertight, since we have to make a lot of assumptions about Luke (him taking a partner, having a child, etc.) and his isn't the only branch in the Skywalker lineage anyway.

I was talking about Rey being Luke's daughter, it is the theory with the most evidence behind it (reference the spreadsheet I linked) and the most obvious.

Kylo knowing Rey is something I got from the novel and my viewing of the movie. I do not apply Occam's to that.
 
I was talking about Rey being Luke's daughter, it is the theory with the most evidence behind it (reference the spreadsheet I linked) and the most obvious.

Kylo knowing Rey is something I got from the novel and my viewing of the movie. I do not apply Occam's to that.

You're not being very honest about the conversation we've had up to this point.

Yup.

Occam's razor is highly applicable here. There is more to point to Kylo having an idea of who she is and then knowing for certain who she is by the end, than there is for him not knowing who she is.

Until otherwise proven - it is the logical conclusion to assume he did know who she was by the end of the episode.

This is exactly the opposite of how Occam's Razor works.

Occam's Razor means that you choose the explanation that minimizes your reliance on unknowns.

So when presented with a line that could be referring to something that's already known (Kylo's existing displeasure at having received bad news, Kylo's recognition that there has been an awakening), Occam's Razor demands that you conclude that those explanations - the ones that are based on existing pieces of known information - are indeed what that line is referring to, not to an as-yet-unconfirmed story detail that could be revealed in the future.

You don't say "well, the story is better if _____, so therefore _____." At least, not if you arrived at your conclusion using Occam's Razor. (That's not to say that all interpretations must be arrived at through that lens; pretty much any guess as to who Rey's family is at this point involves some not-strictly-logical guesswork.)

This basically sums up my entire issue with that line of reasoning: it's being presented as if it's somehow the logical conclusion that follows from the evidence when instead it's simply a possibility that's left open by the evidence.

Precisely. In this instance it is applicable (to me) as it is the explanation with the most actual evidence to support it (one could argue she is just a random person, but given our knowledge of the Star Wars saga, that is probably not the case).

There's even a spreadsheet to break it down:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1bbIyfcyKGh5Ccpv3zZeusBPzjvEIdKQlX2YT4_Mau-M/edit#gid=0

(NOTE: This spreadsheet includes the following assumption as one of the premises for the "Rey is Luke's daughter" theory: "In Novelization, Kylo seems to recognize Rey from somewhere: ” ‘It is you,’ Ren murmured.” This makes sense for a cousin (doesn't quite make sense for a sibling)." Yet this idea being a premise for an argument was exactly what I was railing against by correcting your misuse of Occam's Razor.)

Even if you want to say you are talking about Rey being Luke's daughter and the evidence from that spreadsheet, the premises given in that spreadsheet still rely on unnecessary assumptions and still fail to conform to the demands of Occam's Razor.
 
You're not being very honest about the conversation we've had up to this point.







Even if you want to say you are talking about Rey being Luke's daughter and the evidence from that spreadsheet, the premises given in that spreadsheet still rely on unnecessary assumptions and still fail to conform to the demands of Occam's Razor.
I have only ever used that term in application to Rey being Luke's daughter as far as I know, and you're really going to start questioning my honesty over that? Get lost.

Occam's Razor means that the likeliest answer to a problem is the one that requires the fewest assumptions. I don't know why I need to explain this, but Rey being Luke's daughter is the answer that involves the fewest assumptions (all others, her being Anakin reborn, Obi Wan's granddaughter, etc... all require way more assumptions and theories).

If you can't process that then sorry.
 
I have only ever used that term in application to Rey being Luke's daughter as far as I know, and you're really going to start questioning my honesty over that? Piss off.

The post you quoted when you brought up Occam's Razor did not address that specific question at all, just the question of whether Kylo Ren had history with Rey:

Why not?

He's basically saying, "There are lots of theories about this line from the book. It's actually a callback to this other thing from the movie." That's exactly what you'd expect from someone trying to clarify a point around which there's lots of chatter and confusion.

Again, the only people dismissing or downplaying that interpretation are the people whose theories it doesn't prop up.

Right, but now there's a problem of not actually knowing the full/true meaning of the "awakening", which clearly isn't JUST about Rey. As Quantum stated in a previous post, the force is and has always been about more than just a single user. If you rewatch Empire (in regard to the quote explicitly borrowed in TFA), you'll notice that Yoda mentions that the force is EVERYTHING and that we are all connected to it. That alone is enough for one to focus on a POSSIBLE bigger picture, outside of just Rey alone. We still don't fully know what the "awakening" entails, in short. So for Pablo to say "hey this is just in reference to the awakening guys" doesn't actually tell us enough to draw any conclusions or rule anything out. That's been my point from the beginning. We simply don't have enough information, even after considering his explanation.

Sure, any theory requires you to arrive at conclusions that aren't already confirmed.

