It wasn’t retconned, it’s pretty ambiguous. There wouldn’t even be anything for ady to do about that.
the only real Rebels suggestion should be to put the Ghost into the space battle.
It seems likely that the new show will be about [redacted]. At first I was pretty disappointed by this, mainly because I want the new show to be about all new characters (and one of these existing ones I don’t care much for). But then I had the thought, what if this isn’t going to be the only new show? I’d be pretty okay with this concept if we had an additional animated show running alongside it.
By [redacted] do you mean Ezra?
By [redacted] I mean Sabine and Ashoka looking for Ezra. I’ve actually come to like both Sabine and Ezra (the former might be my favorite character on the show), but I’ve never really liked Ashoka. In fairness, that’s mostly in regard to TCW where I basically just found her to be annoying, she’s better in Rebels. But it’s still frustrating if the new show is about two existing characters looking for a third. Plus, it’d be nice if we could move a bit away from the Jedi stuff, which I liked well enough in both shows, though it feels like it’s time to move on to something else.
Still, the premise certainly presents interesting opportunities (it’s the perfect time period), such as perhaps finally exploring the “Unknown Regions” that have been mentioned a few times. Interesting to wonder too if the war is actually over at this point, they definitely suggested as much but there’s still room in there (like how they mentioned the defeat at Endor, but not Jakku).
Of course, nothing has been confirmed yet.
It seems likely that the new show will be about [redacted]. At first I was pretty disappointed by this, mainly because I want the new show to be about all new characters (and one of these existing ones I don’t care much for). But then I had the thought, what if this isn’t going to be the only new show? I’d be pretty okay with this concept if we had an additional animated show running alongside it.
We do. It’s called The Freemaker Adventures. =P
Ha, tried it, not for me (also not canon).
The Star Wars Show shows off a deleted scene!
Good news:
The time code is outside the image.Bad news:
The effects are unfinished, so it would take a lot of work to make it useable.Perhaps other deleted scenes are in better condition, if they’re not effects heavy.
It’s a nice scene but probably unfixable for any fans. It’s one of the few settings in the movie with such heavy background compositing though, off the top of my head I doubt too many of the other scenes will be in this kind of shape.
Nothing’s unfixable. 😉 If this is a scene people want to use I think it could be done. By me or someone else.
It absolutely can be improved (by fixable I mean professional quality). There are certain things that’d be real tricky without resources though, mainly the background replacement.
Yeah, it wouldn’t be easy and it wouldn’t be flawless. I’m mostly worried about all the rotoscoping you’d have to do, and the hardest part is probably Phasmas armor which they enhance digitally to get the right reflections, hence all the red tracking dots on her.
Yup, exactly.
Personally I’m not sure I consider the scene worth the work, I don’t feel a huge urge to put it back in.
I quite like the scene, it’s a nice little moment for both Finn and Phasma, but ultimately I’d be very surprised if it doesn’t totally kill the pacing of that sequence. Plus, the final Finn/Phasma moment is already pretty great anyway.
It’s pretty good, at least it fleshes out Phasma a bit more (but for what?). But the “rebel scum” line doesn’t feel as good here.
It fits in very nicely with the Phasma novel and comic book. Ultimately, in the context of the films, her personality doesn’t matter too much though. After IX, we could be left wanting this scene back (if say Phasma shows up again and/or Finn tries to turn other stormtroopers), but for now I think it’s an okay miss.
And on the “rebel scum” line, absolutely, it’s a lot less powerful when Finn is laying down, looking up at her and simply blasts her away.
It seems likely that the new show will be about [redacted]. At first I was pretty disappointed by this, mainly because I want the new show to be about all new characters (and one of these existing ones I don’t care much for). But then I had the thought, what if this isn’t going to be the only new show? I’d be pretty okay with this concept if we had an additional animated show running alongside it.
The Star Wars Show shows off a deleted scene!
Good news:
The time code is outside the image.Bad news:
The effects are unfinished, so it would take a lot of work to make it useable.Perhaps other deleted scenes are in better condition, if they’re not effects heavy.
It’s a nice scene but probably unfixable for any fans. It’s one of the few settings in the movie with such heavy background compositing though, off the top of my head I doubt too many of the other scenes will be in this kind of shape.
Nothing’s unfixable. 😉 If this is a scene people want to use I think it could be done. By me or someone else.
It absolutely can be improved (by fixable I mean professional quality). There are certain things that’d be real tricky without resources though, mainly the background replacement.
