On the Starkiller Base and the Emulation of Iconography

Spoilers for THE FORCE AWAKENS lie ahead     

        All art, ultimately, contains some aspect of emulation. We seek to create new forms of things we've already seen, whether it be musical call backs to songs we've heard, or interpretive dance referencing animal movement. Film also contains much of this, with many filmmakers creating homages to films that impacted them over their lives or just appealed to them aesthetically. With regards to STAR WARS, this points outwards towards other films, as well as inwards towards itself. George Lucas has often stated his influences for STAR WARS and explained his implementation of those things. While they make direct references to their original works, ultimately he re-contextualizes those things so that they work organically with the story he wanted to tell. With regards to pointing to itself, he had various elements present in all of the films ("I've got a bad feeling about this", "May the Force be with you") , and even those things work well in the moments they exist, not merely serving as call-backs to earlier films, but wholly organic lines. 
        In my review of THE FORCE AWAKENS, I mention that the weakest part of the film was its insistence on calling back without finding an organic way to integrate those older elements into the whole. The largest instance of this, in every sense of the word, was the Starkiller base. The more obvious reason for its existence in the film is as a call-back to the Death Star from the OT. Then one could factor in that it serves to suggest that the First Order has such incredible arrogance (or such a short memory) that they are willing to build something that has, essentially, been destroyed twice before by a (comparatively) ragtag bunch of rebels. I don't think these reasons really tread water, though. 
        Now, I will begrudgingly concede that the destruction to the small village could be seen as a sort of character motivation for destroying the Starkiller Base, but I mostly lean away from that due to the fact that, besides the basic empathy one would feel at seeing  the horror of people being killed, there wasn't much motivation built from that. It's not as though we followed Poe Dameron's character throughout the majority of the film, seeing his character develop and experience the events of the film. He's in, then out for most of it, then back for a bit before disappearing again, only to strike the final blow at the end. Oscar Isaac does a great job with the character, but there isn't much on the page for him.
        "Well, what of Finn?" you may ask. "He was there and he certainly had motivations for wanting to stop the Empire." Again, I know he was present at the massacre at the beginning of the film, but how does his character ultimately resolve? He engages Kylo Ren at the end of the film and is seriously wounded and then knocked unconscious. That doesn't necessitate the Starkiller's existence.It doesn't hinder his journey in any way. Again, John Boyega does a killer job as Finn, and his performance is all sorts of silly, endearing, and somewhat poignant, but what's on the page is a bit flat. 
        The point here is that there is no major character reason for destroying the Starkiller. Luke had all the reason in the world to do so with the Death Star, though. For one, it was the major symbol of the Empire's power. Not only could they oppress you, but if you stepped out of line they would simply destroy your planet (which they demonstrated by destroying the planet of Alderaan). Secondly, this same Empire killed all the family he knew. Aunt Beru, Uncle Owen, and Obi Wan Kenobi were all killed by these people, arguably destroying Luke's life. Even more, while on route to Alderaan, Luke saw the debris from its destruction, and he knew that millions upon millions of people were killed.  So, for him, destroying the Death Star carried all sorts of weight. It was ultimately a powerfully cathartic moment for him, and was a through-line for the whole film. This goes further, though. The Death Star was a major motivator for Leia, as Alderaan was her home.  
        "Wait just a moment. Starkiller was going to destroy the base of the Resistance. So, that's a pretty  important reason to run off and destroy it!" you may exclaim. Yes, well, there's a problem there. See, by that point the movie had already told us that the First Order wanted the map to Luke that was contained inside of BB-8. Even more, they knew BB-8 was with the Resistance. So, they were going to destroy the planet that held the thing they were looking for. They would end up destroying the very thing needed to prevent the return of Luke, one of the few people who could really do something to the First Order. That certainly seems extraordinarily stupid.  
        Literally every event that occurs on the Starkiller base didn't need to happen on the Starkiller. The fact that the Starkiller looks surprisingly Hoth-like meant that it could have been any random snowy planet or area with a large military instillation. The star system that is destroyed isn't even a destination any of the characters travel to. Yes, it's important to the Resistance, but by not tying any character motivations to it (as in they have to travel there for some information important to the story) it is stripped of any major dramatic impact it may have. 
        When it comes right down to it, the Starkiller base is like a tumor for THE FORCE AWAKENS. It points to the cancer that lies within the heart of the film's story: over-reliance on iconography rather than effectively using character motivations for drama. There's nothing wrong with looking back and giving thematic nods to what came before, but when it seems that the film is relying upon ONLY that, there's a big problem.