Sign In

Jay

User Group
Administrators
Join date
22-Feb-2003
Last activity
22-Jul-2018
Posts
4067

Post History

Post
#1227436
Topic
The Marvel Cinematic Universe
Time

DominicCobb said:

Jay said:
I don’t really care either way. They both said dumb shit and got fired. I don’t think either should have been, but that’s the world we live in at the moment.

I guess my only question is, do you think there’s ever a case where someone should be fired for dumb shit they said?

Sure. If Roseanne had a desk job and she compared a black coworker to an ape, she should be fired. If Gunn made pedo jokes at the water cooler on Monday morning before the weekly staff meeting, he should be fired.

Comedians should have more leeway since our entertainment would get pretty dull if everyone got nervous about saying edgy stuff because they might have their sitcom canceled or lose their HBO special. I think Disney’s ownership of a huge percentage of our entertainment combined with the current outrage culture puts us on the road toward homogenized, “family-friendly” entertainment delivered by milquetoast entertainers.

Anyway, I got burned out on all the comic book movies right around Iron Man 2 (or was it 3?) and I have a lot of catching up to do. Do I need to watch everything in order to understand Avengers or are there any movies I can safely skip?

You could probably safely skip all but the Avengers films and Captain America: Civil War with only a few minor confusing things. Though then you’d be skipping the best ones.

I’ve seen everything up to the first Avengers I think. Haven’t seen Civil War, Thor 2 or 3, Dr. Strange, and some others I’m sure.

Post
#1227407
Topic
The Marvel Cinematic Universe
Time

DominicCobb said:

Jay said:

DominicCobb said:

Jay said:

DominicCobb said:

Also, I think attitudes around jokes of certain kinds have changed dramatically in very recent years, and if Gunn isn’t an asshole (which I don’t know) then he’s actually listened and changed his ways. Which I actually believe is possible for an adult man of any age, but then I’m an optimist.

Pedo jokes have never been cool and his tweets were edgelord junk I’d expect to hear during Xbox Live chat.

If his tweets were racist, we wouldn’t even be having this conversation. Nobody would believe that he’s a better person now.

Well I think pedo jokes have gotten considerably less cool in recent years (though honestly you can still find lots of professional comedic content that still has jokes like that now, not just on Xbox live).

Also, the comparison to racist jokes is more complicated, because not all “racist” jokes are necessarily racist or rooted in racism (with some the target of the joke being racism itself). If they were jokes that displayed that he was racist, then obviously we wouldn’t be having this discussion. But making pedo jokes doesn’t make you a pedo.

So if someone unearths 10,000 race-based jokes on some other entertainer’s social media account tomorrow, you’ll be reviewing those jokes on their own merit and potentially defending them because the jokes weren’t actually “rooted in racism”?

As I’ve stated before, I don’t actually work for Disney.

Nobody said you did. I presented a hypothetical situation and wanted to know how you’d respond in order to see if you’d be logically consistent with the argument you’re making.

Anyway, my point was that racist jokes are on a spectrum that includes “this person is racist” on one end (and no shit making a large number of them probably indicates that). No amount of pedo jokes makes you a pedo though.

(I’m also skeptical of the 10,000 number, not that it matters of course, it’s gross either way).

The 10,000 number is how many tweets he deleted. I’m sure there was some spray-and-pray involved given how quickly he wiped them out.

Did Barr’s joke prove her to be a racist? If you believe her story about not knowing the target of her joke was black (and why wouldn’t you…you’re an optimist), then her joke wouldn’t be inherently racist, her apology would have been sincere, and her firing wouldn’t have been justified. Correct?

If that was an isolated incident for Barr, I’d be on a different side of that particular debate.

Was it an isolated incident for Gunn? He tweeted that garbage for years. How is it that he can post trash well into his 40s and it’s not a pattern of behavior?

As for my “optimism” statement, I would think it obvious what I meant, but I guess I need to explain it to you. As an optimist I believe in general that people can grow and mature. I ultimately don’t really know if Gunn has, but his apology at the very least would seem to indicate so. Barr’s, on the other hand… saying “I thought the bitch was white” months later doesn’t exactly seem remorseful to me.

