/starwars/ - Star Wars

> tfw the best SW character gets killed

Thanks Disney

>>9092

I got banned on /tv/ for 2 days. The fuck is up with these faggots?

>>9094

I meant to say half/tv/

God, this is gonna be a steaming pile.

>>9097

She looks like she's made of fucking lifeless cardboard.

>>9103

Snoke is Plagueis confirmed!

C

O

N

F

I

R

M

E

D

Honestly it doesn't upset me that Han dies. Harrison Ford wanted it for years, and I believe they felt like they should maybe kill him in the movies before he dies IRL.

>>9093

O.O

>>9116

He looks like young Snape

>>9116

>Sidious

>Maul

>Plagueis

>Snoke

It's like a rule that to be a true Dark Sider your have to try just a bit too hard with your moinker. Only Vader and Bane really sound like they hit the sweet spot between menacing and edgy.

>>9123

>your have to try just a bit too hard with your moinker

>snoke

No effort went into that one, bruv.

>>9125

>Kylo's only motivation is that 'He reminds me too much of my old self'.

Uh YEAH, did you not realize Kylo is trying to be as edgy a faggot as possible in order to go "Full Darkside"?

And Han will be back as a Force Ghost anyways.

>>9128

>It's amazing. I've been rewatching all the films lately. That scene where Anakin slaughters the sand people or the one where he slaughters younglings? Didn't feel nearly as edgy as this crap. I'm actually appreciating the prequels.

Ah but that's just it; Kylo is TRYING TOO HARD TO BE EDGY!

He THINKS killing his dad will make him all Hardcore Sith Lord, but it isn't fueled by hate or malice like Anakin's killing sprees were.

He's a pussy trying to psych himself up as a LORD of DARKNESS, and that is why he will fail.

>>9125

Well no, it's not a pussy reason to for Kylo Ren to kill Han solo. You're just missing the point along with a surprising amount of folks.

Kylo Ren is aware of how Darth Vader was redeemed to the light, and that's why his goal is to somehow become immune to that aspect of the Force or otherwise purge it from himself entirely. He affirms in that scene with Supreme Leader Snoke that having to kill the man who raised him would be his greatest challenge because nothing would probably prove, most importantly to himself, that he's shedding his lifetime identity and becoming something entirely different of his own choosing. He wants to get rid of the tender old feelings that could impede that ultimate dark side ambition of power at any price.

Darth Vader really ceased to be Anakin Skywalker when he killed Padme and was forced to own up to it. There was a great scene in one of the Legends books where a Sith rescues his wife from a rival and then immediately does the hardest thing he's ever had to do in killing her because he has the epiphany that his love for her is something that could be used against him and is therefore a weakness.

Han should have died quite awhile back, but it's a good thing that he's sacrificed to fulfill a character's central motivation, which in this case is to satisfy this fearful complex that he must do whatever it takes to succeed where Darth Vader failed.

>>9129

It's fueled by fear and arguably contempt for the trappings of his past that are an obstacle for remaking himself into some idealized dark figure. It's thematically appropriate.

>>9093

>lawrence kasdan co-wrote this with jar jar abrams

how the fuck can that asshole (kasdan, not abrams) bitch about lucas making yoda into more of a spiritual leader than a former warrior, despite us getting that, and then write this shit? i mean ffs he must have seriously gotten lucky with empire, jedi and raiders. anything else i apparently have seen written by him (clash of the titans remake) is absolute garbage.

>>9133

Kasdan is a retard who doesn't know what space opera is. He literally thinks Star Wars is its own genre.

>>9130

Fuck off, J.J., movie was shit. Makes Attack of the Clones look like Empire.

>>9130

That's retarded and edgy. Why does the dark-side have to be so fucking edgy? I'm sorry but it came off as shit and made the death of an amazing chracter just awful.

Fuck off disney shill.

>>9134

>Kasdan is a retard who doesn't know what space opera is. He literally thinks Star Wars is its own genre.

This

>>9141

Worst part is how they made Kylo act like an edgy emo like Anakin.

>>9134

Didn't speak to the overall quality of the movie. Just pointing out that Han dying, why it happens, and how isn't out of place in a Star Wars story. There's precedent.

>>9141

Man, if only you'd called me a cuck or a New you'd have used enough memetic slurs to substitute for knowing what you're talking about.