But to evaluate which theories are the best, you examine whether they're likely or not given the existing evidence. Some theories are less likely, and rely on more (less founded, unnecessary) assumptions.

I can understand not agreeing with that interpretation, as I agree there isn't enough info to know one way or another, but to outright dismiss the idea of the "it is you" line meaning something significant (other than the vague idea of the awakening literally being Rey beginning her hero's journey and connecting with the force) seems short sighted.

I don't think anyone would give two craps about what the novelization says if the theory were just as evident from the film alone. They certainly wouldn't need to fight to preserve its perception as canon, since they wouldn't need it to support their theory.

Again, we're going back to the idea that since the writers based their novels off of an early draft of the script, it's possible they were working with content that ended up being cut from the film but that doesn't automatically mean it won't be used in a future episode.

So, in the TLDR version, the quotes we've seen are too vague to dispel theories that Ren could AT LEAST know who Rey is, if not have had a previous meeting with her.

We simply don't have enough information to throw the theory out or dismiss the possibility. I understand what you're saying and where you're coming from, as we both have access to the same information, but I'm going to have to respectfully agree to disagree with you here.

A piece of that conversation that Surfinn hadn't quoted:

Bertrand Russel's formula for deducing the most logical explanations is as follows: "Whenever possible, substitute constructions out of known entities for inferences to unknown entities"

My reason for dismissing the interpretation that Ren is referring to some otherwise unknown connection to Rey is that all the evidence I've seen could be sufficiently explained based on other already-known elements of the narrative.

You simply don't need a Ren-Rey connection to resolve any of that evidence, or for any of it to make sense or have significance within the story.

The entire conversation you'd inserted yourself in was about Kylo Ren and Rey, not about Rey and Luke.

In the post where you mentioned Occam's Razor, you commented specifically on that topic, and importantly not on the topic of Rey being Luke's daughter.

Yup.

Occam's razor is highly applicable here. There is more to point to Kylo having an idea of who she is and then knowing for certain who she is by the end, than there is for him not knowing who she is.

Until otherwise proven - it is the logical conclusion to assume he did know who she was by the end of the episode.

My responses since then have all been about how saying a Rey-Ren relationship is the most logical conclusion based on the evidence you're citing is an incorrect application of Occam's Razor.

If you really did intend to talk about Rey's potential relationship to Luke and not the ongoing discussion about Kylo Ren/Rey, I don't know that you ever articulated that adequately (look at the posts I quoted in my last post).
 

Surfinn

Member
Wait, why am I being dragged into this/quoted? I thought we were PMing to keep our conversation OUT of this thread as it no longer was a convo between more than two people, and was ended there too..
 

Snake

Member
I have only ever used that term in application to Rey being Luke's daughter as far as I know, and you're really going to start questioning my honesty over that? Get lost.

Occam's Razor means that the likeliest answer to a problem is the one that requires the fewest assumptions. I don't know why I need to explain this, but Rey being Luke's daughter is the answer that involves the fewest assumptions (all others, her being Anakin reborn, Obi Wan's granddaughter, etc... all require way more assumptions and theories).

If you can't process that then sorry.

No, Rey just being Rey and no one else is the answer that involves the fewest assumptions. That's the status quo. We met her, she has no stated relations, she's just a young woman whose parents, we've been told, aren't coming back and aren't her future. Her being Luke's daughter, with him maybe mind-wiping her because [reasons] or however else this would be established, is a far more convoluted backstory. Of course Rey being a clone or reincarnation of someone would obviously require even more leaps. You keep substituting what you think is the most obvious, common sense explanation for Rey over what actually is the least complicated explanation.

But none of that matters, because Occam's Razor is an overused concept which has little value here and the fact remains that Rey could absolutely be Luke's daughter. Or she might not be.

======

Folks just keep arguing in circles. We don't know the answer. The mysteries provided in TFA are designed so that they cannot be conclusively and definitively solved, even though we obviously might have, in some cases, come across the truth.

So everyone can feel free to make theories, whatever, just don't claim that they are absolute truth or "the only way it could happen." And stop getting so bogged down in arguments about canon. Even the most sacred canonical concepts can and have been retconned in the past. Rian Johnson or Colin Trevorrow could intentionally throw a wrench into the whole thing because some aspect seems too predictable. At this point in 1977, one movie into the Original Trilogy, Luke and Leia were being romantically paired and six years later they were twins. Imagine how different our outlooks on the Sequel Trilogy could be six years from now.
 
No, Rey just being Rey and no one else is the answer that involves the fewest assumptions. That's the status quo. We met her, she has no stated relations, she's just a young woman whose parents, we've been told, aren't coming back and aren't her future. Her being Luke's daughter, with him maybe mind-wiping her because [reasons] or however else this would be established, is a far more convoluted backstory. Of course Rey being a clone or reincarnation of someone would obviously require even more leaps. You keep substituting what you think is the most obvious, common sense explanation for Rey over what actually is the least complicated explanation.