I wasn’t aware that optimists tended to compartmentalize their optimism into specific areas; you sound more like a realist since you apply your optimism selectively.

Regardless, you’re enough of an optimist to believe Gunn, who posted pedo jokes well into his 40s, can finally grow up, but not enough to believe Barr when she says she didn’t know the target of her joke was black. She made that claim immediately after she got in trouble, not months later, and then issued a more formal and (presumably) heartfelt apology soon after. I haven’t watched the new video.

I don’t really care either way. They both said dumb shit and got fired. I don’t think either should have been, but that’s the world we live in at the moment.

Anyway, I got burned out on all the comic book movies right around Iron Man 2 (or was it 3?) and I have a lot of catching up to do. Do I need to watch everything in order to understand Avengers or are there any movies I can safely skip?

Post
#1227370
Topic
The Marvel Cinematic Universe
Time

DominicCobb said:

Jay said:

DominicCobb said:

Also, I think attitudes around jokes of certain kinds have changed dramatically in very recent years, and if Gunn isn’t an asshole (which I don’t know) then he’s actually listened and changed his ways. Which I actually believe is possible for an adult man of any age, but then I’m an optimist.

Pedo jokes have never been cool and his tweets were edgelord junk I’d expect to hear during Xbox Live chat.

If his tweets were racist, we wouldn’t even be having this conversation. Nobody would believe that he’s a better person now.

Well I think pedo jokes have gotten considerably less cool in recent years (though honestly you can still find lots of professional comedic content that still has jokes like that now, not just on Xbox live).

Also, the comparison to racist jokes is more complicated, because not all “racist” jokes are necessarily racist or rooted in racism (with some the target of the joke being racism itself). If they were jokes that displayed that he was racist, then obviously we wouldn’t be having this discussion. But making pedo jokes doesn’t make you a pedo.

So if someone unearths 10,000 race-based jokes on some other entertainer’s social media account tomorrow, you’ll be reviewing those jokes on their own merit and potentially defending them because the jokes weren’t actually “rooted in racism”?

Did Barr’s joke prove her to be a racist? If you believe her story about not knowing the target of her joke was black (and why wouldn’t you…you’re an optimist), then her joke wouldn’t be inherently racist, her apology would have been sincere, and her firing wouldn’t have been justified. Correct?

Post
#1227363
Topic
The Marvel Cinematic Universe
Time

DominicCobb said:

Also, I think attitudes around jokes of certain kinds have changed dramatically in very recent years, and if Gunn isn’t an asshole (which I don’t know) then he’s actually listened and changed his ways. Which I actually believe is possible for an adult man of any age, but then I’m an optimist.

Pedo jokes have never been cool and his tweets were edgelord junk I’d expect to hear during Xbox Live chat.

If his tweets were racist, we wouldn’t even be having this conversation. Nobody would believe that he’s a better person now.

Post
#1227346
Topic
The Marvel Cinematic Universe
Time

DominicCobb said:

Jay said:

DominicCobb said:

Jay said:

DominicCobb said:

Jay said:

Politics and outrage culture will ruin entertainment.

There’s a way to conduct matters without either completely ignoring things or going overboard.

Where exactly is that line and who defines it?

No two cases are the same and so the idea that everything must be a firable offense or nothing is is stupid. It’s not a matter of there being a definite line with a definite definition, because the definition won’t necessarily apply in every case. This isn’t a math problem.

And just because some people get fired with insufficient reason doesn’t mean we should throw our hands up and saw no one should be fired for anything ever. It just means people in charge have to actually show some care, rather than just pretending they do (and instead being reckless about it).

Who says Disney didn’t exercise care in this case?

Seems to me it’s “justified” when someone agrees with the decision and “reckless” when they don’t. It’s sort of like speeding: everyone driving slower than you is an idiot and everyone driving faster is crazy.

Despite the differences between Roseanne’s circumstances and Gunn’s, their firings are both tied to politically-driven outrage and social media mobs. There are just different politics driving the mobs.

First of all, whether or not I personally agree with this is besides the point I was making, which was in general terms.

