Sign In

Ranking the Star Wars films — Page 148

Author
Time

TV’s Frink said:

AllAboutThatSpace said:

In general I think my enjoyment of a Star Wars movie is in inverse proportion to the number of planets in it.

I don’t care how you rank any of these films, I really enjoy this method of ranking them.

It works! ROTS has all the planets.
That’s not really my criteria but it’s a good guide. I honestly feel bad that I instigated a whole lot of dumping on Rogue One. I like it fine. I think it’s the weakest of the Disneys, but I think that’s quite a high bar so far.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

dahmage said:

and i fail to see how they are any less relevant than K-2SO, Saw, or Bohdi.

Bodhi at least is the one who defected, tried to communicate with Saw Guerrera, and helped the group to infiltrate Scarif. Not a lot, true, and after the Jedha scenes his relevance is pretty small, but I do understand his appearance in the movie. I liked him, but more could have been done with him.

I did not like K-2SO, since I saw him as the robotic equivalent of a disabled person, as most of the comedy surrounding him is about his inability to understand the context of the moment (example: when Cassian tells him to keep fixing the stolen ship) and making inapropiate comments. There are some shades of this in OT Threepio too, but Threepio is more of a coward and a fish-out-of-water character, rather than a robot with complete lack of emotion-related programming, which seems to be the case with K-2SO. Case in point, if you replace K-2SO with a human, would you laugh at the jokes?

Saw… a wasted potential, personally. He may have been a pretty decent villain or antihero. But then you see that his brain erasing monster can fail to wipe a person’s memory, and he diminishes as a character. Still, there was some potential there.

and it sure seemed like you singled them out because you don’t like the idea of possibly-homosexual characters (this is open to interpretation, i don’t think anything official has stated this by the way).

Sorry but you completely misunderstood my previous comments. What I criticise is that they did not make their homosexual relation more explicit, and that they went to the tired idea of making them a tragic couple where one of them dies and the other is unable to cope with the loss of his lover. I did not criticise that they’re gay. Nor I have a problem with Lando being pansexual.

if you don’t like movies with a team of characters like this, then fine, nobody can convince you to like something.

Nor I am trying to convince others. This isn’t an important conversation, it’s just a bunch of people expressing their opinions.

AllAboutThatSpace said:

Is there anything you do like?

I like Bloodline from the nuEU a lot. I like some Star Wars games.

I do understand what you were trying to say, but I fail to understand how my attitude is different from others, specially since I don’t tend to attack others for their tastes (I have made the occasional joke about the PT, sure, but Frink is much worse than me at this) or have a passive-agressive attitude. My only complain here is that there was no reason for Frink to write a comment that only serves to a) put him as a better person than me, and b) open hostilities. If he (or you, or others) don’t find my contributions interesting, that’s okay. Not everything every user here writes is interesting to me. But unless he or others have some serious problems with my attitude (or unless I do some really shitty action), I don’t see any reasons for Frink to write that comment. That is all.

Author
Time

darthrush said:

But Baze? Seriously? All I know about him is he is the cool guy with the big gun…literally that is all we are given.

Han wasn’t a fantastic, complex character in Star Wars, and yet he worked there. Of course, the context is different (SW is a pastiche and a well made “B-movie”, while R1 is darker and more serious), but sometimes all you need is a cool guy with a big gun, and in that way Baze works despite his very little screentime. I also think his few lines were really enjoyable and funny. He could have been given more scenes and more importance in the movie, but his personality and actions are good.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

GZK8000 said:

But unless he or others have some serious problems with my attitude (or unless I do some really shitty action), I don’t see any reasons for Frink to write that comment. That is all.

I find your comments about Baze and Chirrut’s relationship, and your comparison of K2SO to a disabled person, to be in poor taste. At best.

Sorry you don’t like getting called out on it.

Author
Time

TV’s Frink said:

GZK8000 said:

I did not like K-2SO, since I saw him as the robotic equivalent of a disabled person

WTF

I thought you didn’t want to read my comments anymore, but okay, here’s my explanation.

Generally speaking, the comedy about K-2SO is about:
a) K-2SO doing something “bizarre” and “superhuman” (like holding a grenade until the last second)
b) K-2SO delivering “funny” lines (“That won’t be necessary”)
c) K-2SO being unable to understand the context in question (when the characters don’t want to speak, for example); sometimes, it may be that K-2SO repeats the same line a few more times than “needed”, or he says something inappropiate, whatever.

Now, it’s one thing to make an occasional joke about a character missing a point, doing something inappropiate, etc. Sometimes we do some mistakes that we later found embarrassing (Threepio interrumpting Leia and Han kissing), sometimes we say lines that are funnier than we thought, fine. However, with K-2SO, most, if not all his comedy, is about this. It’s about a character not understanding the expectations that the others have in their mind, a character been always criticised for saying inapropiate stuff even although he seems to be completely unable to comply with these expectations, all the time. So it’s not that K-2SO is a rude, inmature robot, rather, it seems K-2SO can’t really act according to what the others expect all the time, and rather than the other characters understanding this limitation he has, they react negatively.