But none of that matters, because Occam's Razor is an overused concept which has little value here and the fact remains that Rey could absolutely be Luke's daughter. Or she might not be.

Folks just keep arguing in circles. We don't know the answer. The mysteries provided in TFA are designed so that they cannot be conclusively and definitively solved, even though we obviously might have, in some cases, come across the truth.

So everyone can feel free to make theories, whatever, just don't claim that they are absolute truth or "the only way it could happen." And stop getting so bogged down in arguments about canon. Even the most sacred canonical concepts can and have been retconned in the past. Rian Johnson or Colin Trevorrow could intentionally throw a wrench into the whole thing because some aspect seems too predictable. At this point in 1977, one movie into the Original Trilogy, Luke and Leia were being romantically paired and six years later they were twins. Imagine how different our outlooks on the Sequel Trilogy could be six years from now.

I already stated earlier in this thread that I was applying the Occam's razor term to the theories surrounding Rey. It is obvious that the one with the least assumptions is Rey being a rando, but that leads to 0 discussion and doesn't really fit with the theme of the main SW saga being about the Skywalkers, so I dismissed it completely (I said that in a post earlier).

Regardless; between Helios harassing me through PMs and Lex, I'm done with this discussion. I never thought I'd go to reddit for reasonable discussion, but the SW threads there aren't full of the BS i've had to deal with here.
 
I don't really give a shit at this point tbh, between you questioning my honesty over a SW thread (there's plenty of things id like to say regarding you but I'm keeping it civil) and Helios PMing me like a nutcase over the definition of contradiction, I'm done.
You seemed confused by what a contradiction was so I chose to enlighten you.
 
Folks just keep arguing in circles. We don't know the answer. The mysteries provided in TFA are designed so that they cannot be conclusively and definitively solved, even though we obviously might have, in some cases, come across the truth.

You're obviously right, but I think it's fine - healthy, even - to try to work out which possibilities might be the likeliest ones.

And that's gonna be a rough discussion to have in any kind of productive way if people are using wildly different yardsticks for what is likely and even disagree about what basic problem-solving principles mean and how they function.
 
You didn't enlighten anything. You just PMed me repeating yourself after I asked you to stop. You need help.
I repeated myself because you didn't get it. and you kept replying. Of course I'm going to reply. If you don't want batman to come don't light the bat signal.

You're still replying.
 

a916

Member
I know the whole Rey is
Luke's daughter
has been rumored about a lot... but I'm starting to believe it was Kylo who left Rey in Jakku. There's a really cool video that has me thinking that this is the case.

And because of that, and that one flashback scene where that one Knight of Ren was about to strike Rey, but Kylo kills him suggests to me... Kylo thinks the only Jedi/force users should be only the Skywalkers. It could just be he's trying to protect a blood relative... but I wonder if it stems deeper into the "privilege" of being a Jedi.
 

Surfinn

Member
It is obvious that the one with the least assumptions is Rey being a rando, but that leads to 0 discussion and doesn't really fit with the theme of the main SW saga being about the Skywalkers, so I dismissed it completely (I said that in a post earlier).

I would actually say that, just judging from Kathleen Kennedy's statement about the episodes, we can infer that Rey is AT THE VERY LEAST a Skywalker, considering her story is the face of the new trilogy. That doesn't mean she is automatically Luke's daughter, but considering she won't be Luke and Leia's and there is almost nothing that points to her being Han and Leia's, I think it's a damn good conclusion. You could even conclude that before the release of TFA, given Rey is the main character. For Rey to not be a Skywalker, the statement made by Kathleen Kennedy would have to be contradicted, and I just don't see that happening. At the same time, you would think that if she were simply Luke's daughter, this info would have already been divulged, considering this "revelation" would surprise no one and would serve as a major anticlimax.

Also, I think if you applied the same rigid theorizing some are using in this thread (not saying the logic isn't sound or those methods aren't valid) to the OT, you'd be in for a damn rude awakening considering how many major plot points don't apply. I already had this convo with Lex, but for example: Luke's father (you can argue retcon, and I understand this decision was changed behind the scenes, but the logic and reasoning on screen works), Leia being Luke's sister, and Vader ultimately redeeming his son and freeing the galaxy of the empire's rule (for the time being). All of those things cannot be logically concluded upon the end of ESB. It's not like I'm cherry picking, the script just seemed to evolve rapidly in between films.

My point is that, although logical, using rigid rules for theorizing might not return a lot of success when trying to predict the outcome of the next two episodes, especially when their plots are using the OT as a baseline. These movies are often made to surprise, so naturally the filmmakers aren't going to want us to guess their outcomes through a process of elimination; information is purposefully withheld.

Therefore, I think it's better (AND VASTLY MORE ENTERTAINING/SATISFYING) to consider possibilities that lie outside of rigid theory testing.

That's my opinion, anyway, and I can understand the viewpoint of those who do not agree.
 
