One of the reasons the idea of “TLJ is good because it was subversive” bothers me is because the prequels were more subversive and that doesn’t give them a free pass for their racism and moments of bad writing in media discussion.
Japanese stereotypes used in Neimodians, cultural dressing slapped across Naboo, and Watto all deserve to be criticized, and they are. But a lot of “liberal” fans of TLJ will explain away any claims of racism as reaching and any claims of bad writing as whiny fanboys. Yet for every point of subversion that TLJ tries, the prequels do it better.
TLJ: Luke throws away the lightsaber when we expect him to do something proactive. Prequels: Supposedly peaceful Jedi are violent in the first scene.
TLJ: OT Sad Yoda became carefree after death. Prequels: OT Pacifist Yoda wasn’t always a pacifist. (I’ve seen so many people complain that Yoda is a different character in AoTC, ignoring that he becomes the hideaway after RoTS.)
TLJ: Rey’s parents are nobodies. Prequels: The origins of fan favorite Obi-Wan Kenobi don’t bother with his parentage, as it’s unimportant.
TLJ: Luke was willing to kill his nephew to prevent a massacre. Prequels: The Republic, expected to be good compared to the Empire, was willing to utilize a slave army to win a war.
TLJ: You can’t trust criminals and terrorists after all, but military secrets are good. Prequels: The Jedi weren’t guardians of peace, but mongers of war.
Subversion doesn’t equal quality, and weak subversions aren’t even worth getting excited about. (Moth)