Now, as for whether or not I do agree with this firing, my whole point was that each case is different and should be treated differently. So I don’t get the logic of trying to prove my point wrong by saying “you’re only mad when you don’t agree with it!” What I’m saying is it shouldn’t be a binary everyone should be fired or no one should be. So of course I’ll disagree if it just seems like they’re blindly “firing everyone.”

Gunn’s tweets have been in the world for a while, what’s “reckless” is that only now they are firing him. Despite the fact that he’s apologized already, and supposedly has had a fine working relationship with the company. If we are to take Gunn at his word, that his poor taste in jokes are something that are many years behind him now, than this is something Disney should have considered.

You can’t just ignore the differences between this and Barr. Again, my whole point is that everything can’t be treated the same way. The differences are the most important part. If Gunn tweeted a child rape joke yesterday, this would be a completely different story. Part of the reason Roseanne was canceled were that crew members were jumping ship and didn’t want to work with her anymore.

If there are additional factors at play here, it would be nice to know them. As I said before, Disney is sending a confusing message, because on the surface of it they’re essentially suggesting that people aren’t allowed to mature, change, or put any past mistakes behind them (which isn’t to say that every kind of past mistake is forgivable, but again this is where considering each case individually is important).

Where in my first response to you did I suggest it was binary? That it was all or nothing? I didn’t. I suggested, via the question I posed, that if there’s a decision to be made, then there must be a line, and if there’s a line, then it’s up to someone to draw that line.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but you seem to believe that there’s a line that Barr crossed and Gunn didn’t, and that line relates to who that person is today versus who they were in the past. Barr tweeted something offensive recently, whereas Gunn last tweeted something offensive about 6 years ago. That’s a perfectly okay line to draw, and it’s perfectly okay to believe Barr deserved to be fired and Gunn didn’t.

I don’t feel either should have been fired. My line is farther out than your line. I also think that’s okay.

Disney fired both. Apparently, they drew their line more conservatively than you or I would have. It’s their money to make or lose and both Barr’s and Gunn’s employment are at Disney’s discretion. Firing Gunn is only “reckless” if his continued employment wouldn’t have been harmful to their brand. In their judgment, it would have been.

Sure, maybe the guy has changed. He was in his 40s when he made all these tweets, though. He’s a grown-ass man. I think it’s far more likely that he learned to shut his mouth on social media than his sense of humor changed.

I’m not ignoring the differences between Barr and Gunn. However, what they have in common is that their employer decided it would be easier to disassociate themselves from their problematic (there’s that word again) employee and make them go away than it would be to deal with any fallout. That’s the trend that concerns me, and it’s not a politically left or right thing. I don’t want creative people to feel like they have to act as an official representative of their employer at all times.

Post
#1227337
Topic
The Marvel Cinematic Universe
Time

DominicCobb said:

Jay said:

DominicCobb said:

Jay said:

Politics and outrage culture will ruin entertainment.

There’s a way to conduct matters without either completely ignoring things or going overboard.

Where exactly is that line and who defines it?

No two cases are the same and so the idea that everything must be a firable offense or nothing is is stupid. It’s not a matter of there being a definite line with a definite definition, because the definition won’t necessarily apply in every case. This isn’t a math problem.

And just because some people get fired with insufficient reason doesn’t mean we should throw our hands up and saw no one should be fired for anything ever. It just means people in charge have to actually show some care, rather than just pretending they do (and instead being reckless about it).

Who says Disney didn’t exercise care in this case?

Seems to me it’s “justified” when someone agrees with the decision and “reckless” when they don’t. It’s sort of like speeding: everyone driving slower than you is an idiot and everyone driving faster is crazy.

Despite the differences between Roseanne’s circumstances and Gunn’s, their firings are both tied to politically-driven outrage and social media mobs. There are just different politics driving the mobs.

Post
#1227195
Topic
Has Star Wars finally "jumped the shark"?
Time

DominicCobb said:

The idea that Star Wars is “failing” simply because the ST doesn’t have an overarching vision is silly for a million reasons, least of which that 90% of trilogies in existence don’t have that, and most of which that the trilogy isn’t even completed yet.

I didn’t say that’s why it was failing, just that the lack of an overarching vision for the franchise has made a bit of a mess (as evidenced by the vastly different takes on Star Wars provided by the sequel trilogy, in my opinion) and that they might be better served by emulating the Marvel model. And it wasn’t something I suggested they do with the sequel trilogy; obviously they can’t since it’s already two films in.