Yeah, it wouldn’t be easy and it wouldn’t be flawless. I’m mostly worried about all the rotoscoping you’d have to do, and the hardest part is probably Phasmas armor which they enhance digitally to get the right reflections, hence all the red tracking dots on her.
Yup, exactly.
Personally I’m not sure I consider the scene worth the work, I don’t feel a huge urge to put it back in.
I quite like the scene, it’s a nice little moment for both Finn and Phasma, but ultimately I’d be very surprised if it doesn’t totally kill the pacing of that sequence. Plus, the final Finn/Phasma moment is already pretty great anyway.
The Star Wars Show shows off a deleted scene!
Good news:
The time code is outside the image.Bad news:
The effects are unfinished, so it would take a lot of work to make it useable.Perhaps other deleted scenes are in better condition, if they’re not effects heavy.
It’s a nice scene but probably unfixable for any fans. It’s one of the few settings in the movie with such heavy background compositing though, off the top of my head I doubt too many of the other scenes will be in this kind of shape.
Nothing’s unfixable. 😉 If this is a scene people want to use I think it could be done. By me or someone else.
It absolutely can be improved (by fixable I mean professional quality). There are certain things that’d be real tricky without resources though, mainly the background replacement.
The Star Wars Show shows off a deleted scene!
Good news:
The time code is outside the image.Bad news:
The effects are unfinished, so it would take a lot of work to make it useable.Perhaps other deleted scenes are in better condition, if they’re not effects heavy.
It’s a nice scene but probably unfixable for any fans. It’s one of the few settings in the movie with such heavy background compositing though, off the top of my head I doubt too many of the other scenes will be in this kind of shape.
A video from a channel called “Geeks and Gamers” is not terribly inviting (which is to say nothing about the video’s title).
Again, the movie completely bypassed the bargain theater in it’s final weeks. What the heck, Disney?
I don’t think it’s hit the bargain theaters yet.
It seems like I accidentally only invited Dom, let me try again.
sup
You have all been added to my p.m. thread.
First topic:
Should we treat those with bad punctuation like people?
Weird how this is your first post on this site with proper punctuation,
Whatever’s going on in your guy’s private threads makes no sense to me. Maybe you should all stop being in private threads?
This is a good idea.
#ROTJCIRCLECHOKE
oh boy, replying to quotes with quotes gets really confusing, i should stop posting in here. I am not even sure what my goals are. am i posting to be funny? am i posting to cure world hunger? am i posting to make fun of people who aren’t posting?
Dom sayeth:
(in my opinion and from my perspective of course, though I would tend to think this should go without saying).
Depends on the statement. If I say this thread isn’t about the Oscars…that’s kind of accurate but mostly not true. If I say this thread isn’t about Syria, that’s definitely accurate. Whether something “is about” something sounds like a factual statement.
Nothing is factual when it comes to art, especially when you’re talking about what something “is about.”
It is possible to be mistaken. Not all is so relative. In any event, whether art is about X doesn’t mean an objection to element Y is not well founded.
Do you like arguing in circles? I don’t much care for it.
Dom sayeth:
(in my opinion and from my perspective of course, though I would tend to think this should go without saying).
Depends on the statement. If I say this thread isn’t about the Oscars…that’s kind of accurate but mostly not true. If I say this thread isn’t about Syria, that’s definitely accurate. Whether something “is about” something sounds like a factual statement.
Nothing is factual when it comes to art, especially when you’re talking about what something “is about.”
At first I thought Ridley’d forgotten the necklace, but after watching it again I caught it.
A shame it’s not more prominent, but wonderful and seamless work nonetheless.
Oh damn, didn’t even catch that. Sneaky, well done.
I am so confused and so conflicted right now. And because of that I might have taken the worst decision of my life. I feel like I want to blow up. I’m so frustrated, desperate, distressed. I hope things turn out to be ok. And I know my problem is extremely minor compared to most problems in the world and in this very thread, so sorry for “wasting your time”.
No problem is too small or a waste of time if it causing distress like this. We’re here for you.
Maybe it’s just poor casting and some sloppy writing in an otherwise well made film? You can have a great actor that’s totally wrong for a certain role and have a movie fall apart because of one scene.
Yeah, I think the issue is mainly that while Armie Hammer is actually perfect for the part, he just looks a little too old.
I’m just saying the objection is reasonable. I agree with many of your points, Dom. For the record, I don’t find the assertion, “that’s not what the movie is about,” to be persuasive. If one sees a thing in a movie (or any art), that’s their view of it. Art doesn’t happen in a vacuum and everyone attends with their own perspective. Trying to downplay one element because it’s not central is a non-sequitur.
