[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
I'm not a boycotter but I don't bite on these limp narrative baiting attempts. Who in their right mind would think that movies starring white men are BO poison? When has that ever ever been even slightly true?
Solo was neither great nor terrible. I don't imagine Disney want's to put articles out there that say "people aren't seeing it because the last one sucked" so here comes the alternate reality displacement theories. If boycotters are to blame for anything, it is equally fanatic articles like these.
[deleted]
Lol.
I understand your point. I feel for the boycotters and understand their effort. But I agree with you. They won't smell the coffee. They will deflect the "reasons" for the flagging box office and turn it around on the "haters." Just like when JJ claimed that those who hated TLJ were simply misogynists. (sic) They'll just keep on making tons of money anyhow via new fans and one's that will like anything SW with or without some social agenda.
The boycotting will have some impact but not on their sjw lean. Perhaps KK will get canned but her replacement will be the same. It will be interesting to see how it pans out. Interesting and sad.
One thing's for sure, though. They'll have to do better than this article for purposes of deflection. Jayzuss Krayst, it makes no sense.
[deleted]
Just like when JJ claimed that those who hated TLJ were simply misogynists.
Ok, sure. Close enough.
shareC'mon. He didn't say it straightforward, but that was obviously the message.
shareNo, ignoramus, it was not. He was asked about people who react negatively to having more women in Star Wars, and that's what he responded to.
He wasn't talking about the general audience reception to the movie at all, so you're literally just inventing whatever fiction you want it to say.
It clearly was.
He stated that people "who have problems with women" would "find a enemy in Star Wars". This is a stilted way of crying "misogynists hate Star Wars!!!"
Of course, p->q is not the same that q->p, but the insult is crystal clear.
OMG :) . He compared tough Leia with the "Female first" (this isnt about equality at all) trash called Disney Star Wars. How obvious a message have to be before you get it .) ?
shareIsn't the hit Deadpool 2 starring a white man?
Most of the people writing articles about the Solo flop are idiots who don't understand Star Wars or the fans. I wouldn't take them too seriously.
[deleted]
It sounds like you saying ALL future Star Wars movies should star only white males. Correct me if I'm wrong.
shareIt's a fair point though.
The anti-SJWs complain that Star Wars is too anti-white-man and too pro-woman. So Star Wars releases a movie with two white male leads as Lando gets pushed aside for Beckett, contains a parody of an SJW, ends with a woman as the double-crosser, and is released earlier than usual giving those who did not like TLJ a decent movie in May instead of December. Yet the movie receives the biggest boycott campaign in the history of Star Wars by the anti-SJWs.
It's like the children are complaining they didn't like the TLJ veggie burrito they had for dinner, so Disney offers them a dessert, but the kids ignore it and stomp their feet.
Btw, Deadpool 2 is seeing some major drop-off. It had a shit ton of sequel hype behind it too.
Also, I'm interested in your reply to this. You kinda just disappeared:
https://moviechat.org/tt0120915/Star-Wars-Episode-I-The-Phantom-Menace/5b0a20336675d80014cace1b/lowest-rated-Star-Wars-according-to-imdb?reply=5b0dbb61cdf39b00143d5dac
I haven't disappeared. I wanted to check out something before replying. I'll reply Friday or Saturday.
Why should fans see Solo when it's mediocre? The whole point is Disney is making crappy movies which is why people are boycotting. I wish some of the fans would be smarter in how they criticize because their message is becoming confused by overusing the SJW term instead of focusing on their dissatisfaction with the writing.
Avengers is mainly white male actors and so is Ready Player One. It looks like most of the top 20 2018 movies have had white males leads.
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/yearly/chart/?yr=2018&p=.htm
BTW, there's nothing wrong with box office hits starring females and/or nonwhites.
I agree Solo's low box office is partly because TLJ wasn't that great. But outside of it's low performance with casuals, it's getting the largest boycott campaign from anti-SJW Star Wars fans that any Star Wars movie has received, and Disney needs those Star Wars fans in order to thrive. You say they shouldn't be taken seriously, and I agree that would be better for everyone, but the odds of it being ignored are likely zero. This could easily cause KK and Disney to double down on making a more woman-friendly Star Wars. That's been KK's agenda the entire time. She's not a true Star Wars fan. I wouldn't say she's pushing an SJW agenda either. What she's doing is making Star Wars more enjoyable for all women. Solo was the first Disney Star Wars film to go against that grain... and it's the first to get boycotted by the hardcore anti-SJW Star Wars fans. The future of Disney Star Wars is being told to rest firmly in the comforts of KK and Rian Johnson. Yikes.
shareYou misinterpreted what I wrote:
1) I'm boycotting, too!