As for the suggestion that Kennedy is solely going for a random and scattershot approach, that’s not even remotely true. Literally the only new films currently on the roster are two series of movies, both with the exact thing you mention - an overarching creative director.

After two offshoot films by different writers/directors, one of which flopped, and two saga films by different writers/directors, one of which split the fanbase. And the director who split the fanbase was handed this new trilogy.

Sounds like a winning strategy.

Post
#1227164
Topic
Has Star Wars finally "jumped the shark"?
Time

DominicCobb said:

Creox said:

DominicCobb said:

Creox said:

Jay said:

Creox said:

I think it’s interesting there is a thread on SW jumping the shark or/and over-saturation in the same reality that has Marvel just releasing its what?..umpteenth flick about superheroes.

IMO it seems SW fans want their films to be rare events and in reality their wish for more comes with a lot of caveats.

Consumers eat up multiple comic book movies and 10-hour+ series every year. Marvel’s success suggests frequency and over-saturation aren’t the problem.

Not a problem with the MCU for sure but I think that is starting to erode a bit. How SW is different with respects to how fans respond to more content is a bit of a confusing topic for me. I love that there is more content and movies but many do not. I think it’s due to what I already posted. There is a very vocal percentage of SW super fans who look at the OT as sacred texts that should not be messed with in any way. The release of more and more movies (which appears to me to be the only medium that effects these fans) seems to anger them as it dilutes the religion so to speak? Not sure.

That sounds about right. It’s probably no surprise that a certain segment of fans find RO to be the best film they’ve done - a film that does little to expand the narrative beyond unnecessarily plugging a perceived “plot hole” in the original, and fulfilling the ultimate fan service of seeing Darth Vader commit a massacre (something that had simply been implied before). It’s very much a supplement to the OT.

Marvel’s success seems to be the exception rather than the rule. No one else has replicated it. Honestly the reason is painfully obvious - Marvel is a collection of franchises plural, rather than just one singular franchise. If there was a Guardians of the Galaxy movie out every year, it’s no guarantee whatsoever that they would all be a success.

Your last paragraph is spot on I think. I was rattling similar ideas around my noggin while I was posting before. The post Lucas SW is just getting started and with a new trilogy coming out by Rian it appears they will take a more MCU direction with the franchise.

The thing is, while that approach sounds like it could hypothetically work on paper, there isn’t any evidence yet as to whether or not it’s possible. Marvel took multiple franchises and combined them into a mega franchise. Star Wars is a massive franchise, yes, but the question remains if a massive franchise can be split into parts that are each expected to be equal to the whole. There’s really no precedent for that. The closest I can think of is the X-Men films’ Wolverine spin-offs, but even then there are some obvious key differences. Mostly returning actor vs. new actor, but also release date timing. I think the idea that Star Wars could put out a billion dollar movie every single year if they are all universally loved is an incredibly faulty one. Which is to say nothing of the fact that it is probably beyond impossible for anyone to ever to make a new Star Wars movie that is universally loved.

The Marvel movies aren’t universally loved. They’re generally liked enough to keep casual fans buying tickets while catering enough to the nerds to keep them on board. They’re well-written and entertaining with interesting characters. That’s all the viewing public expects from Star Wars and given the depth of the lore, it’s not impossible to deliver.

RO is just an example; success needn’t be measured in billions. Not every Marvel film makes a billion dollars.

The MCU took a lot of planning to pull off, so they’d have to sit down and map out some grand story arcs to do the same with Star Wars. I think that’s the primary reason it’s unlikely to happen. The material is there, but the creative vision to drive it all might not be. Kennedy’s approach of letting random writers/directors take the helm without some overarching story to keep it on the rails is making a mess of things.

Post
#1227019
Topic
Has Star Wars finally "jumped the shark"?
Time

DominicCobb said:

Creox said:

Jay said:

Creox said:

I think it’s interesting there is a thread on SW jumping the shark or/and over-saturation in the same reality that has Marvel just releasing its what?..umpteenth flick about superheroes.

