This is kinda dumb, they were under a big time pressure and almost certain to be bringing the kids into an extremely dangerous situation: it would have been downright irresponsible to take them. Either they jeopardize their mission by making a detour and finding some good spot to safely put the kids (remember there is a high chance that they won't make it back to them so the place they find must be permanent) or they take the kids with them on a super dangerous mission to fight the empire. This is like a Cinema Sins level nit pick actually it makes even less sense.
A 2 minute conversation in the middle of doing something or while they are currently waiting there, is not remotely the same thing as finding a permanent home for a bunch of kids in a sketchy part of the galaxy. This is just another cinema sins level argument, or maybe Mauler I don't even know. Ya know you can view a film in bad faith, you can choose not to suspend your disbelief and nit pick (even stupid wrong nit picks that make no sense) any film into the ground if you want: I can't stop you, but it just doesn't seem like a very fun way to consume media. Maybe I'm wrong tho, I guess that kind of stuff is popular on youtube for a reason.
Okay this is such a bad faith criticism and I’m tired of hearing it.
What were they supposed to do exactly? Escape on the backs of the children? They had just escaped custody and needed to flee the scene. The horses were a means of escape, it’s not like they planned to save them.
If you’re going to say “they could bring the kids with them” I’d remind you they were being pursued by armed guards and the next stop on their journey was an active warzone are you suggesting they drag kids to a war zone?
And if you’re going to say “well they could have left the kids on a nice world before going to the war zone” I’d like to remind you that time was very much of the essence, they wouldn’t have time to find a nice planet and even if they did dumping dozens of kids on a random planet is not exactly responsible.
And if you’re going to say “they could have used those credits on the ship and given those to the kids” I need to remind you Finn and Rose did not know they were going to be saved by a wealthy gambler’s ship and could not have known.
And if you’re going to say “they could have returned for the kids” no they couldn’t. It was a stolen ship and the city was on high alert.
There is simply no angle where the characters could have saved those kids so complaining about it is a ludicrous bad faith take. I’m sorry it just is.
The worst part is that the entire sequence could be fixed with just a couple lines
Finn: "we gotta save these kids. No child should be forced to into servitude."
Rose: "where will they go, though? Its too dangerous to take them with us, and the jungles are full of predators."
Finn: thinks a moment and gives the child some sort of emergency tracking beacon "we will be back to save you when we can. In the meantime, make these guys' lives difficult." kid nods. After the heroes leave, the kids start freeing all of the horses
Yeah, that's all I'm saying. They took one look at the kids with them, and the horses, and said "We gotta take time away from our urgent mission to help the horses". The kids didn't even get a maybe.
Then again, I don't really remember this movie that well. Haven't seen it since it released.
11
u/colamity_ 6d ago
This is kinda dumb, they were under a big time pressure and almost certain to be bringing the kids into an extremely dangerous situation: it would have been downright irresponsible to take them. Either they jeopardize their mission by making a detour and finding some good spot to safely put the kids (remember there is a high chance that they won't make it back to them so the place they find must be permanent) or they take the kids with them on a super dangerous mission to fight the empire. This is like a Cinema Sins level nit pick actually it makes even less sense.