Valheru_84

I need to come back and read your full post but I do understand what you are saying regarding Disney at the start. The issue being that they or at least Lucasfilm never stated that they would monetise his creation. He followed their rules after getting permission from them to make the film. He explains how he could have made near 80k from the success the fan film has had in just those 2 weeks which would have nearly funded Episode 2 by itself.

It just seems a pretty low act for Disney to then come along after the fact to claim monetisation rights that should have been made clear up front if they were planning to do that.

Val

oojason said:

Valheru_84 said:

Ok, I have to reply:

• I ignored nothing, I explained multiple times why I was frustrated and directly replied to your posts.

• I know you are no longer a moderator, I simply thought you might exercise some of the skills that comes with the past role in keeping yourself in check. Additionally you have no doubt had to directly deal with such circumstances and so it is surprising you let yourself sink to these levels.

• If you refer to my lengthy posts where I try to spell out my point of view and reasons as “a load of shite” then I understand why you haven’t actually addressed them. You should have just flung insults at me from the beginning for which I could report you and move on rather than bothering with your pretense.

• Citing the gif as humour is disingenuous BS, although seeing as you never tried to understand my points maybe you actually believe that and can’t see the hypocrisy staring me in the face.

• My reply to you in the Mary Sue thread was simply pointing out that humour or not, you have not watched the quite half of the video you criticise and dismiss and then act as if your opinion expressed so far in the thread (factual recounting of the throne room scene aside) is all anyone needs to know about it and the thread shouldn’t exist despite the multitude of other people having an interesting and reasoned conversation that they clearly want to engage in because they are regularly posting in the thread.

• You are now actively twisting my words:
  – I never claimed you needed to be warned - you WERE warned. If you did the same thing that initially made me frustrated that I would not be happy. Pretty logical, why would you do it again? Doesn’t seem like a good way to discuss the topic.
  – You were clearly ignorant on the matter, you directly admitted it yourself in what you said. Why is it so hard to deal with the term when it is applied to you on just this matter? It is not a bad thing in off itself. Do some reading and come back to talk on the same level of understanding.
  – I did not make or infer any connection to you being mentally / intellectually inferior as to you not getting it. The issue stems from the fact that your responses seem to constantly miss, forget and ignore things I have already said. I was getting a bit frustrated with that.
  – Do we not all coexist on a basic mutual respect? That is all I meant. If you are going to refute my posts then do me the respect of actually addressing the points I make.

All I have done in this thread is represent myself and offer my opinion in discussion. For that I have been:
– Initially labeled and furthermore insinuated multiple times to be anti-pansexual.
– Posts I put some considerable effort and time into ignored and compared to “shite”.
– Sneered at and painted as someone having an unreasonable issue with Pando Lando despite the reasons listed and repeated yet not actually replied to.
– Past conflicts brought back up that have no bearing on the situation and trying to side shift the responsibility of your own part in this argument onto them.
– Been directly insulted and demeaned. I try to tell you why I am frustrated at the situation and your part in it and you end up telling me to go fuck myself.

The actual common issue between this and the Mary Sue thread with yourself and Dom - antagonistic behaviour towards those that criticise TLJ. I’ve had no issue talking with other people in both threads about the issues IMHO TLJ, the ST and various characters have, it wasn’t until Dom and yourself started having a go at me that things started heading down the drain pipe. I try to ignore Dom and now you, but I will stand up for myself.

Val

I haven’t read that - any of it, and am not going to - it’d obviously be a waste of time.

My original post stands for what it is - and you then kicked off. Now you claim I was misrepresenting you as well as your other aforementioned bullshit?

If that’s what happens when a simple post with a couple of reasonable questions then there’s not much hope for having a conversation with you. Add in the insults as well as the “I’ll repeat it again as you do seem hard of hearing” jibe as some sort of lazy innuendo / stigma that deaf people are mentally / intellectually inferior or somehow ‘can’t / don’t get it’… and there is certainly no point in having a conversation with someone who thinks like you.

From that simple post of mine and your then continued blow-ups, insults and unfounded claims it seems you were looking for a fight or baiting there? Or maybe it’s your style to make a one liner post and then light-up the situation? Add in a few insults and derogatory comments and then pretend you’re being hard done by, misrepresented, misunderstood, antagonised etc?

All from this post? Laughable.

Keep up the deflection and bullshit .Val - stay classy. And please, no ranting rage-filled ‘it’s all your fault’ type PMs again either this time around, thanks.