Got banned for five days on cuckchan for posting op's image in a thread on /x/.

>>9103

Where's the full cam rip?

>>9125

>I can't watch that scene again. Such an amazing character, killed for what?

To shock the audience and make them think the movie is a masterpiece

Of course, this caused a terrible collateral effect : Episode 8 and 9 will not have the best Star Wars character

>>9192

it worked for episode 4 since we hardly knew anything about ben and learned much more about him after his death.

here we have han, a guy we've all gotten to know and love for 3 movies and then they axe him off because of reasons.

george was a fucking genius.

>>9125

Han should have died quite awhile back, but it's a good thing that he's sacrificed to fulfill a character's central motivation

>>9130

>Han should have died quite awhile back, but it's a good thing that he's sacrificed to fulfill a character's central motivation

Why should Han have died? He was the most based character in Star Wars. Besides, if you have to use another characters death as means to sell a new one – then you are just a shitty writer.

We all know WHY Kylo killed his father… it was because Kylo was a pussy… but that doesn't make him a better character or even remotely interesting. In the EU books we had Han Solo's son planning to kill his parents (then killing his aunt instead) in order to be a complete Sith – so we already knew about this… yet that was handled better and it taught us that there was no need for it to actually happen. The sheer willingness to go that far would have been enough – there was no need to actually do it.

Murdering billions of people doesn't make a villain seem evil, nor does killing people that the fans like or that is a relative to said character… it is all about building that character from the ground up. We hardly knew Kylo, even if we found out he was Hans' son – to us he had just been introduced. He was just a whiny little bitch with a crappy hair due… he was just some random person.

Likerwise even if you wanted to kill Han Solo, it was wrong to kill him in this movie as this movie was the start of a new "era". They are in a way a seperate thing. Killing Han was like having two seasons of a tv series – then killing the main hero in the first episode of the 2nd season.

We had to wait 30 years for han to appear again… if this movie had taken place 30 years agao, maybe some 2-3 years after the return of the Jedi it would have been one thing because then it would have been like he died in movie number 4. But now it was like he died in movie number 1. Han was just as a prop.

Nobody watched this movie for Kylo, Fen or Rey – Star Wars fans watched it for Han Solo and Luke Skywalker.

>>9233

Pretty much for the same reasons that Ford and Kasdan wanted made sense to me. It would have made for a better ending with more ambiguous tone that involved Han offering the ultimate sacrifice to make victory against the Empire possible. Certainly better, I think, than letting the Ewoks look they amounted to shit on their own.

>Besides, if you have to use another characters death as means to sell a new one – then you are just a shitty writer.

Not really, no. It's not simply selling Kylo Ren as evil. It's fulfilling his core motivation. He's trying to purge himself of anything that can stop him from being Better Vader. Doesn't matter if the audience thinks he can hold a candle to D. Viddy; what's relevant is that it's his whole deal.

>We all know WHY Kylo killed his father… it was because Kylo was a pussy… but that doesn't make him a better character or even remotely interesting

Again, it's not as simple as "he's a pussy," that's just madposting. It's far more powerful for the son to actually go through with the patricide. More personal and more of a step over the brink where said character is trying to go. Will means bullshit next to action, which makes for a more authentic villain. The fact that people are getting IRL butt blasted over it enough to hate the villain is pretty strong testament in favor of that.

>Murdering billions of people doesn't make a villain seem evil, nor does killing people that the fans like or that is a relative to said character

How so? Seems to me those are exactly, 100% the sort of things that define a villain as objectively evil.

>We hardly knew Kylo, even if we found out he was Hans' son – to us he had just been introduced. He was just a whiny little bitch with a crappy hair due… he was just some random person.

We, the audience/fans, don't need to know him and he doesn't have to be as significant to us. There's no meta at work where a new character has to earn the right to kill an old character. The villain's motive doesn't involve proving himself to fans.

>Likerwise even if you wanted to kill Han Solo, it was wrong to kill him in this movie as this movie was the start of a new "era".

Possibly, but I maintain there's nothing wrong in and of itself with having him die for important story reasons. You have a point, though, in that I'd wanted to see Han interact with other old cast members. Shame he won't be onscreen with Luke.

>Nobody watched this movie for Kylo, Fen or Rey – Star Wars fans watched it for Han Solo and Luke Skywalker.

