Sign In

DominicCobb

User Group
Trusted Members
Join date
16-Aug-2011
Last activity
18-Jan-2019
Posts
8,233

Post History

Post
#1264600
Topic
Best Explanation Of Mary Sue Issue
Time

yotsuya said:

DominicCobb said:

Shopping Maul said:

I love what you’re saying Rogue (not that I necessarily grasp all of it of course, but I like the vibe of it!) but I would add that attaining the ‘effortlessness’ implied in the Taoist way would (ironically) require effort. Think of it in terms of being a musician. It would take hours of blisters and finger-cramps and listening and learning for a guitarist to be in that zone. No-one’s going to pick up a guitar and nail it first time just because they had their baser thoughts in check. That’s the beautiful thing about the Karate Kid - he had to wash cars and stand like an Ostrich and go through all kinds of stuff to get to that place. Kershner famously said he wanted “something powerful going on in Luke’s soul” and within the (arguably) limited framework of a SW film he achieved that. The SE feels more like bullet points - ‘we need lightsaber fights, we need a Dark Lord, we need a cantina’ etc etc. Any depth to Rey’s experience seems (to me) to being created by the fans themselves rather than by anything JJ and/or Rian are doing.

Well, to use your Karate Kid example I think the idea in the ST is that Rey has essentially spent her whole life waxing cars (whereas Luke is mostly just any old kid, wasting time with his friends between chores at home).

I believe I have said much the same thing before.

As have I. We’re arguing in circles. The way the force works in the films is not narrowly defined so the interpretation that the ST takes is not a canon-betraying one, regardless of whatever Lucas may or may not have said outside of the movies (I was reading the Rinzler ESB book and at one point he suggested stating outright that Luke is a level 2 and he needs training to face the Emperor who’s a level 9 or something - that’s dumb as fuck and should be ignored as it’s not in the movie). The new films should be able to forge their own path.

Whether you like it or not is a different matter. But the approach is justified.

Post
#1264497
Topic
Best Explanation Of Mary Sue Issue
Time

screams in the void said:

that’s the thing though ,she starts TLJ in a place of doubt , " I need someone to show me my place in all this ." In the end ,she has cast that doubt aside .She literally has no time to doubt or question her abilities in the moment where she lifts the rocks or people will die . I am not sure what you meant by it happens off screen . If you are referring to her thoughts , I suppose that could be the case but I don’t see how that is relevant . other than comparing it to Luke expressing doubt about lifting the x-wing . And having her use two hands would be to weaken her character in my opinion .

The moment is at the climax of the film, and should be the climax of her arc. Everything has come to a head here. She’s starts the film with doubt, yes, about her “place in all this.” But her mission throughout the film is to find the person who will save the Resistance. First she looks to Luke, then Ben. Ultimately the truth is that that person is her (which is also the answer to her place in it all). That realization should’ve happened in that spot, with her coming into the scene doubting herself and the fate of the Resistance after her failure with both Luke and Kylo and having no choice but to assume the mantle herself, which she isn’t prepared for. Instead the realization has either happened off screen or simply has yet to happen at all. I suppose Rey coming to terms with that understanding of her role will likely be part of her story in IX.

Post
#1264490
Topic
Best Explanation Of Mary Sue Issue
Time

screams in the void said:

I had a thought about Rey lifting the Rocks at the back of the rebel base on Crait …there are real world examples of people having enough adrenaline flow through them and enabling them to do superhuman feats like lifting cars in an emergency to save a trapped child etc. I believe it was something like this with Rey , everyone she held dear was trapped in that base and in immediate peril so adrenaline rush +the force =superhuman feat x 10. She did not have time to hesitate or think about whether she could do it or not , unlike Luke when lifting the X-Wing on Dagobah in a safe and controlled environment .She believed she could do it , and did not stop to question it . okay , inevitable rebuttal in 3…2…1…

I like the explanation but we’re given no glimpse inside her thought process there. Because it happens offscreen we’re left having to assume what may or may not been going on in her head. Which would’ve been fine we’re she not supposed to be the lead.