2) I never said boycotters shouldn't be taken seriously. See #1!
3) "What she's doing is making Star Wars more enjoyable for all women."
No she's not! There are plenty of women boycotters, too.
4) It's not a boycott of only hardcore anti-SJW fans. There are plenty of hardcore fans who just want good writing and character development with fresh ideas and creative visuals. A quality film that is loyal to the source material aka: SW lore.
I have to use Star Trek (original & TNG) to make my point. (I'm a Trekkie, too.) ST is filled with a liberal agenda, feminism and diversity. Nobody complains about it because it's done well with good writing and well-developed characters. Same with Lucas Star Wars. You didn't notice because it was subtle.
The problem with SW isn't the politics; it's the horrendously bad writing. I know plenty of fans who are complaining about the writing - not the politics which they probably agree with including myself.
5) If your only complaint is about one woman starring in one trilogy, then you confirm Abrams criticism that you're a woman-hater and Disney will continue to double-down. The Solo movie stars a white male and it's crap. The problem isn't whose starring in it, it's the quality that's bad. Solo is a POS. "You're alone so I'm giving you the name Solo." Seriously? If you ask for a better written film, then how can Disney argue with that?
6)KKs agenda is Disney's agenda which is to expand the target audience (females, China, nonwhites, young people) and release 2-3 SW films each year creating a sizeable profit for Disney. KK & co. are also arrogant and assumed SW fans could be pushed around.
Good news! Solo is expected to make a mere $28 million for the second weekend. Pardon me while I continue to do my happy dance!
You're kinda outing yourself as being too argumentative here. When I wrote "What she's doing is making Star Wars more enjoyable for all women," you should be smart enough to understand I'm stating she is trying to make Star Wars more enjoyable for other women like herself who are not true Star Wars fans.
I never said it was a boycott of only anti-SJWs. I'm merely pointing out the boycott specifically from those anti-SJWs. You say they should be ignored. They can't be ignored or the shit hits the fan... as we're seeing with Solo. That's like saying your particular boycott should be ignored as well.
I hate to say it, but you're in the boycotting minority here. Most of them are doing it because of their belief of a pro-woman agenda. You're pretty much the one person arguing the writing is bad, but the politics of it are fine. Then you're taking that position and attributing it to the majority of boycotters. Sorry, that's just not the case. You're practically alone.
It's not being argumentative if I'm trying to clarify what you misinterpreted in my post.
"I'm stating she is trying to make Star Wars more enjoyable for other women like herself who are not true Star Wars fans. "
Are you saying that women are not true Star Wars fans?
I disagree with the adjective that you used: enjoyable. A more accurate adjective is to say she's trying to "appeal" to female moviegoers by introducing strong female characters. It's about money. Females make up 50% of the population. That's a lot of money! Disney only cares about their profit.
"You say they should be ignored."
I don't want any boycotter ignored. Are you insane? I said that presenting an argument based in misogyny or bigotry isn't going to get Disney to change the direction of SW. Didn't they just fire racist Roseanne even though she had a highly rated TV show?
"your particular boycott"
There is only one boycott.
"You're practically alone."
Nonsense. Personally, I know many hardcore fans of diverse backgrounds: white, black, Hispanic from teens to 50s, male and female, liberal and conservative. All loved either Rogue One or The Force Awakens or both. Both movies star a woman. Total non-issue. Any problem had to do with rehashing from the OT, or how certain characters were handled like Kylo or Han.
The Last Jedi was the turning point that devastated everyone including me. All enthusiasm for future SW films especially Episode 9 is gone. The crap script, broken SW lore and the goal to destroy the OT characters to make room for the poorly written new ones are responsible. I only know 2 people who saw Solo while most hardcore fans decided not to go. Most aren't even in any boycott. They just lost hope for good SW movies.
Pro-quality youtubers:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fmqfUm4F8Ec&t=10s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UeLqmeyXK_M
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jjkD5mK0ZMQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QJRw56cOVw&t=424s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZPRuhTFkxc
"Are you saying that women are not true Star Wars fans?"
No.
"I don't want any boycotter ignored. Are you insane?"
Well you did say "I wouldn't take them too seriously." If you're not going to take them seriously when they write articles, you're not going to take them seriously on any other platform, hence they will be ignored.
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fmqfUm4F8Ec&t=10s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UeLqmeyXK_M
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jjkD5mK0ZMQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QJRw56cOVw&t=424s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZPRuhTFkxc"
After a quick glance, it's interesting that the comments that get the most likes are about KK/Disney's SJW agenda. I guess it's just a coincidence though, and not actually a reflection of what the people against this movie actually feel.
I don't appreciate my comment deliberately being taken out of context. The full comment:
"Most of the people writing articles about the Solo flop are idiots who don't understand Star Wars or the fans. I wouldn't take them too seriously."
