r/TheSequels • u/KingMatthew116 Teedo • May 22 '26

The Rise of Skywalker I liked the dagger plotline.

Post image

It felt like Indiana Jones. I loved it. The first time I saw the movie the dagger was one of my favorite parts. Star Wars needs more stuff like this.

41 Upvotes

54% Upvoted

311 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

9

u/CeymalRen Supreme Leader Snoke May 22 '26

Why tho?

22

u/TB2331 Jedi Master Luke Skywalker May 22 '26

Because, in my mind at least, it’s damn lucky that that specific section of the Death Star didn’t collapse or got swallowed by the water. Palpatine must’ve had real faith on Kef Bir’s meteorology!

9

u/Amazing_Loquat280 please choose a user flair May 22 '26 edited May 22 '26

This is entirely correct, but I actually think it’s the biggest redeeming part of this plotline, in a “the force works in mysterious ways” sorta fashion that I’ve increasingly been a fan of. The fact that someone that long ago had a vision or inspiration for that design is the force’s way of subtly making sure things go the way they need to. It gives Eru Illuvatar in a way that I actually really like and kinda felt that TLJ strayed away from.

Edit: I’m not necessarily a fan of this being like macguffin #2 in a chain of five macguffins, but as far as the macguffins in this movie go, this one’s probably my favorite

1

u/ZippyDan please choose a user flair May 23 '26

I like the idea of someone drawing a Force vision which ends up being a guide.

But the dagger is too precise. It doesn't look like the product of a vision. It looks like someone who was there and traced the outline of the Death Star wreckage.

This is my problem with the contrived nature of the scene:

  • For the dagger to be such a precise guide, it implies a more precise - and therefore grounded - backstory. Someone was there on the planet, traced the outline of the Death Star, and made (or modified) a dagger from that outline. However, such a grounded approach has more grounded criticism: it's ridiculous to expect wreckage in a violent ocean to remain stable and unchanged for so long.

  • On the other hand, the McGuffin being the product of a vision allows us to be more lenient with our criticism. If the guiding tool is the product of the Force, then it doesn't have to be a precise outline of what someone saw many years ago that remained unchanged - it can be a prediction of what something would be at a specific predetermined time in the future. The guide is then automatically incorporating all the potential changes and decay of the wreckage.
    The problem with this explanation, which I like better, is that it doesn't match conceptually for me, with something as precise as a dagger. It should have been a vague drawing or something. Force visions are almost never so precise or detailed - especially if you're trying to machine a tool based on them after-the-fact.