I would actually say that, just judging from Kathleen Kennedy's statement about the episodes, we can infer that Rey is AT THE VERY LEAST a Skywalker, considering her story is the face of the new trilogy. That doesn't mean she is automatically Luke's daughter, but considering she won't be Luke and Leia's and there is almost nothing that points to her being Han and Leia's, I think it's a damn good conclusion.

What would you say points to her being Luke's specifically? I'm really curious about discussing both that possibility and the Han/Leia one and actually evaluating them side-by-side.
 

-griffy-

Banned
I would actually say that, just judging from Kathleen Kennedy's statement about the episodes, we can infer that Rey is AT THE VERY LEAST a Skywalker, considering her story is the face of the new trilogy.

Kylo Ren, the primary antagonist of this series, is already part of the Skywalker lineage, so he already makes these sequels a Skywalker story. And the fact that Luke (and Leia) is still around shouldn't be ignored either. There's no necessity that Rey be a Skywalker in order to make the movies about the Skywalkers, since they are already about that family without her being one. Doesn't mean she isn't also one, but it's not a necessity that needs to be fulfilled in order to adhere to what Kathleen Kennedy has said.
 
I would actually say that, just judging from Kathleen Kennedy's statement about the episodes, we can infer that Rey is AT THE VERY LEAST a Skywalker, considering her story is the face of the new trilogy. That doesn't mean she is automatically Luke's daughter, but considering she won't be Luke and Leia's and there is almost nothing that points to her being Han and Leia's, I think it's a damn good conclusion. You could even conclude that before the release of TFA, given Rey is the main character. For Rey to not be a Skywalker, the statement made by Kathleen Kennedy would have to be contradicted, and I just don't see that happening.
That statement could apply to Kylo Ren. Rey doesn't have to be a Skywalker for Kennedy's statement to be true since it's already true.
 

Surfinn

Member
What would you say points to her being Luke's specifically? I'm really curious about discussing both that possibility and the Han/Leia one and actually evaluating them side-by-side.

In all honesty, I haven't set them up side by side.. but is there even enough information to suggest she could be Han and Leia's?

(THREAD WARNING: UNSTUDIED SPECULATION INCOMING)

I hadn't thought about what you said about the family tree connection in regard to what Maz told Rey, that's an interesting assumption. I also think it's possible that Luke was communicating with Rey through the force somehow, which could explain why she knew of Luke's location (island and water) Ren discussed in the interrogation scene. She also says "Luke" when Maz tells her someone still could return (made me think of when Leia "sense" Luke and returned for him in ESB). These are weak connections, but they remind me of how relatives communicate throughout the OT (i.e. Luke to Leia, Luke to Vader). I've got mroe but I can't think of it it at moment.

Kylo Ren, the primary antagonist of this series, is already part of the Skywalker lineage, so he already makes these sequels a Skywalker story. And the fact that Luke (and Leia) is still around shouldn't be ignored either. There's no necessity that Rey be a Skywalker in order to make the movies about the Skywalkers, since they are already about that family without her being one. Doesn't mean she isn't also one, but it's not a necessity that needs to be fulfilled in order to adhere to what Kathleen Kennedy has said.

Right, we know Kylo is a Skywalker, but do you REALLY think the protagonist of the trilogy won't be a Skywalker? It's possible but unlikely, in my opinion. Unless somehow they break all rules and Kylo becomes the protagonist and Rey the villain/has less importance, which won't happen.

The statement applies to Kylo. How can it not?

So Kylo's a Skywalker. So are Leia and Luke, does the statement apply to them too? Kylo Ren is not the protagonist, of whom the entire trilogy revolves, and neither are the two other Skywalkers.

In that case, the HERO'S JOURNEY, and the person the saga is now centered around, is not focused on the continuation of the Skywalker family and the Skywalker family name serves as only a plot device to push her story forward, instead of being the centerpiece. I don't think that would happen.
 

GhaleonEB

Member
That statement could apply to Kylo Ren. Rey doesn't have to be a Skywalker for Kennedy's statement to be true since it's already true.

The statement applies to Kylo. How can it not?

That's how I've interpreted it as well. Would be kind of refreshing to have the "Skywalker family saga" continue with the villain carrying on the family line.
So Kylo's a Skywalker. So are Leia and Luke, does the statement apply to them too? Kylo Ren is not the protagonist, of whom the entire trilogy revolves, and neither are the two other Skywalkers.

He doesn't have to be the protagonist to make what Kennedy said true. She said the saga films would carry on the Skywalker family story. It's doing that with Ren, and to a lesser degree Leia and Luke (for now).
 