I am specifically addressing the OP's concern reflected in the title about "Are stories about white men box office poison." I already addressed that in a previous post showing that most of the box office successes have been movies starring white men. I don't like columnists who try to create a false issue to get clicks.
When you have the time, I suggest you actually listen to the youtubers who make it clear their main concern is the quality. Even when they mention SJW, they decry the writing and character development. They're also very entertaining.
You appear to be unaware that Lucas is a Liberal with a "SJW agenda" too which was all throughout SW.
"Lucas explained politely as I listened contritely. Anakin Skywalker is a promising young man who is turned to the dark side by an older politician and becomes Darth Vader. “George Bush is Darth Vader,” he said. “Cheney is the emperor.”
Lucas was on his way to Europe and didn’t have time to elaborate in person. But he sent me this message confirming our conversation: “You know, Darth Vader is really a kid from the desert planet near Crawford, and the true evil of the universe is the emperor who pulls all the strings.”"
https://douglasernst.blog/2010/08/14/george-lucas-exposed-as-the-real-palpatine-maureen-dowd-silent/
"Most famously, Lucas got some heat for giving Anakin a line of dialogue that was almost verbatim from a Bush speech. Anakin says to Obi Wan before his ultimate betrayal, “If you’re not with me then you’re my enemy.” Bush’s line was, ““You’re either with us or you’re with the enemy.”
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/star-wars-is-more-political-than-you-think_us_590b663d
Most SW fans didn't pick up the "SJW politics" because he was more subtle than KK.
"You appear to be unaware that Lucas is a Liberal with a "SJW agenda" too which was all throughout SW."
I'm fully aware of it, which I've tried to tell these cretins to no avail. The problem is we are living in a post-Sarkeesian world where any step away from male-centric tropes leads to the Sargon of Akkads and Milo Yiannopouloses of the world voicing their opinions louder than everyone else, which causes more people to come to their side than to the other.
Watching those youtubers is pointless, because I'm talking number of opinions where you're focusing on quality of opinions. Yes, I know the anti-SJWs lack in quality opinions. I agree wholeheartedly. But for every single youtuber you post that bases their criticism of Star Wars on non-SJW related issues, I can find ten youtubers that base them on SJW-related issues. It would be excruciatingly mind-numbing to have to do so, so hopefully it doesn't come to that and we can just agree to disagree.
"The problem is we are living in a post-Sarkeesian world where any step away from male-centric..."
Except The Force Awakens with a female lead was wildly successful! Even Rogue One was very successful. The backlash started not because of a female lead, but that idiot Johnson spitting on Star Wars.
This is where logic comes in:
Lucas is a Liberal. Kennedy is a Liberal.
Lucas makes good films w/SJW agenda. Kennedy makes bad films w/SJW agenda.
Fans watch Lucas films. Fans boycott Kennedy films.
Fans boycott Kennedy films because they are bad.
SJW comments have to be read in context after you listen to the videos. "SJW-related issues" are still related to the films quality. They believe quality is linked to Kennedy's SJW agenda. Most people are not saying they hate well-written women like Leia. They're saying they hate badly-written women like Rey. (I liked Rey until Johnson turned her into a full-fledged Mary Sue.) That's why I prefer they don't use the term SJW because then you get Abrams calling them women-haters and doubling down.
I think we're basically saying the same thing in a different way. I don't mind agreeing to disagree if we're not.
Here's my logic.
Lucas made a bad Star Wars prequel. Fans gave him a pass.
Lucas made another bad Star Wars prequel. Fans gave him a pass.
Lucas finally made an ok Star Wars prequel. Fans admitted it was the best of the prequels.
Kennedy makes a better Star Wars sequel. Fans praised it.
Kennedy makes a good Star Wars story. Fans praised it.
Kennedy makes the most polarizing Star Wars movie. Fans are split nearly down the middle.
That's the real issue. It's polarizing. It's not a 'some liked it, some kinda liked, and some didn't' situation like we had with TFA. There's almost no middle ground with The Last Jedi. People didn't like it that others liked it, so they got louder and louder to try to swing its polarity over to their side while those who liked it kept relatively quiet. This lead to a boycott of the next film... something we didn't see with the first two prequels because they weren't polarizing. They were just bad.
There's also the fact nobody asked for Solo, and it had a mountain of production issues including firing the two directors that were supposedly trying to make it more funny. It's just fodder for the haters to whine about Kennedy's tactics and bring her politics into it. But then, Solo comes out and it's actually a decent Star Wars movie up there with Lucas' third prequel. But it's too late. You've already started your boycott... because The Last Jedi was polarizing.