(Not to mention, this is the point at which she should be feeling the most doubt in her abilities).

Post
#1264489
Topic
The Force Awakens - The Starlight Project
Time

I think most of the daytime shots work. But the issue is do we understand visually what Nev has in mind - that it’s a bright blue sun? In bright light the desert looks grey or white, like it could be ash. The lighting is peculiar and alien but I don’t think the natural assumption is that the desert would be classically yellow without the unnatural lighting (rather that it’s just grey/white). Which isn’t a problem, until the sun starts to set and the sand changes color, which might be confusing.

Or maybe not?

I wonder what the sunset shot looks like.

Post
#1264487
Topic
Best Explanation Of Mary Sue Issue
Time

Shopping Maul said:

I love what you’re saying Rogue (not that I necessarily grasp all of it of course, but I like the vibe of it!) but I would add that attaining the ‘effortlessness’ implied in the Taoist way would (ironically) require effort. Think of it in terms of being a musician. It would take hours of blisters and finger-cramps and listening and learning for a guitarist to be in that zone. No-one’s going to pick up a guitar and nail it first time just because they had their baser thoughts in check. That’s the beautiful thing about the Karate Kid - he had to wash cars and stand like an Ostrich and go through all kinds of stuff to get to that place. Kershner famously said he wanted “something powerful going on in Luke’s soul” and within the (arguably) limited framework of a SW film he achieved that. The SE feels more like bullet points - ‘we need lightsaber fights, we need a Dark Lord, we need a cantina’ etc etc. Any depth to Rey’s experience seems (to me) to being created by the fans themselves rather than by anything JJ and/or Rian are doing.

Well, to use your Karate Kid example I think the idea in the ST is that Rey has essentially spent her whole life waxing cars (whereas Luke is mostly just any old kid, wasting time with his friends between chores at home).

Post
#1264485
Topic
Best Explanation Of Mary Sue Issue
Time

RogueLeader said:

Thanks Dom. I agree, there does seem to be an implication of that, but I like that it isn’t ever overtly stated as such, because I want it to be something that is open to interpretation.

I wouldn’t mind further dialogue about it, but in terms of overt statements I completely agree. Much better when vague, mysterious and open to interpretation.

That is interesting to me. A lot of people talked about how the line, “This will be begin to set things right.” was an indirect jab at the prequels, but a moment later Tekka continues saying, “Without the Jedi, there can be no balance in the Force.” Balance in the Force, being a concept introduced in the prequels. Not saying these things were or weren’t intentional, but I definitely like the juxtaposition. I still kind of have a hunch that the title for IX could be “Balance of the Force”, but regardless of the title, I do think this question of balance will be addressed/resolved in some way, especially with the cyclic nature of light and darkness being an apparent theme in the new trilogy.

Yeah I always find it weird when people say TFA shits on the PT or whatever specifically because of that. It’s not an insignificant element to be lifting from those films (far more worth mentioning than say whether or not a TPM pod racer flag is featured at Maz’s Castle).

Post
#1264478
Topic
Best Explanation Of Mary Sue Issue
Time

Good post RL. It definitely seems like the ST and TLJ in particular are implying that less force users = more heightened individual force abilities. TLJ more or less presents the case that Luke cutting himself off from the force (combined with the purge of his academy) created a vacuum in the light side of the force that ultimately lead to Rey’s explosive awakening. Again, this is merely implied, but the suggestion is that her strength is such so that she may balance out Kylo.

Whether IX continues on this potential thread or not, who knows. There is also the rando (Canto) kids throughout the galaxy with force abilities to consider. Abrams has been vocal about the force being a power for “anyone” so I’d imagine no matter which way it goes the film won’t lose sight of that. He also doesn’t seem to care much for excessive exposition so I wouldn’t necessarily expect anything crazy when it comes to deep philosophical musings about the specific agendas of the force through the ages. But he is the one who reintroduced the concept of “balance” so I’d hope for some follow up on that, in some way.