Since K-2SO is a robot, in this case, it seems the robot lacks the appropiate programming. But my point is, had K-2SO been a human character, the comedy would have been essentially the same. Who doesn’t laugh at Homer Simpson’s stupidity? Therefore, I found K-2SO related comedy ableist, and I hated that.

Author
Time

GZK8000 said:

Sorry but you completely misunderstood my previous comments. What I criticise is that they did not make their homosexual relation more explicit, and that they went to the tired idea of making them a tragic couple where one of them dies and the other is unable to cope with the loss of his lover. I did not criticise that they’re gay. Nor I have a problem with Lando being pansexual.

I will back off my criticism of this part of your comments. You should have said this the first time.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Regardless of how it doesn’t even make sense to think of K2SO as a “disabled” person, I find it kind of reprehensible that K2SO being the equivalent of a disabled person makes him unlikable. There are a lot of physically and mentally “disabled” (I don’t like that label) characters in cinema and television that are very likable if not iconic. Forrest Gump, Geordie LaForge, Rocky Balboa, etc. etc. An actual robotic equivalent of a so-called disabled person is Data from TNG, who is often considered to be an analogy for the struggles that autistic people deal with when trying to understand social cues and interaction. If K2SO actually was a robotic “disabled person” then that may have made him more likable, or at least interesting.

EDIT: To be clear, I did right this before seeing your explanation a couple posts up, so bear that in mind.

The Person in Question

Author
Time

GZK8000 said:

Since K-2SO is a robot, in this case, it seems the robot lacks the appropiate programming. But my point is, had K-2SO been a human character, the comedy would have been essentially the same. Who doesn’t laugh at Homer Simpson’s stupidity? Therefore, I found K-2SO related comedy ableist, and I hated that.

I don’t really understand the conflation of stupidity and ableism here either. K2SO doing stupid things doesn’t make him disabled.

The Person in Question

Author
Time

TV’s Frink said:

I find your comments about Baze and Chirrut’s relationship, and your comparison of K2SO to a disabled person, to be in poor taste. At best.

Sorry you don’t like getting called out on it.

Frink, I know what you’re saying, but you’re completely misunderstanding me. I am not saying “I don’t like K-2SO because he’s like a disabled person” or “I don’t like Baze and Chirrut because they’re gay”. What I criticise is the comedy that is at the expense of K-2SO (which is similar to the comedy made at the expense of disabled people), and that the only way Disney developed the Baze-Chirrut relationship was to fall in the problematic “tragic couple” trope, since it’s almost always the only way gay couples are represented on media. Baze and Chirrut deserved way more than that.

If I expressed myself badly, I apologice, it was not my intention.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

I thought the football-player-in-Flash-Gordon was supposedly the stupidest conversation here right now, but Disney treating K2SO like a disabled person beats it hands down.

Author
Time

moviefreakedmind said:

GZK8000 said:

Since K-2SO is a robot, in this case, it seems the robot lacks the appropiate programming. But my point is, had K-2SO been a human character, the comedy would have been essentially the same. Who doesn’t laugh at Homer Simpson’s stupidity? Therefore, I found K-2SO related comedy ableist, and I hated that.

I don’t really understand the conflation of stupidity and ableism here either. K2SO doing stupid things doesn’t make him disabled.

He can’t be disabled since he’s a robot, but my point is that the same comedy that makes K-2SO “funny” is the same comedy that makes disabled characters “funny”. It’s not a problem that is limited to Rogue One.

I never laugh at Homer Simpson’s stupidity, that’s my point.

Author
Time

Both the disabled and gay complaints revolve around the idea that the filmmakers actually depicted K2SO as disabled and the other guys as gay when I don’t think either was the case. I certainly didn’t interpret any homosexual elements to Rogue One, and I don’t remember any humor being based on mental disability.

The Person in Question

Author
Time

GZK8000 said:

moviefreakedmind said:

GZK8000 said:

Since K-2SO is a robot, in this case, it seems the robot lacks the appropiate programming. But my point is, had K-2SO been a human character, the comedy would have been essentially the same. Who doesn’t laugh at Homer Simpson’s stupidity? Therefore, I found K-2SO related comedy ableist, and I hated that.

I don’t really understand the conflation of stupidity and ableism here either. K2SO doing stupid things doesn’t make him disabled.

He can’t be disabled since he’s a robot, but my point is that the same comedy that makes K-2SO “funny” is the same comedy that makes disabled characters “funny”. It’s not a problem that is limited to Rogue One.

I never laugh at Homer Simpson’s stupidity, that’s my point.