Who knows. Maybe there isn't a boycott. Maybe Solo is just the perfect storm of bad press and timing. But when I hear boycott, I'm going to assume it's for the entire franchise under KK's management. It will be funny if after the failure of TLJ, Star Wars IX does the same numbers as TLJ. All this talk of a boycott will have surrounded just Solo... the one Disney Star Wars film with a white male lead.
Two points I want to make:
1) There is a difference between a person's enjoyment of a movie and a movie being good.
Movie enjoyment is subjective. There is no right or wrong. It's like the saying about music: One person's music is another person's noise. You enjoyed The Last Jedi which is fine. I hated it which is fine too.
A movie being good is more objective because there are standards concerning writing, directing, acting, etc.
It's possible to enjoy a bad movie and hate a good one. This depends on personal criteria for movie enjoyment.
2) Different goals existed for The Phantom Menace and The Last Jedi.
Lucas' goal was adding to the SW lore by telling Vader's backstory, showing us the Republic and Jedi at their height.
Lucas was experimenting with new CGI SFX and characters and digital filmmaking. Jarjar was an experiment that unintentionally went wrong.
Johnson's goal was destroying Luke as a hero in order to have him replaced by Rey. He also destroyed continuity either accidentally or purposely by contradicting 40 years of storytelling including how the Force works and how Jedi are trained.
There are numerous errors in continuity, story & character development which make it seem as if nobody cared.
Both are bad movies. But, it's the destructive goal of Last Jedi that is causing such a violent fan backlash. You don't take what fans loved for 40 years and try to destroy it and appear lackadaisical re: the script and characters.
Here's my take on it. It's not that Rian Johnson destroyed anything, it's that he wasn't a sufficient storyteller to tell you the Grey Jedi direction the franchise was going. He left half the audience scratching their heads thinking Luke died over nothing. He implied it instead of showing it that Rey and Kylo were both moving to the middle. It only seems like destruction of what you've known for 40 years because it wasn't done properly.
It's kinda like how Lucas was accused of destroying Star Wars by turning it into government politics about senators and viceroys. People assumed that franchise would be all about Anakin slowly turning to the dark side throughout three films, but instead it was three films about how Palpatine changed the government and Jedi order so he could take power, with Anakin just floating around until, in a flash, he's Vader killing younglings. I see exactly what Lucas was doing with it, but it needed a better director to give us an emotional impact from the other characters, especially Anakin, but we only got it from Palpatine.
Lucas and Johnson most likely came to the same conclusion that they can't keep doing the 'rebel wins, empire wins, and rebel wins' again or it will get stale. Lucas' way around it was three Palpatine movies, and Johnson's way around it is the Grey Jedi. The prequels would've worked if Lucas was a more competent director/writer who could give the characters an arc and to express themselves. The Last Jedi would've worked if Johnson was a more competent storyteller to show us the Grey Jedi narrative instead of merely suggesting it.
Lucas "...I have moved that treasure trove (his treatments for 7, 8 & 9 and SW EU) to Kathy and have complete confidence that she will take them and make great movies..."
Disney/Kennedy dumped both Lucas' treatment and the EU.
Kennedy to Lucas, "The main thing is to protect these characters. Make sure they continue to live in the way that you created them. And the universe of Star Wars continues to grow."
Kennedy killed off Han and Luke. Not before removing their heroism arc. Leia will likely be dead in episode 9.
The above is the destruction that I'm referring to.
SW ST and standalones have no growth because they repeatedly take characters, dialogue and scenes from the OT. No character development or change within the SW universe.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5TGJquhP1s&t=149s
Luke wasn't a gray jedi. A gray uses both light and dark. He was afraid of the darkside.
"...'rebel wins, empire wins, and rebel wins..."
Totally disagree. It was always Lucas intention to show how a democracy becomes a dictatorship and is even in the 1977 SW novelization.
The prequels main story is how Anakin became Vader. Subplot is how a democracy becomes a dictatorship. Perhaps the fans wanted a popcorn movie. I enjoyed the story, but then I read the book was looking forward to it.
Disney was afraid to move the story forward so they chose to return the story to the OT era. That's cowardice. Decades pass yet all vehicles look the same!
At least in Lucas EU time moves forward which is why I consider it canon.
Luke wasn't a Grey Jedi, but they wanted him to be the catalyst for it. He was distanced from the Jedi due to his experience with Kylo who is also on the path to becoming a Grey Jedi. Luke's whole attitude was that the Jedi needed to end. It only makes sense for that to rub off on Rey, but it's only implied and not really shown. The scenes are all well directed by Johnson, but his storytelling is awful. It's like he has an idea, then changes his mind, then changes it back again, leaving the final product terribly paced with no feeling of accomplishment.