IMO it seems SW fans want their films to be rare events and in reality their wish for more comes with a lot of caveats.

Consumers eat up multiple comic book movies and 10-hour+ series every year. Marvel’s success suggests frequency and over-saturation aren’t the problem.

Not a problem with the MCU for sure but I think that is starting to erode a bit. How SW is different with respects to how fans respond to more content is a bit of a confusing topic for me. I love that there is more content and movies but many do not. I think it’s due to what I already posted. There is a very vocal percentage of SW super fans who look at the OT as sacred texts that should not be messed with in any way. The release of more and more movies (which appears to me to be the only medium that effects these fans) seems to anger them as it dilutes the religion so to speak? Not sure.

That sounds about right. It’s probably no surprise that a certain segment of fans find RO to be the best film they’ve done - a film that does little to expand the narrative beyond unnecessarily plugging a perceived “plot hole” in the original, and fulfilling the ultimate fan service of seeing Darth Vader commit a massacre (something that had simply been implied before). It’s very much a supplement to the OT.

Marvel’s success seems to be the exception rather than the rule. No one else has replicated it. Honestly the reason is painfully obvious - Marvel is a collection of franchises plural, rather than just one singular franchise. If there was a Guardians of the Galaxy movie out every year, it’s no guarantee whatsoever that they would all be a success.

Nobody is suggesting annual Star Wars films with the same characters and story lines. The universe is rife with possibilities. No reason they couldn’t take a page from Marvel’s playbook and have multiple stories going simultaneously with different characters in the same universe. Each set of characters could have a film every few years with staggered releases so we end up with one film a year, but alternating casts and stories. Every five or six years, have a big event film (“saga”) that ties the different stories together. It doesn’t need to be at the same scale as Marvel.

Post
#1226965
Topic
Has Star Wars finally "jumped the shark"?
Time

Creox said:

Jay said:

Creox said:

I think it’s interesting there is a thread on SW jumping the shark or/and over-saturation in the same reality that has Marvel just releasing its what?..umpteenth flick about superheroes.

IMO it seems SW fans want their films to be rare events and in reality their wish for more comes with a lot of caveats.

Consumers eat up multiple comic book movies and 10-hour+ series every year. Marvel’s success suggests frequency and over-saturation aren’t the problem.

Not a problem with the MCU for sure but I think that is starting to erode a bit. How SW is different with respects to how fans respond to more content is a bit of a confusing topic for me. I love that there is more content and movies but many do not. I think it’s due to what I already posted. There is a very vocal percentage of SW super fans who look at the OT as sacred texts that should not be messed with in any way. The release of more and more movies (which appears to me to be the only medium that effects these fans) seems to anger them as it dilutes the religion so to speak? Not sure.

RO made a billion dollars.

Solo probably would’ve been better served by a holiday release, but it also would’ve been better served had it been preceded by a better movie.

They could have a successful Star Wars movie every year if they were consistent — and consistently good.

Post
#1226821
Topic
Episode VIII : The Last Jedi - Discussion * <strong><em>SPOILER THREAD</em></strong> *
Time

Mocata said:

The problem is that certain audience members just expected to have their fan service brain centres massaged again, since that’s what a lot of what TFA and Rogue One offered. SW was back, and it was important. They were important as fans. But since TLJ didn’t end with Luke killing 400 dudes with a green lightsaber nobody cheered.

I haven’t seen a lot of criticisms suggesting Luke should’ve been a one-Jedi army; he wasn’t in the OT (although he came close in the escape from Jabba’s barge).

TFA and TLJ are both mediocre Star Wars movies (in my opinion) for a variety of reasons that have nothing to do with fan service (whether it’s too much in the former or a complete lack of in the latter).

Post
#1226750
Topic
Episode VIII : The Last Jedi - Discussion * <strong><em>SPOILER THREAD</em></strong> *
Time

NeverarGreat said:

Jay said:

Edit: I just watched the scene again and I’m so annoyed at how Luke completely forgets everything he learned about internal conflict by saving his father and Rey spoon-feeds this wisdom to him like she’s the Jedi master. Ugh.

I’ve found it helpful to look at Kylo and Rey as being written to represent Star Wars fans. Rey represents those who are avid and hopeful fans of the franchise, who know everything about the Jedi and what the ‘real’ Luke would do. This is why she’s so disappointed in what he’s become.