But stupid characters aren’t disabled either. That conflation is far more offensive than whatever happened in Rogue One.

The Person in Question

Author
Time

moviefreakedmind said:

I certainly didn’t interpret any homosexual elements to Rogue One

Like I said earlier, it was left open to interpretation, and it’s reasonable to interpret it either way.

Author
Time

K-2SO may not have been conceived as a disabled character, but people find him funny for the same reasons thy find Homer Simpson’s “stupidity” funny, or use the r-word. It’s a bigger problem beyond anyone’s conscience and intentions.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

moviefreakedmind said:

GZK8000 said:

moviefreakedmind said:

GZK8000 said:

Since K-2SO is a robot, in this case, it seems the robot lacks the appropiate programming. But my point is, had K-2SO been a human character, the comedy would have been essentially the same. Who doesn’t laugh at Homer Simpson’s stupidity? Therefore, I found K-2SO related comedy ableist, and I hated that.

I don’t really understand the conflation of stupidity and ableism here either. K2SO doing stupid things doesn’t make him disabled.

He can’t be disabled since he’s a robot, but my point is that the same comedy that makes K-2SO “funny” is the same comedy that makes disabled characters “funny”. It’s not a problem that is limited to Rogue One.

I never laugh at Homer Simpson’s stupidity, that’s my point.

But stupid characters aren’t disabled either. That conflation is far more offensive than whatever happened in Rogue One.

I’m pretty sure I’ve never heard this complaint about Homer Simpson. Not once. And supposedly I’m the biggest SJW on the site.

Author
Time

moviefreakedmind said:

But stupid characters aren’t disabled either. That conflation is far more offensive than whatever happened in Rogue One.

I’m using “stupidity” as a synonym of disability here. I’m not speaking of individual actions that could be considered “stupid”. OT Threepio seems to do some “stupid” things, but with K-2SO almost everything he does is “stupid”.

Author
Time

TV’s Frink said:

I’m pretty sure I’ve never heard this complaint about Homer Simpson. Not once. And supposedly I’m the biggest SJW on the site.

I did not want to speak about my complains about K-2SO since I know I will be accussed of being a SJW.

Author
Time

GZK8000 said:

K-2SO may not have been conceived as a disabled character, but people find him funny for the same reasons thy find Homer Simpson’s “stupidity” funny, or use the r-word. It’s a bigger problem beyond anyone’s conscience and intentions.

I don’t think so. Stupidity is a very real phenomenon. It’s not the same thing as disabled people. I think all intelligent people that find stupidity funny or use the “r-word” are well aware of that. Also, “disabled” is an overly broad term that could referring to any number of completely different disabilities.

The Person in Question

Author
Time
 (Edited)

GZK8000 said:

TV’s Frink said:

I’m pretty sure I’ve never heard this complaint about Homer Simpson. Not once. And supposedly I’m the biggest SJW on the site.

I did not want to speak about my complains about K-2SO since I know I will be accussed of being a SJW.

I don’t think the term SJW should be a pejorative. I believe it’s not asking for much to ask that we show respect to other people who’ve committed no crime other than being different than us, purposefully or not. I have a high-functioning daughter for God’s sake.

And I am completely baffled by this complaint.

Author
Time

TV’s Frink said:

I don’t think the term SJW should be a pejorative.

I also share your view, but that’s how it is used.

I believe it’s not asking for much to ask that we show respect to other people who’ve committed no crime other than being different than us, purposefully or not. I have a high-functioning daughter for God’s sake.

I know that. And when you were banned after you reacted against another user who said the r-word (wasn’t DrDre?), I was with you. And that was at a time when I already had many problems with your general attitude. But I thought it was a dirty move to use your past actions to diminish your reasonable criticism, because your daughter and other disabled people are not guilty of being different, and they should not suffer violence for being different.

And I am completely baffled by this complaint.

Fine. This is not the first time I see people seeing some forms of ableism and denying others. It also happens with many others types of violence and oppresion. After all, some Asperger people think of themselves as better than other autistic people. So even in the disabled community there are some shitty views and attitudes (that does not mean Asperger people does not suffer ableism; they do).

I know I’ll never convince anymore, so I honestly prefer to not speak of this topic anymore. I knew people would say I’m exaggerating, that I’m just a SJW that wants to ruin everything, so… Whatever. I gain nothing from continuing this particular conversation.

If you don’t want to read my comments anymore, do whatever you want. I just say that, if your rude comment was because you didn’t find my comments enjoyable, there was no reason to be so rude. If it was because you misunderstood me, then no problem, sorry for the confusion.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

This is a pretty wild and overly long debate over a robot that is just yet another lug headed out spoken comic relief character. These archetypes exist in genre movies, big deal. People like that exist. They’re not mentally damaged or anything. They’re usually not very funny either. Real life isn’t Star Wars.

Yub Nub for life