Post
#1264448
Topic
The Random <em>Star Wars</em> Pics &amp; GIFs Thread
Time

Val, for someone trying to ignore me, you sure love bringing me up over and over in a conversation I’m not even a part of. My issues with you are with you alone, and have nothing to do with your thoughts on TLJ (speaking for myself, the fact that we disagree on that film only serves to exacerbate the problem, not cause it; speaking for jason, this conversation has nothing to do with TLJ). If you’re trying to be “reasonable” and “ignore” me, you should actually do it and stop whining about it.

Post
#1264433
Topic
Best Explanation Of Mary Sue Issue
Time

One of the issues with the Mary Sue argument is that many who subscribe to it now look anywhere they can find and contort everything Rey does as evidence to back it up the theory. It hurts the argument to do such acrobatics (just as it hurts the argument to use the term in the first place, as that strikes up a whole different debate).

It’s one thing to say that Rey learns the force too quickly, respective of previous canon portrayals, or that the stakes for her emotional journey are too low going forward. But to nitpick and turn everything Rey does into proof that she is better than someone else is disregarding the actual filmmaking decisions and how things actually play out on screen (not to mention in some cases these arguments involve ignoring, forgetting, or fabricating things that happen in certain scenes).

My point being, I’m sorry I get flippant some times but it can be very frustrating when I want to have a discussion and it feels like when we can’t even agree on the reality of the film we’ve all seen (probably multiple times). It makes it very hard to debate!

Post
#1264348
Topic
Strong Female characters in the Star Wars universe
Time

“Strong female character” is a crap term. It’s overused and is vague enough so as to be a pointless metric. Many take it to mean the strength of the character them self (be it physical, emotional, or intellectual), but what’s far more important when it comes to storytelling is the strength of the characterization. In that regard, the Star Wars films feature shockingly few, but thankfully there has been a concerted effort to add more with each new entry.

Post
#1264135
Topic
Best Explanation Of Mary Sue Issue
Time

Valheru_84 said:

DominicCobb said:

Valheru_84 said:

DominicCobb said:

Shopping Maul said:

I only hope that James Cameron made it plain that anyone who had issues with the political/social overtones in Aliens was a toxic manbaby that couldn’t handle strong motherhood figures…

That actually does sounds like something he would do… but why do assume you’re making a sarcastic comment? I’m not aware of anyone behind TLJ doing that.

Now THIS is pretending…(or you’re the perfect example of head in the sand / living under a rock / etc.)

I’m open to examples if you have them.

Dom, drop the pretence. I know that you know very well from our past discussions and the threads they occurred in, what I and Maul refer to and the only reason I am replying in this case is so that people are aware of the disingenuous game you are playing here.

I can only assume that you are trying to goad me into replying now so that you can demonstrate your powers of “intelligent discussion” in arguing why the hundreds of examples out there that anyone can find with minimal effort are not correct, misunderstood or do not matter due to your infallible opinion.

I will not be drawn into an argument with you which I know will never be resolved, likely need moderation and therefore is pointless. Instead I will get back to discussing the content covered in the video and the other discussion points I’ve already replied to above.

Val

Hey man, if you were worried about looking unintelligent, you shouldn’t have responded to me. It’s not my fault you’re referring to examples that don’t exist.

https://twitter.com/rianjohnson/status/1004783228614406144?s=20
https://twitter.com/rianjohnson/status/1004073917990879233?s=20
https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2018/06/rian-johnson-response-kelly-marie-tran-instagram/amp
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Rian+Johnson+man+baby+quote

Post
#1264074
Topic
Best Explanation Of Mary Sue Issue
Time

Valheru_84 said:

DominicCobb said:

Shopping Maul said:

I only hope that James Cameron made it plain that anyone who had issues with the political/social overtones in Aliens was a toxic manbaby that couldn’t handle strong motherhood figures…

That actually does sounds like something he would do… but why do assume you’re making a sarcastic comment? I’m not aware of anyone behind TLJ doing that.