Han's death is a bit different. Ford would only do the movie if they killed him, something he asked for in Return of the Jedi but was denied because of bad test screenings.
The third prequel is about how Anakin became Vader. The first two really aren't. I mean, you can try to nudge it a bit by him killing the sand people who murdered his mother. But the first two movies are really just him floating around in the Star Wars universe at different ages waiting for Palps to advance the story.
"Disney was afraid to move the story forward so they chose to return the story to the OT era."
For TFA, sure. JJ and Kasdan rushed the new TFA script after the previous guy said he needed an extra year and half to finish it. If Arndt had completed it as scheduled, we would have gotten something different. 26 months for a script though? Yikes. I'd have probably tossed him out too.
"That's cowardice."
Well, it's safe. TFA was good for the most part, but was criticized for being too similar. TLJ and the prequels were bad for the most part because they were too different from the OT. In fact, TLJ was so different you view it as destruction. Damned if you do, damned if you don't, I guess.
Kennedy's objective isn't to tell a story. It's to make money for Disney. She mistakenly believes the original characters needed to be destroyed in order for young people to accept the new characters. Have you listened to anything she said? All the fans are middle-aged white men. Females didn't like Luke because they can't relate to a male. He needs to be replaced by a female. They don't want the older fans, just new younger ones.
She's a fool. Johnson and Abrams are both her sycophants. Kasdan was over-rated as a writer. Most of the Empire Strikes Back was written by Lucas before he hired Kasdan.
The fans stupidly chased the true genius, Lucas away.
I don't know why you're paying attention to the nonsense that Johnson wrote when he's completely clueless about SW lore. He knows nothing about the balance of the Force, how Jedi are trained, the history of the Jedi and what a gray jedi is.
Lucas knew Han's death would be an unneeded distraction and a cliche. He was right not to do it.
All 3 prequels are about how Anakin became Vader. Lucas wanted to show an innocent good person (Ep. 1) becoming a hero (Ep 2) and then finally falling to the dark side (Ep 3). It was to humanize him.
Yeah I agree the sequels are rush jobs. I've been saying all along they're rushing them out with out caring about quality. But I reiterate that Disney wanted the sequels to take place in the OT time line because they know fans like the OT best. It's safe. That's why Leia & co are the rebels again. The Evil Empire is back. X-wings and Y-wings and death star all the same nonsense. Stormtroopers look the same. Lucas said things should look different to reflect a new era.
If you don't take risk, then there is no creativity. Disney is afraid to take risk because of the 4 billion dollar payout which is why we're getting rehashes.
Lucas was a risk taker and the EU covers variety. Old Republic, Mandalorian Wars, Jedi Sith Wars, Clone Wars, New Republic Era, first Sith appearing,etc.
Of course Kennedy is there to make money. That's why I laugh when people say she's there to push a pro-woman agenda. Disney has done the research. They know white male leads aren't doing as well overseas as they used to. We've had strong female leads before here in the US. We can handle it too. As long as it's a good movie, the neanderthals crawl back in their caves. It just sucks that they hijack the conversation when it's a bad movie.
There's no winning with Lucas or Johnson. I don't see the point of focusing on Lucas when JJ and Gareth did fine. There was no risk with TFA because it was a quick script whose goal was to set the universe and nothing more. It didn't need to be any more complicated. Rogue One was the second film in the Disney universe, and it took a chance, and succeeded. TLJ was the third film, it took a chance, and failed.
And now you think they should bring back Lucas?... because he's a risk taker? And because the one guy, Johnson, dropped the ball? C'mon, man. You know as well as I do that this whole thing could be fixed just by getting a better storyteller than Johnson. Focusing on getting rid of Kennedy and bringing in Lucas are both dead ends.
As long as JJ remains on board with IX, that part of the problem is taken care of. But Johnson's new trilogy is another big problem. That's what they need to fix.
I disagree when you say that Rogue One and The Last Jedi took chances. None of the Disney films have taken chances and they borrowed heavily from the OT. Disney is not adding anything new. Both JJ and Gareth just copied the story and artwork that Lucas created 40 years ago.
One of the main reasons I can enjoy the prequels is because visually there is so much new art as well as a new story.
What would've happen if you replaced these writers with Disney hired writers during the middle of their storytelling? Would the quality and creativity remain the same? George R. R. Martin - Game of Thrones; J. K. Rowling - Harry Potter, J. R. R. Tolkien - Hobbit and Lord of the Rings. Of course not!
Lucas needed to finish his story.
I agree with this video that says why Star Wars can't thrive without Lucas.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3lgqNI36usE
I am in no way a hardcore fan of Star Wars, but I like science fantasy genre in general. I watched and enjoyed tremendously the original trilogy.