 

Once again, back to the pics…

I’m quite happy to see more diversity in Star Wars…

Would have like to see more of L3 in the GFFA, though I suppose from a certain point of view she is still with us… 😉
 

Ok seeing as there is no moderation happening anymore on this site where blatant abuse and personal attacks are the order of the day and anything in between goes - if you were standing in front of me right now I would knock your fucking block off “mate”. You are a piece of shit who will continually take cheap shots while claiming to be innocent all the while constantly attacking my very character and alluding that I have some ulterior motive.

Since you want to drag that skeleton out of the closet, you did the exact same thing to me in PM before you personally banned me some 8 months ago. Anything I said was never taken at face value, you always seem to think the worst of me and project this onto my words, looking for hidden meaning where there is none. At the time you failed to tell me it was a temporary ban, our conversation devolved as you constantly applied your own meaning to my words and due to our personal conversation you permanently banned me. Yet in the banned members thread you claim it’s what I said to the moderators in general that earned me my permanent ban. So disingenuous.

In the end I found I actually owned a copy of TFA that was packed away still after having not long moved house at the time and that was after I purchased another copy in order to ask to be allowed back on here. So it was my own fucking dumb fault for not checking my bluray collection before saying to you I didn’t have a copy for the one edit I downloaded. But you let me believe it was a permanent ban from the get go and it was your inability to not get personal as the moderator that resulted in our argument that you decided should be grounds for the actual permanent ban, which to this day I still feel was completely unfair.

You say you won’t read my post, the very post where I tell you I never inferred any such thing when I said you seem hard of hearing. You concocted that one up yourself. It was in reference to the repeated times you wouldn’t read or ignored what I’d said in earlier posts that you later confirmed to consider “shite” and now still refuse to read my reply all the while throwing insult and abuse at me. How can I even deal with such an individual, how am I supposed to begin to engage in reasoned discussion when you blatantly ignore my post while dismissing them and insulting me in the same breath. Why the fuck do you think I was feeling frustrated in the first place you bloody tospot!

How were you ever a moderator when this is how you talk to people? I’m firing of the expletives and insults now but you lit the fire and fanned the flames you arsehole. This comes on the back of my wife telling me she hates life at the moment, so I’m a bit fucking unstable emotionally right now after my one liner observation was taken out of context and then you happened along to have a crack at me all day long. But that won’t mean anything to you, you never believe a single word I ever say as genuine no matter how reasoned and straightforward I try to be. Get out of my fucking face you idiotic twat and don’t talk to me ever again.

Well that didn’t take long. Fan film ‘Vader: Shards of the Past’ has now been “manually claimed” by Disney on YouTube to monetise and collect money from for themselves. This is after Star Wars Theory approached Lucasfilm beforehand, clearing it all through them with the stipulation of not being allowed to make any money from it himself via YouTube monetisation, crowd funding, etc.

The video trended at #2 on YouTube in its first days of release with around 3-4 million views and is now at 6.3 million. It just goes to show the money hungry corporate body that Disney are, who would rather profit from a little fan film they had no involvement in making past officially allowing it to happen, instead of building good will and relationships with the fandom. A fandom it is clear they are trying to fleece through nostalgia with every chance they get yet want to demean and kill of OT characters in order to prop up their new ones.

Anyway here is a video on the matter:

https://youtu.be/0SKG6PVug-s

And from SWT himself:

https://youtu.be/acPFPu_UZWE

Val

SilverWook said:

Valheru_84 said:

Great, pando Lando is making it’s way into pop culture…

And the first massive threadcrap of the year award goes to…

Excuse me? That is a legitimate criticism and after everything said, you don’t take issue with Pando-robotsex Lando in any shape or form? Fact is, my original post was a one liner and that’s all that I needed to say on the topic before people started unjustly insinuating things about me. I don’t pretend that this didn’t turn into a big mess but I wasn’t the instigator, instead ultimately just defending myself. If this is the official mod response, I honestly expected much better…

Fair enough Dom and noted. Though referencing you is not failing to ignore you.

RogueLeader, this has nothing to do with socially and lawfully (depending on country) accepted sexuality and that is the issue, one that Jason continues to misrepresent as to my issues with Pando Lando. If you need clarity on the matter, please read my previous posts in this thread. I will also add that it’s not a case of character interpretation, sexual relations with robots is now part of Star Wars…yay.

Val

Ok, I have to reply:

• I ignored nothing, I explained multiple times why I was frustrated and directly replied to your posts.