Not really. I was about equally interested in both sets of characters. Too bad Rey is going to poison the franchise with her terrible Mary Sue plot powers.

>>9239

> Pretty much for the same reasons that Ford and Kasdan wanted made sense to me. It would have made for a better ending with more ambiguous tone that involved Han offering the ultimate sacrifice to make victory against the Empire possible.

No, because Anakin already did the ultimate sacrifice. Killing other character would be redundant.

> Not really, no. It's not simply selling Kylo Ren as evil. It's fulfilling his core motivation. He's trying to purge himself of anything that can stop him from being Better Vader. Doesn't matter if the audience thinks he can hold a candle to D. Viddy; what's relevant is that it's his whole deal.

But why does he want to be better than Vader? Why does he want to be a sith? Because "muh power"? He's an anime villain.

> Not really. I was about equally interested in both sets of characters.

This is why the movie is underwhelming. They should made it at least like Indy 4: introduce new characters (his son) but have Indy as the main protagonist.

>>9239

>Certainly better, I think, than letting the Ewoks look they amounted to shit on their own.

So just because the Ewoks were a retarded addition to Star Wars, we should accept other people adding retarded shit to the franchise?

>Not really, no.

No seriously then you really are a shitty writer.

If you can't demonstrate how ebil your main villain is, without having said villain kill off an established and loved hero… then you can't write worth shit. It is the Worf effect times retard.

>It's not simply selling Kylo Ren as evil.

Yes it is, because unless you have read the EU and know about Jacen – there really is nothing in the movie that actually explains to us WHY he has to kill his father. Oh murdered his father… but had he really ever loved his father? The way he spoke about Han when talking to Rey suggested that he didn't even like the guy. We know far to little about Kylo to really understand his motives.

>Again, it's not as simple as "he's a pussy," that's just madposting. It's far more powerful for the son to actually go through with the patricide.

No it was "that simple". He was afraid he would betray the dark side, so instead of actually living with it – he became a pussy and took the easy way out. Once he killed his father, he would have no more issues… so it wasn't hard – it was easy.

>How so? Seems to me those are exactly, 100% the sort of things that define a villain as objectively evil.

Imagine you are the president of a country. You are in a war against a fearsome opponent so decide to nuke all of them. Would this constitute you as a villain? No, it would just make you a character that fired of the nukes. Likewise say you have an estranged family member that you really dislike that is standing in the way of you fulfilling your dream… would killing them make you a villain? No necessarily… fr instance if said was a villain himself then that would make you a hero.

If your character kills a fan favorite – that character will be hated… but it will not be "heel hate" – it will just be hate. People will hate this character because they killed their favorite character, not because the character is so villainous that you want to hate him for being a villain.

>We, the audience/fans, don't need to know him and he doesn't have to be as significant to us.

Oh so it would make a good movie is a background character all of a sudden killed one of the main characters? You are telling us that we don't need to get to know a character?`That a character can just "be" what they are intended to be from the start while at the same time being one of the main protagonists? No, that shit only works for grunts that are meant to be killed off and these grunts in turn can only kill off characters that are important to the main characters, but not important to the fans… like Luke's aunt and uncle.

>There's no meta at work where a new character has to earn the right to kill an old character.

Yes there is – because unless we care about the new characters first, what defines their character will not be their motivation or who/what they are… they wont be important to the story – they will just be "that retarded new character that killed the best damn character in Star Wars". Kylo didn't become a good character because he killed his father, nor did he become even remotely interesting. The scene was wasted.

>The villain's motive doesn't involve proving himself to fans.

No it does. The villain has to prove themselves not only as villains but as characters in their own right. In movies where villains are central to the movie, they more than the heroes need to actually be able to fulfill their role.

>there's nothing wrong in and of itself with having him die for important story reasons

If Han's death was treated as central to the movie and the movie had been about Han, they yes his death would have been accepable – but this wasn't the case here. His death was, by your own admission, used as a tool to make Kylo seem ebil. But it failed. Instead we got a raging Mary Sue fighting with an hipster in a fight that wasn't important to the story at all. Absolutely nothing would have changed even if their fight hadn't taken place after Solo was killed.

>Not really. I was about equally interested in both sets of characters.

… like I said – nobody.

>Too bad Rey is going to poison the franchise with her terrible Mary Sue plot powers.