I found Episode I was bad. So bad I've never bothered to watch Episode II and III because of it. Instead, I just enjoyed reruns of the originals on tv whenever they air them.
I didn't even watch Force Awaken in theater. Episode I is that bad (at least for me.)
However, I heard that TFA was a huge success I gave it a chance when it arrived on DVD. I watched it, and I had a new hope in Star Wars.
Thus I watched Rogue One on theater. After all this time. And really, I like it a lot. Don't get all the fuss with the female leads. I dig badass women in movies; Ellen Ripley, Sarah Connor, Nikita, etc.
So far so good. I was looking forward to see TLJ in theater. However, after there's a big backlash againts the movie, I don't feel like to watch it in theater. I waited the DVD instead.
Thank goodness I waited! TLJ was a cringefest indeed. It was worse than Episode I. So bad I decided that I would never watch any Star Wars movie again in theater. Forever.
That's pretty much where I stand as well. There were elements of TLJ that I thought were interesting, but overall it felt like watching a disjointed prequel.
However, I believe there is no fixing the prequels. Some have tried by cutting Jar-Jar out, but there's not enough good to outweigh the bad.
With TLJ, all they'll need to do is fix the pacing and get rid of the casino side quest. I'd be willing to bet a good future edit of TLJ will have most people on board with it. But it will also remind us how hard they dropped the ball by giving us this theater version.
I enjoyed both Force Awakens and Rogue One too and own both DVDs. There was something traumatizing about The Last Jedi that turned many fans off to Disney Star Wars including me. It didn't respect the Star Wars lore or its fans. Now, I literally can't look at the covers of my DVDs and hate the characters.
I'm not sure if you know that the original trilogy shown on TV is an edited version with many changes by Lucas. A fan restored the theatrical version of the trilogy and can be found as a download. It's called the Harmy's Star Wars: Despecialized Edition.
The thing is Disney isn't giving away veggie burrito's they're *selling* products to customers... if you disappoint customers you can expect that to be reflected is future sales. It's very simple.
And it's interesting that you think 'two white male leads' will appease the anti-SJWs. I'm going to shock you now dlancer but anti-SJWs aren't the ones that care about skin colour and genitalia; anti-SJWs are the ones sick of identity politics dragging us back into the race/gender obsessed past. You can't 'fix' badly written female characters by casting more men in your following movie, and what kind of a bizarrely superficial person do you have to be to think that you can?
"You can't 'fix' badly written female characters by casting more men in your following movie"
You can't fix them by boycotting over politics either.
Also, if you are going to boycott something because of your disagreement in politics, you are still doing it because of your own politics. There's no getting around it.
Of course you can!
If you don't like something - whether it's due to the politics or quality or both - the simplest thing you can do is to stop buying it. What's the alternative? 'I didn't like the last thing you sold me but I have to keep consuming everything else you produce on the off chance it might be better?'.
And as for:
"if you are going to boycott something because of your disagreement in politics, you are still doing it because of your own politics. There's no getting around it"
I genuinely do not understand what you mean. This sounds like you're saying "1 = 1"....?
In order to get better written female characters, you need to boycott lackluster writers... not Kennedy's politics. That's just blatantly obvious. Rian Johnson is the problem here. If you get rid of Kennedy, Rian Johnson could very likely remain because you bitched and moaned at the wrong person, and you've changed nothing.
You said the anti-SJWs didn't care about skin color and genitalia, which implies they don't care about race and gender. There's nothing about Rey that reeks of identity politics. She's just a woman lead in a Star Wars movie. But that upsets the anti-SJWs... because of their politics... not the politics of the movie. Or maybe it's just because Kennedy is outspoken... and they really hate... words? Idk.
Rian is Kennedy's boy and if she goes his trilogy has about as much chance being made as Ice Pirates II.
And C'mon, you don't really think that about Anti-SJWs, surely? The overwhelming number of people critical of Disney Star Wars have no problem with Rey being female, they have a problem with her being awfully written (by men!). And if you don't believe me why did Jinn from R1 get a pass from the misogynists? Were they on their day off? And what about all the other sci fi/fantasy stories with very popular female leads?
Aliens
Buffy
Tomb Raider
Mad Max
Terminator
Underworld
Resident Evil
etc etc
Rey's character is the very *personification* of identity politics. The took Luke, made him female, and then - due to the politics of current year - realised they had to make this new character be perfect at everything or else Salon and the Mary Sue et al would churn out 5000 articles about how misogynistic Star Wars is. Now the big problem with this, isn't the politics itself, it's the affect the politics has had on the art. I don't care about politics in film, they could have made a 37 hour epic where every single male character is emasculated before the female heros blow up Emperor Trump's MAGAStar for all I care just so long as it's *well written*.