I believe I touched on this. Art has meaning, whether intentional or not. I’m just saying, from the perspective of someone who’s actually seen the movie and how it portrays the relationship, that that’s not what it’s about and that’s not the effect the film has (in my opinion and from my perspective of course, though I would tend to think this should go without saying).
DominicCobb said:
It isn’t until the end when it’s revealed that the parents decided to just let it happen (and we don’t see this decision making process, only the end result).We know no such thing. In that final “speech”, Elio asks his father if his mother knows, and he says he doesn’t know if she knows or not. What is strongly suggested at the end is that they both knew about it and hadn’t even discussed it.
I think you’re right actually, my bad, but point more or less still stands, we don’t know what’s going on in the heads of the parents. You assume they are 100% on board and that that’s unrealistic, I’m just saying I bet their feelings are probably more complicated than that, but this isn’t their story and we don’t see their perspective.
I should add that I was totally fine with everything in the movie until near the end when Elio’s parents are happily putting him on the bus for that trip with Oliver. It was only then that I found myself saying “wait a minute… wha?”. And that speech… “am I talking out of turn?” really? Who’s the parent here?
They know that, sexual or not, Elio’s relationship with Oliver has grown into something powerful, and think that allowing him the chance for some closure via this trip will be good for him. You don’t have to think they’re great parents or whatever, that’s not really important, but I don’t think their reasoning is impossible to understand (especially for the father, who doesn’t want to get in the way of his son having an experience he was never given the chance to have).
As I’ve said, their purpose in this story isn’t to be the overbearing parents of most stories like this, as that part is played by Elio’s assumptions of them. Ultimately they serve as a support system for his heartbreak in the end (the idea being that love and loss is inevitable, and they want to allow it to play its course naturally without getting in the way at a critical juncture).
I am sorry if I gave the impression that everyone who liked the film is a perv… obviously that isn’t the case, as most people love the film. Only that there were lots of creepy looking people in the cinema when I went. I’d like to presume there was no such intent, but as more and more problematic behaviors in Hollywood are being exposed, I couldn’t help but wonder.
I like to think that most people in the world aren’t pedophiles, and that counts for Hollywood just as much as anything. Hollywood is throwing out its dirt right now, which obviously makes it seem dirty, but it isn’t anymore than any other industry (if anything it’s only proving that at its heart it isn’t, because it’s actually trying to do something about it). Just cause Kevin Spacey tried to diddle a 14 year old doesn’t mean we should be suspicious that everyone making movies is a perv.
The penultimate piece of the puzzle has been delivered by Sir Ridley. I’m extremely happy with the result.
Very nice, he got that hint of blue in there.
Sorry I said I would do this but then forgot about it. Thank god for Ridley.
Whether this is “abuse” is debatable – there are those who think that any sex between an adult and a minor is abuse, whether consensual or not, and regardless of who was the pursuer. There are those who think it is a grey area (probably most think that, including me). And, there are those who think the law should be a lot more permissive.
However, I found the movie’s dealing with this issue to be manipulative (to the viewer). By making the characters seem SO different in age, and by making the parents SO approving and hands off - while being portrayed as highly educated and enlightened, it made me wonder exactly what the movie’s message was supposed to be. The guy was a guest in the parents’ home, and was pretty rude and aggressive. And he was doing their son. It is very, very strange that they didn’t even question whether it was “ok”, or whether their son was even ok with it. Is the message that this is how parents should be? Is that really good?
Other similarly-themed stories include the parents being livid - or at the very least worrying, regardless of whether or not the story sympathizes with the protagonists.
Concern about the messaging of the movie sounds reasonable.
I think we all have a sense that it could be more inappropriate if the ages were farther apart, and especially if the protagonist were younger. Kevin Spacey was accused of abuse of a 14 year old when he was 24. I saw him routinely called a pedophile. His “I’m a gay American” statement outraged many people, not only for trying to deflect from what he did, but for playing into a stereotype of gay men being especially interested in minors.
Even if the relationship in the movie were portrayed in such a way that there was not a scintilla of taking advantage, the concern about parental approval/encouragement seems valid. It would be weird to see a father delighted about a 24 year old man being involved with his 17 year old daughter.
This debate touches on something bigger, I think. And that’s to what extent a movie is serving as some sort of propaganda (for lack of a better word) or merely telling a story where we can judge the characters and actions but still enjoy the movie for what it is. It’s difficult because movies push a certain point of view. If you think a behavior (such as approving parent, or adults involved with minors) is entirely wrong but in the context of the movie you’re supposed to find it wonderful, how do you not have a problem with the film itself?