Now THIS is pretending…(or you’re the perfect example of head in the sand / living under a rock / etc.)

I’m open to examples if you have them.

Post
#1264067
Topic
Best Explanation Of Mary Sue Issue
Time

Valheru_84 said:

TLJ being one step away a number of times from literally having an actor turn to the camera and tell you “animal cruelty is bad”, “slavery is bad”, “capitalism is bad”, “woman dont need men to tell them what to do”, etc. It’s one thing to recognise and witness capitalism in action within the context of the story being told, it’s another for the characters to explain to you via the 4th wall why it’s bad.

I’m an effort to be more reasonable with you, I’d be interested to hear you explain this opinion beyond the hyperbole. As is I can’t figure what the basis in the film is for any of these statements.

Post
#1264062
Topic
Best Explanation Of Mary Sue Issue
Time

NeverarGreat said:

DominicCobb said:

OutboundFlight said:

DominicCobb said:

Shopping Maul said:

I think the difference here is the actual intentions of the filmmakers. For example if I have a problem with the Ewoks, a quick online search will show that Lucas was referencing the Vietnam war. Okay, that might not change my mind, but I can at least see where he was coming from and get a sense of the intention.

So with Rey I might be perplexed at her power levels and how that might clash with my sense of SW canon. If I hit Google what I’ll find is Kathleen Kennedy banging on about ‘strong female characters’. Ewoks as a Vietnam allegory makes sense to me. Palpatine as Nixon makes sense to me. Rey being superwoman because ‘strong female characters’ is nonsense. That’s not storytelling being inspired by politics. That’s politics subsuming storytelling.

I think you’re misunderstanding the phrase and what it means. I’d also be curious to see those Kennedy quotes as I’m not sure what you’re referring too.

OutboundFlight said:

When Rey and Kylo face off for a round two of TLJ, Rey wins off-screen. We have one character effortlessly beating the other twice,

I don’t have a problem with the rest of your post (some of it I agree, some agree to disagree), but this is just plain inaccurate. Rey does not win off screen. They come to a draw with the lightsaber and she runs away while Kylo’s knocked out. That’s not her “beating” him. As for the other win, it clearly was not “effortless,” as she was on the ropes before she used the force.

Although she may have not knocked Kylo out, she was the first one to wake up (or she never said awake the whole time). Regardless Rey was stronger and was awake where Kylo was knocked out. Had she wanted she could have killed him right then and there (and I wonder why the story didn’t lean in on this). That sounds to me like beating.

That’s, frankly, insane. We’re now equating “waking up first” and “not murdering someone in cold blood” with “effortlessly beating someone in battle”? Just like Rey, Luke ran away from Vader in ESB - and he wasn’t even knocked out! Does that mean Luke beat him?

This really gets down to the meat of what we were talking about earlier, in regards to incorrectly evaluating Rey by mere action film standards. Rey’s goal in the throne room was not to kill Kylo. Her goal was to turn him to her side. She didn’t win at all, she literally lost.

You admit that the assumed genre of the movie has a lot to do with whether Rey has won or lost in this scene, yet in the same breath you say that the action genre interpretation is ‘insane’ - a genre that is heavily infused into Star Wars DNA.

From the pure drama or romantic drama interpretation, Rey has definitely lost this fight.
From the pure action interpretation, Rey has at least matched Kylo if not bested him in her recovery.

At the very least, you must admit that the scene sends mixed messages depending on interpretation.

No. Even if this were an action movie the interpretation would be wrong. Rey’s goal is not to kill Kylo, action movie or not. The issue is not genre but people assuming things about the genre - in this case that conflicts are only about who physically bests the other, or that Rey’s motivation is to kill Kylo because that’s the common action hero motivation.