But Nu Star Wars is not well written. It's a narrative disaster and a huge reason for that is the infestation of identity politics. There's no way to separate the two.
And btw it was JJ who got this ball rolling, not RJ.
Diversity isn't identity politics. Diversity is done for ticket sales. Not only does it sell here, but it also does surprisingly well overseas. Overseas markets have gotten kinda tired of the typical cliched white male hero, which is part of the reason why Solo isn't being saved by those markets.
JJ was continuing the same liberal film tropes started by George Lucas. The only real difference is Rey is the lead instead of Luke. We've already had two franchises lead by a Luke-type character, one of which turned to the dark side to become Vader. Just within Star Wars alone, it has gotten stale.
There are many legitimate reasons to criticize Solo. It had a mountain of production issues, it was a movie nobody asked for, and it's following the heels of the poorly-done Last Jedi. The problem is there is a subsection of haters who are hijacking those arguments by bringing The Force Awakens and Rogue One, both solid films, into the equation so they can point at KK's agenda and identity politics being the problem.
No man. Get the fuck outta here with that shit. Solo was a film nobody asked for, had production issues that were reported throughout the internet, and The Last Jedi sucked. That's all you need. Quit trying to drag others into your stupid little political agenda while simultaneously trying to pretend you're not part of a political agenda. You aren't fooling anyone, kid.
I'm genuinely finding it difficult to follow the thread of your arguments. I have a feeling you're skim reading my posts and then replying to points I didn't actually make. Which kind of makes this pointless, doesn't it?
You seem to be upset that people are bringing their 'stupid little political agenda' into things where it doesn't belong. Which is exactly how a lot of us feel about Disney's Star Wars. So good, we have that in common at least.
Your argument for Rey being identity politics was just plain stupid. They put a female as the lead, and it ended up working well with ticket sales as their research department predicted it would. Then you went on to say they made her perfect to appease things like Salon. The idea of Force Awakens was to have two individuals with connections to the force that were stronger than what we've seen before. Politics were not required for that type of storyline to exist. But because it centered around the female, and because you are too wrapped up in your own identity politics where Star Wars must always have a male lead, you lost your damn mind over it.
shareThere you go again. You' not arguing against my actual points, your arguing against an extrapolated/fantasy version of my points as they are easier for you to criticise and doing so makes you feel good.
Where did I say Star Wars must always have males leads? You accuse me of losing my damn mind but I'm not the one who apparently thinks they're psychic.
You don't know me, you don't know anything about me or my politics. I live in Scandinavia where it's pretty much illegal to not be a hard core feminist and I've enjoyed plenty of films written by overt feminists that push an overtly feminist message and I enjoy them because they were well written and well made. I didn't have a problem with Jin Erso (other than she was maybe a bit bland) because she was competently written. I do have a problem with Rey because she is badly written. It is my belief that she is badly written, in part, due to the present political climate (though it should be stated that *all* the characters JJ wrote are awful).
Now if you think Rey is well written then fine. If you don't think that Rey's character has anything to do with identity politics then fine. But when you claim to be able to read my mind and just 'know' that I have a problem with Star Wars because they're casting female leads you lose all credibility.
"There you go again. You' not arguing against my actual points"
You said "they had to make this new character be perfect at everything or else Salon and the Mary Sue et al would churn out 5000 articles about how misogynistic Star Wars is" and that is what I'm arguing against.
"Where did I say Star Wars must always have males leads?"
It's not that you said it outwardly, but all it took was the existence of a simple character like Rey with a simple story to make you whine about identity politics, so I inferred it.
"You don't know me, you don't know anything about me or my politics."
But TFA did not require politics to be what it was, and so your complaint of its politics is all I need to know that you are stuck on politics.
"Now if you think Rey is well written then fine."
If only YOU argued that Rey was not a well-written character, as Keelai has done, then I could not be able to argue. If you think it is weak character building to have two incredibly strong force users, there isn't anything I can say because it is a fact that they are strong.
What I have a problem with is you saying it's because there's an agenda behind it even though it's a storyline that is so basic that it could exist in any hero story ever written in the history of hero stories.
Basically, what I want you to do is let go of your feelings. Let the force guide you to the real problems you have with the movie. Don't take the easy road by chalking it all up to politics and agendas. That leads to the dark side, my friend.
"It's not that you said it outwardly, but all it took was the existence of a simple character like Rey with a simple story to make you whine about identity politics, so I inferred it."
You can't 'infer' something that I have already said isn't the case. I've explicitly stated I don't have a problem with females in Star Wars (or other films) and you're deliberately ignoring my comments about R1 and enjoying feminist films as you know it rubbishes your point. You're not inferring anything, you're refuting my own statements about my intent and the only way you can confidently do that (with no other evidence to go on) is to be psychic so congratulations on that.