• I know you are no longer a moderator, I simply thought you might exercise some of the skills that comes with the past role in keeping yourself in check. Additionally you have no doubt had to directly deal with such circumstances and so it is surprising you let yourself sink to these levels.

• If you refer to my lengthy posts where I try to spell out my point of view and reasons as “a load of shite” then I understand why you haven’t actually addressed them. You should have just flung insults at me from the beginning for which I could report you and move on rather than bothering with your pretense.

• Citing the gif as humour is disingenuous BS, although seeing as you never tried to understand my points maybe you actually believe that and can’t see the hypocrisy staring me in the face.

• My reply to you in the Mary Sue thread was simply pointing out that humour or not, you have not watched the quite half of the video you criticise and dismiss and then act as if your opinion expressed so far in the thread (factual recounting of the throne room scene aside) is all anyone needs to know about it and the thread shouldn’t exist despite the multitude of other people having an interesting and reasoned conversation that they clearly want to engage in because they are regularly posting in the thread.

• You are now actively twisting my words:
  – I never claimed you needed to be warned - you WERE warned. If you did the same thing that initially made me frustrated that I would not be happy. Pretty logical, why would you do it again? Doesn’t seem like a good way to discuss the topic.
  – You were clearly ignorant on the matter, you directly admitted it yourself in what you said. Why is it so hard to deal with the term when it is applied to you on just this matter? It is not a bad thing in off itself. Do some reading and come back to talk on the same level of understanding.
  – I did not make or infer any connection to you being mentally / intellectually inferior as to you not getting it. The issue stems from the fact that your responses seem to constantly miss, forget and ignore things I have already said. I was getting a bit frustrated with that.
  – Do we not all coexist on a basic mutual respect? That is all I meant. If you are going to refute my posts then do me the respect of actually addressing the points I make.

All I have done in this thread is represent myself and offer my opinion in discussion. For that I have been:
– Initially labeled and furthermore insinuated multiple times to be anti-pansexual.
– Posts I put some considerable effort and time into ignored and compared to “shite”.
– Sneered at and painted as someone having an unreasonable issue with Pando Lando despite the reasons listed and repeated yet not actually replied to.
– Past conflicts brought back up that have no bearing on the situation and trying to side shift the responsibility of your own part in this argument onto them.
– Been directly insulted and demeaned. I try to tell you why I am frustrated at the situation and your part in it and you end up telling me to go fuck myself.

The actual common issue between this and the Mary Sue thread with yourself and Dom - antagonistic behaviour towards those that criticise TLJ. I’ve had no issue talking with other people in both threads about the issues IMHO TLJ, the ST and various characters have, it wasn’t until Dom and yourself started having a go at me that things started heading down the drain pipe. I try to ignore Dom and now you, but I will stand up for myself.

Val

Jason, this has nothing to do with our past history. While I still don’t think of you fondly (anymore) it was water under the bridge from 8 or more months ago that I was also asked to leave be when being allowed to return from my permanent ban, to which I have no problem doing so if you were to do the same. It seems you can’t though in brining it up now. I’ll repeat it again since you do seem hard of hearing - the way I currently feel has nothing to do with our past fullstop. Nor is there anything external influencing it, I feel the way about this exchange because of the way you’ve handled it and to shift blame onto imaginary external factors on my behalf instead of taking responsibility for your own tone and demeanour towards me is beyond the pale.

I replied directly to your previous post you refer to above and explained my response to Snooker’s and essentially repeated much of what I had already explained in a more straightforward manner so that you could easily address it. I covered each paragraph in order to directly respond to your “reasonable questions” you asked to be addressed. If you don’t want to engage in that discussion then don’t. You’re telling me to grow up yet you are the one sitting there with your fingers in your ears yelling “nah nah nah” until I’ve finished speaking and then proclaim I need to point out where the issues are with your post. I did - you’re not listening or actively trying not to reply to the many points I do make. I replied again directly to your post yet there seems to be something wrong with that as well since you just make claims as to what I’m doing wrong instead of debating the point as you yourself so aptly brought up (that I don’t need reminding of).

Warning you? You didn’t seem to understand I’d already covered everything that I explained a 2nd time directly to you, citing you read what I said just fine - yet didn’t respond in a manner that indicated this since what you say is refuted or explained already by what you supposedly read just fine. I simply made it clear what would happen if you did this again.

Your ignorance of the Pando Lando matter? You said you’d never heard of it before, therefore you are ignorant of it. What is wrong with this assertion? You claim to know nothing about it yet want to down play and dismiss everything I say about it.