Kylo represents the fan who is tired of the whole dichotomy between good and evil, rebels and Empire, and wants to make the franchise about something else.

This is a big reason why it’s so hard to take these movies seriously - the stories aren’t written as a natural progression of events but more as a meta commentary on Star Wars itself.

I’d just like some good stories and well-developed characters, please. And maybe don’t sacrifice the arc of characters we love in order to make some arthouse meta commentary.

Post
#1226584
Topic
Episode VIII : The Last Jedi - Discussion * <strong><em>SPOILER THREAD</em></strong> *
Time

NeverarGreat said:

snooker said:

Yeah, but people say ‘Luke would never do that, the scene betrays his character!’ and I don’t agree with them.

I don’t disagree with the direction they took, but it could have been better handled.

What if Luke had looked into Kylo’s future and explicitly seen him kill Han? Then you have the man who couldn’t kill his evil father facing the man who will kill his heroic father (and led to the destruction of the Republic). If they had focused on that drama I think it would have improved both Han’s and Luke’s stories in this trilogy.

It’s a shame that they muddled that message by making Luke surprised that Han was gone.

I’m trying to imagine Yoda standing over a sleeping Luke in ESB, knowing full well in Luke’s rush to face Vader he could be turned and become a powerful enemy, and being so disturbed at the thought of his pupil joining his father on the Dark Side, he brandishes his lightsaber with the intention—no matter how fleeting—of murdering him.

Luke proved to himself and Vader in ROTJ that there is always hope. The idea that he’d even contemplate murdering a sleeping student who wasn’t yet guilty of any crime—knowing that the future is “always in motion”—doesn’t jibe. Even Luke reading Kylo’s thoughts while he sleeps is creepy.

What happened to Luke in the intervening years to turn him into someone who’d contemplate that? We don’t know, because the sequels don’t do a great job of showing us.

Edit: I just watched the scene again and I’m so annoyed at how Luke completely forgets everything he learned about internal conflict by saving his father and Rey spoon-feeds this wisdom to him like she’s the Jedi master. Ugh.

Post
#1226578
Topic
Has Star Wars finally &quot;jumped the shark&quot;?
Time

Creox said:

I think it’s interesting there is a thread on SW jumping the shark or/and over-saturation in the same reality that has Marvel just releasing its what?..umpteenth flick about superheroes.

IMO it seems SW fans want their films to be rare events and in reality their wish for more comes with a lot of caveats.

Consumers eat up multiple comic book movies and 10-hour+ series every year. Marvel’s success suggests frequency and over-saturation aren’t the problem.

Post
#1226333
Topic
Has Star Wars finally &quot;jumped the shark&quot;?
Time

Mielr said:

Jay said:

DominicCobb said:

Jay said:

DominicCobb said:

Also, since anecdotal evidence is important here I guess, everyone I’ve talked to has really enjoyed the new films (in fact I still haven’t met anyone who disliked TLJ, only people who know people who disliked TLJ). So, checkmate I guess? Is that how anecdotal-based debates work?

I called it anecdotal when I posted it. I never said I was right or that anyone else was wrong.

No, I realize you did, that wasn’t the issue. It just generally seems like a weird thing to bring up in a debate. Like, where do you go from there?

It’s an attempt to present feedback that doesn’t make it into most hardcore fan discussions because we’re in a bit of a bubble. The extreme negative feedback is part of that bubble; there are plenty of hardcore Star Wars fans who really don’t like TLJ, but I’ve never heard an overwhelmingly negative opinion from a casual fan. Worst I’ve heard is “meh”.

All I’m saying is that I’m getting lots of “meh”, which I heard during the prequel years so it’s not new, but “flying Leia was weird” is new. I’ve never had people tell me Star Wars is weird in a bad way.

That’s the thing—I mean if there was any time for SW to jump the shark it should have been in the prequel years. I think the films were awful and they haven’t aged very well, either, but there was still enough good will for the OT to sort of “forgive” the PT for what is was.

Now, I’m also in the position of not having seen SOLO and I don’t have any plans on doing so anytime soon. This is the first SW film that I won’t see theatrically, and I have no interest in seeing the next film theatrically either.