"If you think it is weak character building to have two incredibly strong force users, there isn't anything I can say because it is a fact that they are strong. "
This is just pointless. Where did I say that Rey can't be strong? You see here you reveal everything about your attitude: you're not listening to what I'm saying, you're just responding to point made up in your head. The point isn't that Rey is strong, it's that she's strong with *no explanation*, with zero effort and overcomes all her problems with consummate ease. This has been written about on these boards ad nauseam and if you think all these thousands of people who think Rey is badly written all have some secret agenda against women (that they just forgot about with R1 and the countless other Sci Fi films with leading female roles) then I don't know what to tell you.
And don't talk to me about letting go of feelings. I'm not the one calling your points 'stupid' or telling people to 'get the fuck out of here'.
Not going to reply any more dlancer because this seems to be a waste of time. My advice to you is to go back through these posts and ask yourself why you need to critique points nobody is making.
"The point isn't that Rey is strong, it's that she's strong with *no explanation*, with zero effort and overcomes all her problems with consummate ease."
Dude, this is where I'm agreeing with you. You're so stuck in that one gear believing I'm over arguing that you even mistake my agreement as an argument. My point was exactly what you just said. By making Rey so strong, you could argue they skipped important story elements, and there'd be nothing I can say about it because you would have a point... Rey is very strong.
Most didn't mind the simple story (It's Star Wars after all), and some were not thrilled with it because they wanted more than simplicity. Then there were those who went full Alex Jones and believed it was part of a political agenda. That's where my argument with you begins and ends.
Now after I've explained how silly it was to whine about some agenda when there are other far more legitimate complaints, and how the simple story of Force Awakens can easily exist without politics, you're pretending as if you never whined about an agenda or politics. Now you're ducking out of the whole thing by pointing to mean words I said. Oh dear. But you're also using me in the third person in hopes someone can drum up a better argument for identity politics than you could come up with. Well, best of luck with that, friend.
People aren't flocking to Solo because it is a boring, uneventful film. It's got very little to do with politics.
It's not a terrible film mind you, but more of a 'I can wait until its out locally' kind of thing.
I see. So first KK destroyed Star Wars and then we should continue her desperate attempts to further kick the dead Star Wars horse.
What an amazing point of view :) .
Solo was getting bashed in production. When they said they had to send the main actor to acting school it was pretty much a done deal that the movie was going to be pretty bad.
shareAn elemental problem with the whole boycott idea is that you can't know if it is worth boycotting for sure until you've seen it. People should've boycotted TLJ but who knew it would be such a goat screw?
I'll watch every SW movie they make except for ones by Rian (if they actually keep him). I don't care what race the leads are.
I was thinking about skipping it, actually, but I wanted to see Carrie Fischer's final film and I wanted to see Luke actually do something. With both Luke and Leia out of the picture now, I have no interest in seeing Episode 9 anymore. It's not some dramatic boycott thing for me. I'm just not interested now.
shareThats not how things work. KK destroyed SW with TLJ. Therefor it doesnt matter what Solo is like. Cause it isnt a SW movie anymore. Cause when you are fooled twice, then theres only guy whom is to blame about for this :) .
shareThe majority of Star Wars fans are white men. Han Solo being a white man is not the issue. The reason Solo is performing poorly is because it wasn't a film Star Wars fans particularly wanted, but once it was announced the fan favorite was Anthony Ingruber. Casting Alden Ehrenreich pissed off many fans, and those pissed off fans are not buying tickets. Also The Last Jedi was a huge disappointment for many fans, and Solo is making it's debut only 5 months later.
Incompetence also has a big hand in this. Disney increased Solo's production cost from 125 million to 250 million by firing the original directors and doing re shoots.
[deleted]
White male movies like Avengers 3 or Deadpoool 2 are poison at the movie box offices :) ? And KK proved that she cant to SW movies. So only real stupid people like to pay for KK spitting in their face! Thats especially stupid when she already spitted three times in your faces (while you paid for that) and then payin a fourth time for it :) .
shareIf this was anyone but Scott Mendelson who had written this I would take it more seriously. The guy is a major feminist and is pretty much against any guy films. I have no problem with feminist leads in films but I also have no problem with male leads. This guy's has problems with anything that goes against the current political climate.
share[deleted]
Noone gives a sh*t about SJW panic mode. Everyone at Disney knows that KK destroyed their franchise which they had to buy for 4 billion dollars. So the boycot was the correct thing to do. Disney even stated already that they will now communicate with the fans. Instead of insulting them (like Yar Yar Abrams, Ruin Johnsons and KK did).
share