Even in that regard, it’s weird to come away saying that the film is showing Rey is stronger when I feel like the scene is trying really hard to say that they’re perfectly matched? Having the physical capacity to not be knocked out as long is not particularly remarkable, and likely happens off screen so that it isn’t remarked upon. The fact that fans have read into this that she’s beaten Kylo again is what’s insane to me when the film seems to be working to actively not suggest this.

As for “mixed messages,” A scene can accomplish multiple things. Just because Rey has failed her mission doesn’t mean it’s a mixed message that she didn’t also get beat up by Kylo.

BTW, there is no comparison to Luke in ESB. Luke was battered, literally disarmed, beaten, and emotionally shattered. He survived by the thinnest of margins and the scars of the battle, both literal and emotional, dominated the rest of the movie and beyond. Rey is back to her peppy self literally the next time we see her, lending credence to the pure action interpretation of the confrontation.

Kylo’s just fine too, no? Even though he’s been supposedly beaten? The “first” time Rey beat him, he seemed pretty fucked up. Why not this time?

The comparison isn’t to say that they’re exactly the same, just to show why the specific claim of “getting away = beating” is silly. But there is some validity to the comparison. It’s hard to imagine Rey’s failure with Kylo won’t be a part of IX (as for her part in the final scenes of TLJ, there was certainly room for improvement). On the other side of things, let’s not forget Luke essentially did beat Vader. Vader’s mission was to capture Luke and turn him to the dark side, and he failed on both accounts (with the consolation being knocking Luke down a peg and successfully putting some existential doubt in his head).

Post
#1264058
Topic
Best Explanation Of Mary Sue Issue
Time

RogueLeader said:

Shopping Maul said:

This is such an interesting question. I’m only guessing here, but I wonder if a lot of it has to do with a large percentage of the older fanbase being male (given that Lucas was supposedly aiming the films at 12 year-old boys). I don’t have the stats obviously, but it would make sense that a long-term fanbase would be the ones most heavily invested in matters of canon and consistency. It logically follows that a new fanbase (with more females in it) would be more inclined to see the entire thing through fresh eyes and with less dogged adherence to what has gone before. Plus they (the newer female audience) might be inclined to simply enjoy the female representation in the films without being too concerned with the minutiae of Force abilities and such, while the old guard are more obsessed with what has been previously established (in their own minds as much as official canon).

I stress this is mere speculation!

I could see it being something like this. Where a lot of the criticisms clearly aren’t coming from a place of malice, but a different perspective that is taking all of this other stuff into account.

It kind of goes with my opinion with how people view the Force depending on what all Star Wars content they consumed, whether it be just the OT, or grew up with the prequels, played the video games, read the books, or got introduced with the new movies. I think this can have a big affect on how they see Rey, especially too.

I think you’re both right. There’s a lot of factors at play here that may or may not apply to everyone.

Post
#1264052
Topic
Best Explanation Of Mary Sue Issue
Time

OutboundFlight said:

DominicCobb said:

Shopping Maul said:

I think the difference here is the actual intentions of the filmmakers. For example if I have a problem with the Ewoks, a quick online search will show that Lucas was referencing the Vietnam war. Okay, that might not change my mind, but I can at least see where he was coming from and get a sense of the intention.

So with Rey I might be perplexed at her power levels and how that might clash with my sense of SW canon. If I hit Google what I’ll find is Kathleen Kennedy banging on about ‘strong female characters’. Ewoks as a Vietnam allegory makes sense to me. Palpatine as Nixon makes sense to me. Rey being superwoman because ‘strong female characters’ is nonsense. That’s not storytelling being inspired by politics. That’s politics subsuming storytelling.

I think you’re misunderstanding the phrase and what it means. I’d also be curious to see those Kennedy quotes as I’m not sure what you’re referring too.

OutboundFlight said:

When Rey and Kylo face off for a round two of TLJ, Rey wins off-screen. We have one character effortlessly beating the other twice,

I don’t have a problem with the rest of your post (some of it I agree, some agree to disagree), but this is just plain inaccurate. Rey does not win off screen. They come to a draw with the lightsaber and she runs away while Kylo’s knocked out. That’s not her “beating” him. As for the other win, it clearly was not “effortless,” as she was on the ropes before she used the force.