Same. If IX doesn’t get great reviews all around, I won’t bother with it until it hits Netflix.

Post
#1226313
Topic
Has Star Wars finally &quot;jumped the shark&quot;?
Time

DominicCobb said:

Jay said:

DominicCobb said:

Also, since anecdotal evidence is important here I guess, everyone I’ve talked to has really enjoyed the new films (in fact I still haven’t met anyone who disliked TLJ, only people who know people who disliked TLJ). So, checkmate I guess? Is that how anecdotal-based debates work?

I called it anecdotal when I posted it. I never said I was right or that anyone else was wrong.

No, I realize you did, that wasn’t the issue. It just generally seems like a weird thing to bring up in a debate. Like, where do you go from there?

It’s an attempt to present feedback that doesn’t make it into most hardcore fan discussions because we’re in a bit of a bubble. The extreme negative feedback is part of that bubble; there are plenty of hardcore Star Wars fans who really don’t like TLJ, but I’ve never heard an overwhelmingly negative opinion from a casual fan. Worst I’ve heard is “meh”.

All I’m saying is that I’m getting lots of “meh”, which I heard during the prequel years so it’s not new, but “flying Leia was weird” is new. I’ve never had people tell me Star Wars is weird in a bad way.

Post
#1226298
Topic
Has Star Wars finally &quot;jumped the shark&quot;?
Time

DominicCobb said:

Also, since anecdotal evidence is important here I guess, everyone I’ve talked to has really enjoyed the new films (in fact I still haven’t met anyone who disliked TLJ, only people who know people who disliked TLJ). So, checkmate I guess? Is that how anecdotal-based debates work?

I called it anecdotal when I posted it. I never said I was right or that anyone else was wrong.

Post
#1226296
Topic
Has Star Wars finally &quot;jumped the shark&quot;?
Time

SilverWook said:

I was speaking more towards the people who think the human body blows up like a water balloon in space.

In a movie universe where spaceships and explosions can be heard in a vacuum, and often defy physics, giant slugs live inside an apparently airless asteroid, people with magical powers formally fight with improbable laser swords when a blaster would end things quicker, (see Obi-Wan vs. Grevious) and overgrown teddy bears kicked Imperial ass, Leia in space was the one bridge too far? I give up.

That’s what happens when you establish rules and then break them. “Reality” in the context of fiction has more to do with the guidelines you create that actual reality.

I think the main problem with the scene is that it’s the audience’s introduction to Leia’s first external use of her latent Force powers. Of course, we don’t know what happened in the decades between Episode VI and Episode VII, so maybe she did some training, who knows. But on screen, it seems to come out of nowhere. We didn’t even get a hint of external Force powers in TFA to set it up.

Secondly, nowhere in any Star Wars movie is it made clear that humans can survive in open space. Sure, the films obviously dispense with most real-world physics as they pertain to technology (laser swords, space dogfights, etc.), but for the most part, humans in Star Wars are still subject to the same physical laws they are in the real world. They’re subject to gravity, they can’t breathe underwater, they can freeze to death, they can’t venture outside a ship without a breathing apparatus, etc. Point taken about the giant space worm, but it’s not human.

When Leia uses Force powers we’ve never seen before to defy certain death, that sets something off in the viewer’s mind because it doesn’t align with what they’ve been taught previously. Suspension of disbelief goes up in a puff of smoke and the viewer is left thinking what they just saw was silly.

Regardless, my hypothesis was only based on my personal conversations with casual fans and entirely anecdotal. I think DominicCobb is partially right when he suggests Star Wars lost its way a long time ago, but the box office numbers for TFA suggest that everyone was totally willing to give it another shot. Unfortunately, I think TLJ squandered some of that goodwill.