That part I can agree with you about. But she wasn't the worst part. The worst part was the fixation and focus on all those latina background characters appearing everywhere. For every named male character that had a scene where they had to say something (for story purposes) if they didn't have a reason for one of the female named characters to say anything – the damn camera showed us a female background characters just to make sure that we knew that "hey!! this movie has womyn and latinos in it!!"

>>9243

Jacen wasn't just an edgy retard though. He had a goal of going all ozymandias stop the fighting. Keep all the hatred on him. And at the end of it all, he still cared for his sister and daughter. It was a nice story.

Kylo Ren is just elliot roger

>>9092

moot being a cuck and installing SJW mods at every place. I think he even sold the side by now to some former 2ch guy that sells user data or similar shit.

>>9093

Somethings wrong with that. It didn't play out exactly like that in the US showing

>>9123

>implying Snoke is a Sith Lord

you can't be that much of a normie can you?

>>9252

Oh jesus I think you're serious.

>>9290

But he's right. Kylo is Elliot Roger.

>>9240

>No, because Anakin already did the ultimate sacrifice. Killing other character would be redundant.

Not really. Anakin brought balance to the Force, but the story could have allowed for a different hero to secure the real military success. Then it wouldn't have been written off as "battle meditation" in the EU.

>But why does he want to be better than Vader? Why does he want to be a sith? Because "muh power"? He's an anime villain.

To succeed where Vader failed, to live up to that ideal of a dark sider, he needs to be better at that than Vader was. "Muh power" is the quintessential motive for pretty much all Dark Siders in the end, Sith or no. Guess SW was anime all along.

>>9243

>So just because the Ewoks were a retarded addition to Star Wars, we should accept other people adding retarded shit to the franchise?

Just keeping perspective, and I stand by Han dying not being shitty whereas Ewoks were.

>No seriously then you really are a shitty writer. If you can't demonstrate how ebil your main villain is, without having said villain kill off an established and loved hero… then you can't write shit

Naw, seriously, it's fine when said beloved hero has a relationship with the killer that makes the act personal and important. It's not shitty just because it makes fans nerd rage.

>– there really is nothing in the movie that actually explains to us WHY he has to kill his father. Oh murdered his father… but had he really ever loved his father? The way he spoke about Han when talking to Rey suggested that he didn't even like the guy. We know far to little about Kylo to really understand his motives.

Naw, you're wrong about that. Read between the lines. He's trying to convince himself more than Snoke or anybody that he has what it takes to transcend Vader's legacy. Kind of already covered all the proof that he did. I'd say there's a chance he cared about him given his tone in the scene and how Snoke before then challenge him on it. Dollars to donuts Snoke could sense out his ambiguity. Of course he's going to act nonplussed like that in front of Rey, though, why would he admit to it? It would showing weakness to do otherwise.

>No it was "that simple". He was afraid he would betray the dark side, so instead of actually living with it – he became a pussy and took the easy way out. Once he killed his father, he would have no more issues… so it wasn't hard – it was easy.

It really isn't that simple. The Dark Side is usually portrayed as the quick and easy path to power (so I guess all Sith are crap villains), which goes back far in the films, but that doesn't make killing Han only an easy out. "Living with it" means not moving on and not proving to himself that he can sever his past. It's not easy if he actually valued that past, which context suggests he does.

>Imagine you are the president…

I'd answer yes to all of your rhetorical questions. Those are villainous deeds, period.

>People will hate this character because they killed their favorite character, not because the character is so villainous that you want to hate him for being a villain.

Those people are autists with an inordinate personal attachment to a fictional being.

>Yes there is – because unless we care about the new characters first, what defines their character will not be their motivation or who/what they are… they wont be important to the story – they will just be "that retarded new character that killed the best damn character in Star Wars". Kylo didn't become a good character because he killed his father, nor did he become even remotely interesting. The scene was wasted.

Their importance to the story is independent of whether or not you or anybody else in the audience deigns to care about them. It makes sense for Kylo Ren to kill his father and for that to be significant. That justifies it alone and he doesn't need to pass some arbitrary coolness bar before he "gets to" kill Han Solo. That is objectively true whereas your lack of interest and belief in the scene being wasted is just subjectivity. He may not be a "good" character yet, but he's indisputably more defined.