Although she may have not knocked Kylo out, she was the first one to wake up (or she never said awake the whole time). Regardless Rey was stronger and was awake where Kylo was knocked out. Had she wanted she could have killed him right then and there (and I wonder why the story didn’t lean in on this). That sounds to me like beating.

That’s, frankly, insane. We’re now equating “waking up first” and “not murdering someone in cold blood” with “effortlessly beating someone in battle”? Just like Rey, Luke ran away from Vader in ESB - and he wasn’t even knocked out! Does that mean Luke beat him?

This really gets down to the meat of what we were talking about earlier, in regards to incorrectly evaluating Rey by mere action film standards. Rey’s goal in the throne room was not to kill Kylo. Her goal was to turn him to her side. She didn’t win at all, she literally lost.

Post
#1264042
Topic
Best Explanation Of Mary Sue Issue
Time

Shopping Maul said:

I think the difference here is the actual intentions of the filmmakers. For example if I have a problem with the Ewoks, a quick online search will show that Lucas was referencing the Vietnam war. Okay, that might not change my mind, but I can at least see where he was coming from and get a sense of the intention.

So with Rey I might be perplexed at her power levels and how that might clash with my sense of SW canon. If I hit Google what I’ll find is Kathleen Kennedy banging on about ‘strong female characters’. Ewoks as a Vietnam allegory makes sense to me. Palpatine as Nixon makes sense to me. Rey being superwoman because ‘strong female characters’ is nonsense. That’s not storytelling being inspired by politics. That’s politics subsuming storytelling.

I think you’re misunderstanding the phrase and what it means. I’d also be curious to see those Kennedy quotes as I’m not sure what you’re referring too.

OutboundFlight said:

When Rey and Kylo face off for a round two of TLJ, Rey wins off-screen. We have one character effortlessly beating the other twice,

I don’t have a problem with the rest of your post (some of it I agree, some agree to disagree), but this is just plain inaccurate. Rey does not win off screen. They come to a draw with the lightsaber and she runs away while Kylo’s knocked out. That’s not her “beating” him. As for the other win, it clearly was not “effortless,” as she was on the ropes before she used the force.

Post
#1264040
Topic
Best Explanation Of Mary Sue Issue
Time

Voss Caltrez said:

DominicCobb said:

First thing I think you should understand, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with it.

I didn’t say you did.
I worded it that way to underline to you, and other people, that I myself don’t think having political leanings in a film, Star Wars or otherwise, is a bad thing.

Just because others have interpreted it that way doesn’t make it the only “obvious” interpretation. Seems to me more Poe having an issue with authority in general. That they’re both women seems to be interpreting something that may or may not be there. At the very least, you have to agree it’s not in the text of the film, which by definition makes it subtext.

The point is you were saying these interpretations were absurd, when they don’t appear to be.
Everything is up for interpretation, and just because the term “mansplaining” is not used, and other characters don’t actually say, “Hey Poe, you’re ‘mansplaining’ to General Holdo because she’s a woman,” doesn’t mean the films lacks subtlety. Again, you’re isolating individual things, while I’m saying that taken as a whole, the political leanings of the film is very apparent, at least more so than Aliens.

I didn’t say the interpretations were absurd, only the idea that they’re “in your face.” I still fail to see how it’s subtext in one and not the other. There’s more than just anti-capitalism in Aliens too.

“Now it’s worth it” has to do with the theme of “saving what you love.” I don’t see how that is an exclusively left-leaning message, or even all that political a message to begin with.

Again, on it’s own, it wouldn’t. Taken as a whole with everything else in the film, that’s a different story.

Any anti-capitalist sentiment is extremely overstated. Much like how you view Aliens, it’s really more critical about greed and people profiting off war, which is also not that controversial (please show me where anyone says money=bad).

I don’t think I said TLJ was anti-capitalist. Maybe I did, but I thought I was specifically mentioning the “one percent.”

