Review: Star Wars: The Force Awakens (novelization)

This was honestly the worst film-to-book adoption I've ever read, and I've read a lot of them. Star Wars Revenge of the Sith's novelization was perfect. It explained decisions and colored the world in ways that the movie simply couldn't. It used the strengths of the medium. Same with the X-Men novelizations. They make reading about their universes fun.

But not this book.

This book tries to interpret Star Wars- and fails.

~~spoilers~~spoilers~~spoilers~~spoilers~~spoilers~~spoilers~~spoilers~~

The transference from book-to-film is easy to get wrong. Two examples: (1) Dumbledore yelling /calmly/ in the books in Goblet of Fire did not make it into the movie. (2) Voldemort turning into dust in movie movie 7.5 instead of thudding to the ground.

These changes were made because the directors failed to understand the characters and nature of reality that JK Rowling was describing. Dumbledore is thoughtful and trustful. Voldemort is just a man. They lost these themes and the movies sucked a bit more.

Reverse this: the theme of The Force Awakens is good versus evil. It says that good is good and evil is evil and the difference is obvious. The entirely movie plays this out visually: The iconic shot of TIE fighters coming from an orange sky indicate they're coming from the dark, from evening. X-Wings come from the stars. Good things happen in the sun, bad things happen at night or underground, and Han Solo is killed literally when the light of the sun goes out.

The book ignores this. It destroys it. The Starkiller doesn't evil kill a fucking star. It "absorbs dark matter" which becomes "quientessist" which becomes "phantom energy" and goes into "sub-hyperspace." Han Solo is slayed literally as dark energy blocks out "light".

The author has so many opportunities to play with this symbolism, but instead he seems to be making fun of The Force Awakens. Finn- who is never described as black, like, you know, he is- constantly "thinks" about how the movie solution is problematic, but then makes up an answer to justify. Bro. Bro. I don't need to know why it's problematic. Just give me the answer to the plot hole before you say "hey look there is a plot hole."

Another example: Rey spends her life on a desert planet. How does she know how to fly? Answer: she flies a speeder and, apparently, steals away in the night to look at the ships in Niima outpost. Thats radical. It's a good answer. But why do we get that fucking answer after she already flew and Han asks the question? Why is Han bringing up the plothole? Han doesn't know her life, he doesn't give two shits.

The correct way to answer plot holes it to have the novel color the world so well that we feel like assholes for thinking they were plot holes at all.

God help me if the rest of the books I read this year are like this one.