Post
#1226280
Topic
Has Star Wars finally &quot;jumped the shark&quot;?
Time

SilverWook said:

Guess they didn’t see Guardians Of The Galaxy which did essentially the same thing, or 2001 for that matter. 😉

I only saw GotG once in the theater, so I don’t remember the scene you’re referencing. The scene in 2001 actually got Neil deGrasse Tyson’s seal of approval in terms of scientific accuracy. Dave spent a few frantic seconds trying to save his own life and it’s a plausible set of events. Not quite what Leia pulled off, which was clearly cheating death and out of bounds even for the loose set of laws guiding physical reality in Star Wars. I’ve seen a lot of mental gymnastics from fans trying to explain it 😉

I’m not saying it’s the most absurd scene ever, but it takes quite a bit of bad writing to break a casual Star Wars fan’s suspension of disbelief and cause them to call “bullshit”.

Post
#1226274
Topic
Has Star Wars finally &quot;jumped the shark&quot;?
Time

Mielr said:

SilverWook said:

There are no sharks in Star Wars! And nobody under 30 even knows the origin of that phrase anyway.

Also, only tv shows can jump the shark. Movies nuke the fridge.

Maybe they don’t know the origin, but they know what it means. 😉 (and, under 40 is more like it).

I didn’t know there was a separate term for films. That just reinforces my belief that it’s a good thing Spielberg didn’t direct ROTJ. 😄

Indy fans get that reference, but I’ve never heard it in casual conversation. Many know “jumped the shark” and I don’t think it’s strictly for TV, but for anything that occurs in a series (including film series).

Leia cheating death and flying through space might be the saga’s shark-jumping moment. Every casual fan friend I’ve spoken with has referenced that scene as “weird” or “stupid” without prompting.

Post
#1226216
Topic
Has Star Wars finally &quot;jumped the shark&quot;?
Time

Handman said:

The masses spend a lot of their time picking their nose. They don’t put any critical thought into entertainment, so whether or not these movies are good or not, is almost irrelevant when evaluating how they feel about them. Solo underperformed, but we don’t really know if that’s due to Star Wars fatigue, or because it wasn’t a saga film. We’ll have a clearer picture when Ep. IX comes out.

I’ve been to a few family gatherings in the last couple months and they all know I’m into Star Wars. In reference to Solo, people have been asking me, “Did you see the new Star Wars movie yet?” This is the same phrasing they use in regards to the numbered films.

It’s anecdotal, of course, but I don’t think casual fans are drawing the distinction between “saga” and “story” films that we are.

Going to a Star Wars movie used to be an event, but Disney’s more rapid release schedule along with the addition of non-saga films acting as filler has cheapened the brand a bit.

Post
#1226117
Topic
Has Star Wars finally &quot;jumped the shark&quot;?
Time

I saw TFA a couple weeks after it came out, but not because I didn’t have time to go sooner. Waited until RO hit Netflix to watch that. Skipped TLJ in the theater and waited for the digital release. Haven’t seen Solo and will wait for Netflix.

Of course, TFA was a smash hit and raked in huge sums of cash worldwide. It was an event film and everyone wanted to be part of that phenomenon. A few years later, however, it’s not remembered as fondly as many thought it would be. Then we got TLJ, which clearly split the fanbase and had no honeymoon period to speak of. Then Solo didn’t do well.

Setting my own feelings aside, it’s premature to say Star Wars is on a downward slope from which it can’t recover. The children of hardcore Star Wars fans have been raised on this stuff and they’ll probably continue to support it. But for children of casual fans, it’s just another franchise consisting of fun movies they’ll see once and forget about soon after. At this point we’re probably a decade into what is considered another golden age of film and TV, not to mention more amazing video games with real stories and great characters than we’ve ever had access to before; if you’re younger and didn’t grow up on Star Wars, why spend your money on entertainment that’s largely getting by on nostalgia you don’t identify with when you can choose something original from literally tens of thousands of hours of content?

When I think of my top 10 favorite movies to come out over the last 10 years (or top 20 over 20 years), there isn’t a single Star Wars movie on the list. For me, the Star Wars label by itself is no longer strong enough on its own to get my time and money.

Post
#1225930
Topic
The Something Political Thread (Was: Random Political Thoughts)
Time

Handman said:

I feel like the word “problematic” has become a tad bit overused in the past year or so. I’m not sure why, but it’s kind of annoying. Isn’t there a way to articulate the same thought a different way?

It’s a convenient dog whistle. Anytime I see something or someone described as “problematic”, I know there’s a good chance I’m about to read some PC nonsense.