-griffy-

Banned
Right, we know Kylo is a Skywalker, but do you REALLY think the protagonist of the trilogy won't be a Skywalker? It's possible but unlikely, in my opinion. Unless somehow they break all rules and Kylo becomes the protagonist and Rey the villain/lesser of a character, which won't happen.
I'm simply saying Kathleen Kennedy's statement doesn't mean Rey must be a Skywalker. She said "The Saga films focus on the Skywalker family saga." She didn't say "The hero character must be a Skywalker." It's obviously a possibility she is a Skywalker, but I REALLY think it's also a possibility that Luke passes the torch to her, and she inherits the franchise as an "adoptive" Skywalker going forward. I'm not going to assume anything at this point.
 

Surfinn

Member
That's how I've interpreted it as well. Would be kind of refreshing to have the "Skywalker family saga" continue with the villain carrying on the family line.


He doesn't have to be the protagonist to make what Kennedy said true.

In the PT, the protagonist, until the final part of the third movie, was a Skywalker. In the OT, Luke Skywalker was the protagonist. Both characters are protagonists in the end, after Anakin Skywalker is redeemed.

I'm not saying it can't happen, but I think it's extremely likely they continue this pattern and keep the protagonist a Skywalker. I also think it's what Kennedy was referring to.

They're going to have one hell of a time passing on the Skywalker legacy in episodes 10-12 if Rey is not of this lineage. What, Ren is her sidekick and the family legacy is represented through him? Or the future of the lineage is cast in darkness?

I just don't see that happening.
 

-griffy-

Banned
If we're gonna dig into producer quotes, here's Abrams talking about the Force (source here), and I've highlighted where I think it points to Rey not being a Skywalker:
I’m not someone who quite understands the science of the Force. To me Star Wars was never about science fiction — it was a spiritual story. And it was more of a fairytale in that regard. For me when I heard Obi-Wan say that the Force surrounds us and binds us all together, there was no judgement about who you were. This was something that we could all access. Being strong with the force didn’t mean something scientific, it meant something spiritual. It meant someone who could believe, someone who could reach down to the depths of your feelings and follow this primal energy that was flowing through all of us. I mean, thats what was said in that first film!

And there I am sitting in the theater at almost 11 years old and that was a powerful notion. And I think this is what your point was, we would like to believe that when shit gets serious, that you could harness that Force I was told surrounds not just some of us but every living thing. And so, I really feel like the assumption that any character needs to have inherited a certain number of midi-chlorians or needs to be part of a bloodline, it’s not that I don’t believe that as part of the canon, I’m just saying that at 11 years old, that wasn’t where my heart was. And so I respect and adhere to the canon but I also say that the Force has always seemed to me to be more inclusive and stronger than that.

Rey can carry on the Skywalker legacy by inheriting her position in the standings of the Force from Luke, without literally being a Skywalker herself. Maybe she can be the Skywalker that Kylo Ren fails at being, proving that anyone can be a hero like Luke Skywalker.
 

GhaleonEB

Member
In the PT, the protagonist, until the final part of the third movie, was a Skywalker. In the OT, Luke Skywalker was the protagonist. Both characters are protagonists in the end, after Anakin Skywalker is redeemed.

I'm not saying it can't happen, but I think it's extremely likely they continue this pattern and keep the protagonist a Skywalker. I also think it's what Kennedy was referring to.

They're going to have one hell of a time passing on the Skywalker legacy in episodes 10-12 if Rey is not of this lineage. What, Ren is her sidekick and the family legacy is represented through her? Or the future of the lineage is cast in darkness?

I just don't see that happening.

Again, we're just talking about what Kennedy said. I'm familiar with the other films. TFA is already about the Skywalker family line, without the need for Rey to be one of them.

It's fine if you don't see it happening, but regardless of whether that's a later reveal or not, her statement is objectively already true.
If we're gonna dig into producer quotes, here's Abrams talking about the Force, and why I think it points to Rey not being a Skywalker:

That is a great quote. I'd read that interview but forgotten it, but in the context of having seen the film, definitely reinforces the not-Skywalker hypothesis.
 
Rey can carry on the Skywalker legacy by inheriting her position in the standings of the Force from Luke, without literally being a Skywalker herself. Maybe she can be the Skywalker that Kylo Ren fails at being, proving that anyone can be a hero like Luke Skywalker.
That's what I got from Rey accepting her destiny. She's not accepting her relations to Luke, but to her position in the Force.
 
In all honesty, I haven't set them up side by side.. but is there even enough information to suggest she could be Han and Leia's?

These are the chief reasons why I think people speculate a Luke connection (more or less in order of importance):

- Rey is very strong with the Force, which matches what we know about the Skywalker line. (It's easiest to match her Force abilities to a known quantity like Luke.)
- Rey appears to have literally inherited the lightsaber from Luke, based on what we hear from Maz about how the lightsaber has been passed down ("This lightsaber was Luke's, and his father's before him, and now it calls to you!" specifically mentions Luke, so naturally the impulse response is to guess at a connection to Luke.)
- Rey's origins very tightly parallel Luke's origins (orphaned on a desert planet, forced to do menial labor to survive, leaves once the arrival of the Empire/First Order to capture a droid whose mission is to bring back a Jedi from exile draws her into the conflict against evil), which is often a sign of a direct (and often familial) connection as a storytelling convention
- Rey is also a great pilot, in line with what we know about Luke. (This is less of a strong connection, since pretty much everyone in the Star Wars universe isn't half-bad at flying ships anyway.)