It’s hard to keep track who’s saying what. I’m arguing against the idea that the film is anti-capitalist.

I didn’t say there was nothing there that could be interpreted that way, just that complaints overstated them.

Except I wasn’t complaining about it. I specifically said that I believe that Disney wanted to make the film relevant to modern film audiences, and was successful in doing so.

Again I apologize I guess, not trying to argue with you specifically.

Don’t forget they went there to find the code breaker, who seems to be a good enough guy (Maz lauds him). And Rose’s line is really, like I said before, condemning war profiteers. She’s not saying all rich people suck, just these.

She says “Only one thing gets you THIS rich. War.” The implication is that the extreme rich only get that way through immoral means.
We have different ideas of what constitutes “on the nose” or lack of subtlety.
For example, if Rose screamed out “Die capitalist pigs,” and her and Finn were plotting to overthrow the “capitalist system,” I wouldn’t merely being saying that the message lacked subtlety or was too on-the-nose.

You previously want examples of people explicitly stating things, yet Rose never says “only war profiteers are evil.” She’s goes out of her way to mention the rich elite, which would probably be the Star Wars equivalent of the “one percent.”

I think it’s more complicated than that.

There aren’t many things that gets me stressed out and I can promise you this isn’t one. I love Star Wars and I love talking about Star Wars. This site has been where I’ve done that for years. But the discourse around this film specifically has been exhausting. I’m not upset, just disappointed. For once we were having an intelligent discussion about the movie and then on cue it devolved into the same old tired and silly talking points.

Everyone else seemed pretty cordial until one particular poster came in insulting others.
Right now, this particular discussion with you seems pretty chill and productive.

Apologies, I have a history with one of the other posters that caused my intitial rancor. You just got the residual effects.

Post
#1263991
Topic
Best Explanation Of Mary Sue Issue
Time

Shopping Maul said:

I only hope that James Cameron made it plain that anyone who had issues with the political/social overtones in Aliens was a toxic manbaby that couldn’t handle strong motherhood figures…

That actually does sounds like something he would do… but why do assume you’re making a sarcastic comment? I’m not aware of anyone behind TLJ doing that.

Post
#1263987
Topic
Best Explanation Of Mary Sue Issue
Time

Voss Caltrez said:

DominicCobb said:

The argument is absurd. There’s nothing about TLJ that is overtly political. Everything you mention is as “subtle” in TLJ as it is in Aliens.

No it’s not, but there’s nothing necessarily wrong with that either, if the goal is to have it immediately resonate with audiences now, rather than them discovering these themes years later.

First thing I think you should understand, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with it. Quite on the contrary, if you ask me, TLJ should have been as explicitly political as many are complaining it is. But it’s not, which is what makes the reactionary commentary so ridiculous.

There’s nothing in TLJ that’s has anything to do with “gender inequality” (literally only one reference to gender I can think of). There’s not a single instance of “mansplaining” or the calling out of such. There’s not a single instance of any male having trouble with a female in charge (Poe’s problems with Holdo have nothing to do with that).

Forget that Poe ignored General Organa’s orders, and then creates a mutiny against Holdo, both women.

And about “mansplaining”:
Vanity Fair: “Star Wars: The Last Jedi Offers the Harsh Condemnation of Mansplaining We Need in 2017”

The Washington Post: “…Leia is flanked by an unflinching vice admiral in the lavender-tressed Amilyn Holdo (Laura Dern), who, when called upon, has a deep sense of mission and knows well the painful wages of war. When challenged by a “mansplaining” flyboy like Poe Dameron (Oscar Isaac), she gives no quarter.”

TheMarySue.com: “his first conversation with her is to mansplain how they only have so much fuel left (something she would already have been briefed on) and let us not forget the first thing he does this movie is disobeying Leia’s orders, which leads to the destruction of all the current Rebel Bombers and the death of Rose’s sister.”