>No it does. The villain has to prove themselves not only as villains but as characters in their own right. In movies where villains are central to the movie, they more than the heroes need to actually be able to fulfill their role.

Naw, the villain exists in the setting and his rationale doesn't have size up with how much fan service his deeds can generate. The writer needs to make his actions plausible, understandable, sympathetic, unsympathetic, insane, or whatever based on the desired effect, but nowhere is it written that he needs to earn some right from the audience to do anything, and thank God because fans are retarded.

>If Han's death was treated as central to the movie and the movie had been about Han, they yes his death would have been accepable

He didn't need to be central to the film for his death to make sense or be acceptable.

>His death was, by your own admission, used as a tool to make Kylo seem ebil.

Which it did.

>Instead we got a raging Mary Sue fighting with an hipster in a fight that wasn't important to the story at all. Absolutely nothing would have changed even if their fight hadn't taken place after Solo was killed.

Well, no, it was pretty relevant to the 3 characters involved.

>… like I said – nobody.

A nobody who you seem pretty keen on disproving with red hot opinions, bruv.

>>9252

Yes, Jacen's fall was constructed, there was sense in it. His killing of Mara Jade was the culmination of his fall. That Kylo Ryu whatever was just from nowhere. "Lol i'm Han Solo's son and gonna kill him" There was no building up to that.

Also Jacen was a fallen jedi knight rising to Sith mastery, not some "edgy apprentice"

>>9121

I thought the same thing.

>>9259

Moot gave 4chan to the partner of the guy who was selling user data. Hotwheels gave 8chan to the man who was actually selling user data.

>>9381

>Just keeping perspective, and I stand by Han dying not being shitty whereas Ewoks were.

No, I was pointing out that your argument was a fallacy. It doesn't matter if the Ewoks were retarded, that doesn't make the decision to kill off Han Solo in this movie any less retarded. The movie wasn't good enough to make use of the death of loved character. It did absolutely nothing for the movie and it was wasted.

>Naw, seriously, it's fine when said beloved hero has a relationship with the killer that makes the act personal and important. It's not shitty just because it makes fans nerd rage.

No, it isn't shitty because "nerds" rage (lolwut?), it is shitty because it was a cheap and tacky way to achieve a pop. And it failed even at that since Kylo hadn't been properly established nor had Han Solo since this was the first movie in "the new line". If Han Solo had been killed in the 2nd movie or the third, then it might have made a little more sense… but not at the start of the bloody thing! Kylo was no more than a glorified mook.

>Naw, you're wrong about that. Read between the lines. He's trying to convince himself more than Snoke or anybody that he has what it takes to transcend Vader's legacy.

Irrelevant, this doesn't show us that he liked or even cared about his father. Killing his father was a quick solution. Being able to feel the Light side he thinks that killing his family will make him dark and edgy, but if he didn't care about his father to begin with then this would mean nothing. If anything he should have killed Snoke if he wanted to achieve his goal since he was praising the guy during his fight with Rey. To him Snoke was a guy he cared about – I.E he should have killed Snoke.

> Kind of already covered all the proof that he did. I'd say there's a chance he cared about him given his tone in the scene and how Snoke before then challenge him on it.

No, you haven't shown any proof of any kind. Please try again.

>Of course he's going to act nonplussed like that in front of Rey, though, why would he admit to it?

No, he told Rey that "you see him as a father? You would be disappointed in him if you really knew him".

This isn't him not trying to show weakness, this is him being pissed off that Rey thinks Han Solo is such a great guy. Obviously this hints at that Ben Solo is angry that his father wasn't always there for him when he was young ect ect

>It really isn't that simple.

Again – no it is. He was being a pussy.

> The Dark Side is usually portrayed as the quick and easy path to power

Yes…so?

> (so I guess all Sith are crap villains)

How did you reach to this conclusion? Kylo was a crap villain because he acted like a brat, and because he was defined only after he killed his father. Up until that moment he was just a silly looking guy running around with a stupid looking sword. After that he became "the mook that killed the based character in Star Wars". So he was shitty all around – not because he was a pussy but because he was crap.

> that doesn't make killing Han only an easy out.

Yes it does. Kylo is suffering because he can't be dark and edgy like his cool father figure Snoke. So he decides to kill his biological father – and it is easy because Kylo never like his real father anyways.