I have no views on this movie except I haven’t seen it and probably won’t.
I’ll just state outright my argument and be done with it, this has gone on too long and I fear people aren’t really getting what I’m saying.
To begin, I think the legal age of consent should be 18 (with some exceptions like close in age or preexisting relationship). I don’t think that all relationships outside of these boundaries are inherently unhealthy and creepy, but a line needs be drawn somewhere, and this is the place. None of this really has much to do with the film and what it’s portraying.
My first post on this topic mentioned that the 17/24 age difference was on the sketchy line, but not egregious (if you can’t see the difference between a 14 and a 17 year old, and an unwanted advance vs a wanted relationship, I don’t know what to tell you). I also said that this might be a casting issue (Armie Hammer doesn’t look 24, although he’s great in the part). I also considered the fact that maybe they should have made Chalamet’s character 18. All this to say, these are things that got in the way of the point, which is to say, an adult having a sexual relationship with a minor was not the point.
Nowhere in the film is the age difference even mentioned. The movie is not about statutory rape and how it’s great. The idea that this is some sort of NAMBLA propaganda film is ridiculous, and the suggestion that most of its fans are pedophiles is absurd and offensive. Whatever the impression some people get when they see the film, it is quite obvous that promoting sexual relationships with minors was not at all the intent from the filmmakers.
As for the parents not caring, that’s just not what the movie is about. It’s Elio’s story from his perspective. Throughout the film he pulls himself away from the relationship precisely because he thinks his parents wouldn’t approve. It isn’t until the end when it’s revealed that the parents decided to just let it happen (and we don’t see this decision making process, only the end result). In the context of the film itself, they do this because they ultimately know it will be a powerful and transformative experience in Elio’s life, and they know that as a person with homosexual tendencies living in the 80s, he may never be allowed an opportunity like this again.
If there’s a “propaganda” point that the film is trying to get across, I guess you could say it’s promoting that rascally gay agenda that everyone is so worried about. Now obviously a film’s effect and meaning are more than simply the filmmakers intention, and I’ve argued this before. So yes, there is a fair argument to make that this film is inadvertently promoting ephebophilia or whatever. But that’s basically like when I argue that the Phantom Menace has racist caricatures and everyone yells at me. Thing is, just because it does doesn’t mean George Lucas was a racist or TPM is racist propaganda or the people who like it are racist. It doesn’t make the film disgusting or despicable or not worth watching. It’s not even really that big a problem with the movie. You just sorta have to roll with it, just like I said about CMBYN a few pages back.
Anyway, I’m not really interested in explaining a movie to people who mostly haven’t seen it again, so don’t expect me to jump into this Shape of Water debate.
I was quite satisfied with the finale, really liked it. I love that they brought back you know what from you know which episode.
I must say though if the end was a set up for the next series, I’m not sure how I feel about that.
I think most here would agree there’s nothing inherently wrong with the idea of an SE.
Whether this is “abuse” is debatable – there are those who think that any sex between an adult and a minor is abuse, whether consensual or not, and regardless of who was the pursuer. There are those who think it is a grey area (probably most think that, including me). And, there are those who think the law should be a lot more permissive.
However, I found the movie’s dealing with this issue to be manipulative (to the viewer). By making the characters seem SO different in age, and by making the parents SO approving and hands off - while being portrayed as highly educated and enlightened, it made me wonder exactly what the movie’s message was supposed to be. The guy was a guest in the parents’ home, and was pretty rude and aggressive. And he was doing their son. It is very, very strange that they didn’t even question whether it was “ok”, or whether their son was even ok with it. Is the message that this is how parents should be? Is that really good?
Other similarly-themed stories include the parents being livid - or at the very least worrying, regardless of whether or not the story sympathizes with the protagonists.
If he was 18 would we even be having this conversation? Genuinely curious.
That is so easy to say. So, we move the age back to 17… then a case comes up with a 16-year-old and we say “if it were a 17-year-old would we be having this conversation” etc. So, are you saying there shouldn’t be a line drawn anywhere?
I’m not saying that I think we should change the age of consent (though I should point out again that in most places it is younger than 18, which isn’t to say I agree with that). I’m not really talking about our current society at all. I’m just talking about the movie and how that isn’t really the point at all.
You didn’t find the parents’ behavior at all unusual?
Depends on your definition of unusual.