But I think we can subvert all of those connections (by linking them back to Anakin and tracing her lineage through Leia instead).

- Rey's strength in the Force also mirrors Anakin's, and we know Leia is also capable of passing down Force powers. (She's also yet another known quantity in the equation.)
- The lightsaber is also ultimately handed down from Anakin, even if she's Leia's kid. (Luke will ultimately be the one to teach her, since he's the one who actually became a Jedi, and he's the one who "lost" it on Bespin, leading it to be left for her.)
- Rey's desert planet/menial worker origins also heavily mirror Anakin's, with the bonus that Anakin's actually known for his mechanic prowess in addition to his piloting skills (yet again, a known quantity) - something Luke isn't known for anyway.
- Rey's piloting skills likewise really come primarily from Anakin (another known quantity), regardless of whether she's Luke's offspring or Leia's.

Here's the kicker, though: if we look at Rey appearing to "inherit" the lightsaber in a generational fashion as a signal that she's tied to the Skywalker lineage (either Luke or Leia), shouldn't we also consider other imagery that evokes "inheritance"? And what do we see?

- Rey is given a blaster by Han. Yes, Finn is also given a weapon by Han, but when Han gives the blaster to Rey, it's beneath a couple interesting conditions: the offer of a job serving on the Falcon, and the statement that "you have a lot to learn" - neither of which are offered to Finn. So while both characters receive blasters from Han, only Rey does so in a context that relays a kind of fatherly tenderness and the willingness to take her under his wing. The film loops back to the special connection developing between Rey and Han later (during the Rey-Ren interrogation scene) and specifically calls it out as the kind of father-daughter relationship that Rey never had.
- After Han dies, Rey appears to literally inherit both the Falcon - Han's most prized possession, which he refers to as his "home" - and Chewie - Han's lifelong partner. The film doesn't belabor any kind of setup for why the Falcon and Chewie end up with Rey; it's taken for granted as the film moves along to the ending.

Rey also "inherits" a specific characteristic from Han that isn't associated with Luke: a deep reverence for and appreciation of the Falcon. The film draws several direct parallels between the way Rey feels about, understands, and treats the Falcon and the way Han does. These moments tie in with her mechanical prowess, too - the one thing we know isn't a characteristic she also shares with Luke.

What runs against this theory? The fact that Han and Leia don't directly demonstrate any recognition of her, for one. But that's just as problematic if she's Luke's child, as in that case she'd be their niece - she'd still be family, and the fact that they never acknowledge this would still be just as weird.

The film is careful to place any conversation between Han/Leia and other characters off-screen. In particular, there's the scene in Maz's tavern where Maz explicitly asks Han "Who's the girl?" before the scene cuts to Finn and Rey. Now, it's possible he simply doesn't know her and nothing of value was said, and so the whole conversation was just a red herring. But that this pattern was repeated with his first conversation with Leia about Rey - it also happened off-screen - gives the impression the filmmakers are intentionally being coy about what these two characters know about Rey, a pretty good signal there's a strong possibility there's something there to keep under wraps.

In the absence of any other evidence that would account for why Han and Leia wouldn't react to Rey like family (whether she's their niece, in line with the leading theory, or their daughter, in line with this other theory), and with both theories being effectively equal on that count, I think the film's deliberate avoidance of these conversations is meant to signal to us that the characters themselves know something but are - for some reason - disposed to avoid revealing whatever that is to Rey (or her friend, Finn).

In any case, whether she's Luke's daughter or Han/Leia's, I think there are way too many coincidences surrounding the way the Falcon landed in Rey's lap on Jakku - Han conveniently didn't search for the Falcon in the region where she was left, where she was living alongside the junker (known to Han) who happened to also end up with his ship, and yet somehow he wound up finding the Falcon pretty incredibly quickly after they left orbit (and even said outright it wasn't a coincidence). So my hunch (it's weaker than the rest of the guesses I make, admittedly) is that Han knows something about who she is/why she was left there and isn't telling.

In the end, I don't know that either possibility is necessarily more or less likely. During my first viewing, I actually wouldn't have been shocked if the last line was Luke saying "I'm your father" to Rey. However, after repeat viewings, I don't think the film has closed the door on the possibility that she's Han and Leia's child, in spite of what many have suggested.

I'm also open to the not-Skywalker idea, since really its biggest support - that Rey's strong with the Force - comes from an assumption about Force powers that may prove to be untrue (and that Abrams's statement, shown a few posts back, actually undercuts). In the end, there's no reason to conclude that someone "strong with the Force" has to be a Skywalker; neither do we have to conclude that the will of the Force will link only Skywalkers to the evolving Skywalker story. But I'm also actually really fond of that (primarily spiritual) interpretation of the Force and I'm predisposed to think it's a good idea since it really reinforces the way I feel about the ending - that Rey's victory over Kylo is a victory of her belief and faith in the Force (the spiritual approach) over Kylo's raw mastery and brute power (the scientific approach).
 