Just because others have interpreted it that way doesn’t make it the only “obvious” interpretation. Seems to me more Poe having an issue with authority in general. That they’re both women seems to be interpreting something that may or may not be there. At the very least, you have to agree it’s not in the text of the film, which by definition makes it subtext.

The “animal rights” message is barely anything (animal abuse being wrong is not a controversial or even liberal opinion, not to mention no one in the film even talks about it being wrong we just see it, and on top of that the Fathiers seem to be intelligent which makes this abuse specifically extra bad).

Considering how prominent it was in the film, with Rose and Finn saying “it was worth it” even if the Resistance is doomed, in conjunction with all the other themes, gives the film a more left-leaning tilt than Aliens. Which is fine.

“Now it’s worth it” has to do with the theme of “saving what you love.” I don’t see how that is an exclusively left-leaning message, or even all that political a message to begin with.

Any anti-capitalist sentiment is extremely overstated. Much like how you view Aliens, it’s really more critical about greed and people profiting off war, which is also not that controversial (please show me where anyone says money=bad).

Isn’t there a part where Rose says something like “Only one business in the galaxy gets you this rich.”
Seems to be a criticism of the 1% percent, especially considering that we see all the rich elite drinking space wine while wearing tuxedos and gowns during a time of conflict. I immediately thought of video footage during Occupy Wall Street, of the rich drinking champagne from their balconies and looking down at the people on the streets protesting.

I didn’t say there was nothing there that could be interpreted that way, just that complaints overstated them. Don’t forget they went there to find the code breaker, who seems to be a good enough guy (Maz lauds him). And Rose’s line is really, like I said before, condemning war profiteers. She’s not saying all rich people suck, just these.

The arguments of TLJ being “shove in your face” political are some of the most annoying bullshit I’ve had to put up with talking Star Wars in this past year.

I never said TLJ “shoved” anything in anyone’s face. I agreed with someone else that it was more on the nose compared to something like Aliens. Disney obviously wanted to make Star Wars more relevant to today’s modern audiences, I think they succeeded in their approach.

I didn’t say you did, and I wasn’t speaking directly to you, more just in general about those complaints. I also very very strongly doubt Disney had anything to do with it. If anything Disney would be the ones asking for it to be less political.

How have you had to put up with it? Participating on message forums is voluntary. If it’s getting you that stressed out, take a break from certain topics.

There aren’t many things that gets me stressed out and I can promise you this isn’t one. I love Star Wars and I love talking about Star Wars. This site has been where I’ve done that for years. But the discourse around this film specifically has been exhausting.

I’m tired of the parroting of clunky, poorly thought out talking points. I try not to argue about this movie anymore but the Aliens comparison is particularly apt and really points out the extremely ridiculous double standard some guys apply to their analyses.

There was some nice arguments for and against Aliens handling a female action lead better.
You seem to the be the only one letting this discussion get under your skin while resorting to insults.

I’m not upset, just disappointed. For once we were having an intelligent discussion about the movie and then on cue it devolved into the same old tired and silly talking points. Me being insulting has nothing to do with these things - which I’ve read thousands of times at this point - “getting under my skin”. It’s just me being too tired to spend more of my time trying explain to people who don’t want to listen (not talking about you).

Post
#1263950
Topic
The Sequel Radical Redux Ideas Thread (Radical Ideas Welcome).
Time

RogueLeader said:

huh, that would be cool, a little Scarif like, but I don’t think it is practical.

The autumn Takodana is cool! Love the red leaves. Although it would need to be sporadic, here and there, because of Rey’s line, “I didn’t know there was this much green in the whole galaxy.” Which is why I suggested making D’Qar autumn, but yeah, it would be more noticeable with Takodana since she actually goes into the forest. And I guess that line doesn’t matter if you cut it, but I really like that line personally.

I think you could probably get a way with a couple or so non-green trees in the wide shot, and then show some more later without stepping on Rey’s line. For her even without it being entirely green it still would make sense to say it (plus you could also of course argue that the line isn’t just referring to the color but the plant life in general).