> "Living with it" means not moving on and not proving to himself that he can sever his past.

Nope. Severing his past is just shit propaganda. He already severed his past when he killed the other Jedi Luke was training. Rather it would be a true display of strength if he had been able to live with feeling the Light Side of the force and still only use the dark side.

> It's not easy if he actually valued that past, which context suggests he does.

Valued? Yes but only in the context that he wanted to break free from it. He wanted to break free so it was easy.

>I'd answer yes to all of your rhetorical questions. Those are villainous deeds, period.

Egads – you just revealed yourself to be an SJW. No wonder you think Kylo a good character.

>Those people are autists with an inordinate personal attachment to a fictional being.

Insulting the fanbase for not enjoying a shitty new character that killed off an already established character. Yupp – more and more you are revealing your true colors as a shill and as an SJW.

>>9381

>Their importance to the story is independent of whether or not you or anybody else in the audience deigns to care about them.

Importance is not decided its own merit. I.E if a scene isn't overall important to the story – then it isn't.

> It makes sense for Kylo Ren to kill his father and for that to be significant.

Kylo killing his father was JJ stealing stuff from the EU much like how he added some of the stuff from the EU in the extra info that wasn't shown in the movie but that we could read about in the extra material. Kylo killed his father because this is what Jacen planned to do. It wasn't because it was needed, it was just JJ being a shitty writer.

> That justifies it alone and he doesn't need to pass some arbitrary coolness bar before he "gets to" kill Han Solo.

Again no. If a mook kills an established character, then he is defined by that first act. This does not make a main villain nor even a "dragon". Kylo isn't Han Solo's son, the ebil Sith Lord… he is that mook that killed Han Solo like a pussy when said established character was trying to help him.

> That is objectively true whereas your lack of interest and belief in the scene being wasted is just subjectivity.

No, the scene is wasted on a crappy movie.

> He may not be a "good" character yet, but he's indisputably more defined.

No he wasn't. If don't read the extra material, and you haven't read the EU – if you just see this as a stand alone movie – then he is just some guy that is the son of some other guy that just showed up in this movie. BUT, since we know whop Han is – his son still hasn't been defined as Han Solo's son since we just found out about him in this movie. When we found out that Vader was Luke's father, he had already been established as the force choking son a of a bitch from the first movie. And from the first movie we already knew that Vader supposedly had murdered Luke's father… so Vader was already an established character when the "big scene" happened. Kylo just outright tells Snoke in a lackluster scene" Han Solo is my daddy" There was no big reveal, it was just added as an after though – and then in the same movie they act on this. There was no buildup – non at all.

>Naw, the villain exists in the setting and his rationale doesn't have size up with how much fan service his deeds can generate.

Fan service? No, a villains worth is not decided by the fans per say – but it IS decided by his worth in the actual movie.Kylo had non.

> The writer needs to make his actions plausible, understandable, sympathetic, unsympathetic, insane, or whatever based on the desired effect,

Yes and the writer in this case failed because he was a two bit hack and a thief.

> nowhere is it written that he needs to earn some right from the audience to do anything,

You are the only one that keeps on bringing up the idea that a character needs to earn the right from the audience. I was saying that the character needs to earn their place in the story – I didn't say they had to earn it from the audience.

> and thank God because fans are retarded.

Yes, yes ^some fans are.

>He didn't need to be central to the film for his death to make sense or be acceptable.

Outright making a statement makes it true. Yeah, about that… how about you providing at least a counter-objective as to why you think this to be true?

> Which it did.

No, it made him seem like a pussy. But riiigh – when I say "evil", I was talking about main villain material – not mook material… or "this weeks villain that Superman punches in the nut."

>Well, no, it was pretty relevant to the 3 characters involved.

No, it changed nothing. If Kylo hadn't fought them then they still would have left the planet and Kylo would still have been a punk.

It didn't affect the story at all. Yes it affected them a bit personally seeing as how Finn got a nice scar on his back, Kylo now has a hardon for Rey – and Rey becoming more of a feminists wet dream – but it didn't affect the actual story!!

>A nobody who you seem pretty keen on disproving with red hot opinions, bruv.

Because we aren't the only people reading this thread. Retarded statements can't always be ignored – sometimes they have to be answered if only so that the retarded statements aren't allowed to stand there alone unchallenged.