Surfinn

Member
Kathleen Kennedy said:
The Saga films focus on the Skywalker family saga. The stories follow a linear narrative that connects to the previous six films. The Force Awakens follows Return of the Jedi and continues that generational story.

How can the main character not be a part of the Skywalker family, judging from this quote? So the Skywalker generational story is just a side note to her hero's journey and she'll only watch it develop instead of being directly involved in the family drama? And what of episodes 10-12? The next protagonist will stand on the outside as well? (Yes, I know she is involved with the Skywalker family, but not involved inherently)


Lots of good points there. The most noteworthy being:

Rey’s life on Jakku is an intentional echo of Anakin and Luke’s childhoods on Tatooine.

Rey’s natural aptitude for technology and flying ships is a callback to Anakin and Luke’s talents.

Luke’s lightsaber calls out to Rey specifically. (Maz's explanation of how the saber has been passed down through generations, all of whom are SKYWALKERS, from Anakin, to Luke, and now to Rey)

There is an allusion to Excalibur in Rey and Kylo Ren’s duel at the end of the movie.


Rey being the daughter of Luke and Kylo Ren being the son of Leia makes the trilogy a story about the legacy of the Skywalker family.

If we're gonna dig into producer quotes, here's Abrams talking about the Force (source here), and I've highlighted where I think it points to Rey not being a Skywalker:


Rey can carry on the Skywalker legacy by inheriting her position in the standings of the Force from Luke, without literally being a Skywalker herself. Maybe she can be the Skywalker that Kylo Ren fails at being, proving that anyone can be a hero like Luke Skywalker.

I agree with this a lot, but JJ is not writing episodes 8 or 9, and there's already an indication that we might not even know of her lineage until the conclusion of the trilogy.
 

numble

Member
How can the main character not be a part of the Skywalker family, judging from this quote? So the Skywalker generational story is just a side note to her hero's journey and she'll only watch it develop instead of being directly involved in the family drama? And what of episodes 10-12? The next protagonist will stand on the outside as well? (Yes, I know she is involved with the Skywalker family, but not involved inherently)
The main character of the PT was Obi Wan, even though it focused on the Skywalker family.

The conflict between Luke and his nephew and Leia and her son is enough Skywalker family connection that will always be in the background.
 
How can the main character not be a part of the Skywalker family, judging from this quote? So the Skywalker generational story is just a side note to her hero's journey and she'll only watch it develop instead of being directly involved in the family drama? And what of episodes 10-12? The next protagonist will stand on the outside as well? (Yes, I know she is involved with the Skywalker family, but not involved inherently)



Lots of good points there. The most noteworthy being:

Rey’s life on Jakku is an intentional echo of Anakin and Luke’s childhoods on Tatooine.

Rey’s natural aptitude for technology and flying ships is a callback to Anakin and Luke’s talents.

Luke’s lightsaber calls out to Rey specifically. (Maz's explanation of how the saber has been passed down through generations, from Anakin, to Luke, and now to Rey)

There is an allusion to Excalibur in Rey and Kylo Ren’s duel at the end of the movie.


Rey being the daughter of Luke and Kylo Ren being the son of Leia makes the trilogy a story about the legacy of the Skywalker family.



I agree with this a lot, but JJ is not writing episodes 8 or 9, and there's already an indication that we might not even know of her lineage until the conclusion of the trilogy.

Yup.

I'm really amazed at some of the posters here seemingly wanting Rey to not be a Skywalker (I understand some doubt, but not to this extent).

On the reddit SW subreddits, people are pretty much operating their theories on the foregone conclusion that she is Luke's daughter. It's totally bizarre to see people there see it as the most logical explanation and use it to base actually crazy theories off of, yet here its approached with utter skepticism.

/shrug, oh well
 
How can the main character not be a part of the Skywalker family, judging from this quote? So the Skywalker generational story is just a side note to her hero's journey and she'll only watch it develop instead of being directly involved in the family drama? And what of episodes 10-12? The next protagonist will stand on the outside as well? (Yes, I know she is involved with the Skywalker family, but not involved inherently)
.
The conflict with Kylo Ren is enough to satisfy her statement. He is the main villain of the new trilogy and he already and he already has a ton of characterization behind him.
 

Interfectum

Member
Yup.

I'm really amazed at some of the posters here seemingly wanting Rey to not be a Skywalker (I understand some doubt, but not to this extent).

On the reddit SW subreddits, people are pretty much operating their theories on the foregone conclusion that she is Luke's daughter. It's totally bizarre to see people there see it as the most logical explanation and use it to base actually crazy theories off of, yet here its approached with utter skepticism.

/shrug, oh well

Since you read a lot of theories and whatnot on the SW subreddits, what is the consensus on how they are going to explain the Starkiller Base? Or is it even possible to explain it's existence. Like how the First Order managed to create it in the first place and what does it mean that they lost it.
 

heringer

Member
Again, we're just talking about what Kennedy said. I'm familiar with the other films. TFA is already about the Skywalker family line, without the need for Rey to be one of them.

It's fine if you don't see it happening, but regardless of whether that's a later reveal or not, her statement is objectively already true.


That is a great quote. I'd read that interview but forgotten it, but in the context of having seen the film, definitely reinforces the not-Skywalker hypothesis.

It's kind of funny how you are quickly dismissing Kennedy's quote as an indication (not confirmation) of Rey being a Skywalker, but JJ's vague quote totally reinforces the opposite idea. I mean, I think it could go either way, but it's hard to deny the most plausible outcome is Rey being a Skywalker. Far from definitive, far from watertight, but it is the most plausible hypothesis.
 
It's kind of funny how you are quickly dismissing Kennedy's quote as an indication (not confirmation) of Rey being a Skywalker

The idea is that Kennedy's quote does not require Rey to be a Skywalker (something we haven't confirmed) to be already true based only on Kylo Ren being a Skywalker (something we have already confirmed).

So we can't say that Rey being a Skywalker is necessarily rendered more (or less!) likely based on the Kennedy quote. It requires other assumptions about what could be meant by that besides the one that's already definitely true.
 

Interfectum

Member
IMO, that Abrams quote is referring to Finn. He's not any relation to known force users and yet he most likely wields some type of force power. Meaning anyone, even a lowly Stormtrooper, can tap into the power of the force.
 

heringer

Member
The main character of the PT was Obi Wan, even though it focused on the Skywalker family.

The conflict between Luke and his nephew and Leia and her son is enough Skywalker family connection that will always be in the background.

The idea is that Kennedy's quote does not require Rey to be a Skywalker (something we haven't confirmed) to be already true based only on Kylo Ren being a Skywalker (something we have already confirmed).

So we can't say that Rey being a Skywalker is necessarily rendered more (or less!) likely based on the Kennedy quote. It requires other assumptions about what could be meant by that besides the one that's already definitely true.
Well, yeah, technically it doesn't require that for her sentence to be true. Technically. That's not how most people would interpret what she said, though. It's hard to interpret her intentions of course, but the way she phrases it definitely doesn't scream like she's talking about anything other than the protagonist.

I mean, if we go that route then JJ's quote could mean anything.
 

-griffy-

Banned
Post with a lot of information.

What I think is interesting is that all of this can be true, Leia/Han may know more about Rey's past then they are letting on, without her being a direct family member. Her past could intersect with theirs, and with Luke's, even if she's not the daughter of one of them. It seems plausible that she has some tangential connection to Luke, and the most obvious is that she is his daughter so it's easy to understand why people jump to that conclusion. It was one of the first possibilities I thought after my first viewing. The movie is very obviously setting up her past as a mystery and being deliberately ambiguous about it.

But what if after all that build up and mystery and allusion and obvious speculation that she is from some important bloodline and this all must mean something, that it's nothing? That her parents were just regular students of Luke's makeshift academy who were killed by Kylo, leaving her orphaned? Or hell, maybe they weren't even students, but just collateral damage of the massacre.

And she was just left on Jakku because Luke went AWOL, and Leia/Han were so fucked up over what their own son did that they couldn't take raising this girl themselves, so they dumped her on Jakku with Unkar Plutt, and paid him off with the Falcon to ease the burden looking after this orphan girl put on him.

And what if Rey herself was buying into the obvious idea of her being Luke's daughter, of her life having some big, grander meaning, and her disappointment at finding out the truth mirrors the audience's? And the story becomes not about her finding out the "point" of it all, but about Luke teaching her that her past, or her family, or her lack of family, doesn't define her, it's what she makes for herself in the now that does. Which is actually pretty much what her arc in The Force Awakens was. Letting go of her past and moving forward. It hits on the thematic idea that Abrams has about the Force being the potential for anyone to become special.

I mean, I kind of like the sound of that. This kind of thing to me seems as plausible as anything else at this point.
 
Yeah, I also really like the idea that all the signposts that people are using to build their theories of who her family is are just symbolic instead of literal, and that the importance of the Skywalker bloodline to the story will ultimately get subverted by Rey really being an unknown with no real ties to their legacy, but who is now their best chance at stopping the First Order simply because of the person she is and not the blood she's inherited.

The more I think about it, the less I'm attached to any particular idea and the more I just want to see all these signals resolved in at least some kind of meaningful way as the story progresses.

But I guess I'm just looking at the evidence for the most popular theory and saying "well, if those are the clues you're seeing, couldn't this also work, based on those clues (plus a few others)?"
 
Top Bottom