Get educated? Learn what you are talking about before presuming to tell someone else how they should think and feel about it.

I never went looking for a fight, it came to me when I was simply explaining my position on pansexuals and why I have a distaste for newly canonised “Pando Lando”. To add fuel to the fire you throw a L33T gif back in my teeth as your final words that literally references part of what I take issue with on the Pando Lando matter. That’s really mature, nice work on trying to deflate the situation, these are a great display of your moderation skills at work here.

Say what you will in response but it’s clear now that you need to go in the same basket as Dom. It was nice trying to converse with you again for a time but it’s clear that isn’t possible with the chip on your shoulder (whether that be our past, anti-TLJ/ST criticism or both).

This will be my last post on the matter (waits for the post now by Jason that finally addresses all my points to spite me in saying I would not post again).

Val

oojason said:
I bring ‘just the facts, Sir/Ma’am’

No just an opinion based on not even half the video.

To be continued tomorrow…(once I’ve had some sleep)

I AM trying to debate the issue without effectively having to repeat myself as I can’t understand your response in the context that you have supposedly read my reply. You are dismissive and make statements that appear to ignore the additional clarification and detail that I already provided to give you insight into my perspective where my opinion stems from and the contributing factors. Your responses do not present to me as someone that has read and tried to understand what I actually said.

To try and put it simply:

• Perhaps “sensation” was inaccurate in the picture it painted but it seemed an apt enough approximation at the time due to the amount of places and mediums I have seen it appear in, many of which are mainstream. I don’t believe it ever featured in my local town news channel but my point was if you search for it there are countless references, many of them big or well known names and brands. Regardless of the actors tone, they were talking about it and on camera which means it was public knowledge and a topic viewable to many Star Wars fans that would view such content. I can’t help it if you and Ray haven’t come across it, you asked for examples and I provided 6. The burden of proof works both ways, it’s your turn to get educated on the matter before you continue to summarily dismiss it.

• Pando Lando is what the public and media termed it as when Jonathan Kasdan answered a direct question from a journalist on whether Lando was pansexual which he confirmed.

• I’ve already stated what I object to which has nothing to do with homosexual, bisexual or pansexual characters but the retconning of a classic character and the fact that the term in itself is misleading and when I think about it now, it could be offensive to actual pansexuals because of what it is actually alluding to in the movie which has nothing to do with pansexuality and is disgusting, depraved and hardly the type of thing to include in a Star Wars movie which will be watched by little kids and that is the act of sexual activity with a robot called L33T.

• My response to Snooker was because I already clearly stated my views on homosexuals and of which any sexual representation in a movie is normally only shown in M15+ rated movies where you are supposed to be 15 years or older to view and it is not expected to be watched by little kids (ie. 3-10 year olds).

• My issue with the meme was simply a passing observation of my less than enthused thoughts on it that I did not expect anyone here to be completely ignorant of seeing how prolific it has featured in media. In fact, if you understand the context of the meme “It works every time” as in getting the “ladies” but with L33T hanging off of his shoulder instead of a woman, then you understand the reference and where I am coming from and I again have to wonder as to the genuine nature of your supposed ignorance on the matter. Just think about it - why would you insinuate a sexual relationship between a Star Wars character and a robot and not just any character but freaking Lando Calrissian?!

• I never would have gone to such lengths to explain the situation or myself if I didn’t feel I had to after Screams accused me of referring to pansexuals as “it” and also asking why pansexuals bothered me, rather than seeing the multitude of issues tied to the name and idea, not the sexuality.

• I’ve got no issue with pansexuals in sci-fi or in general. If you try to make me repeat this a 3rd time by saying you “read what I said just fine” I will not be happy. You can’t say now that I haven’t warned you.

Valheru_84 said:
I don’t have a problem myself if there are homosexual, bisexual or pansexual characters in movies. If that is the character and it plays to the story at hand and isn’t shoved in my face just so no one can miss that the movie makers ensured the “representation” box was ticked, then that’s fine.

I do apologise for now taking this thread off topic but I am immensely frustrated by these attempts to make me out as some kind of unreasonable homo/panphobe.

Val

Absolutely bang on as usual Dre on all those points.

You much more concisely conveyed what I’ve spent a good hour trying to write but due to the time of the night / early morning, I’m mostly just sitting here unintentionally zoning out and trying to remember exactly my very clear reasoning and points that flashed through my brain earlier but essentially am getting no closer to finishing my post as the minutes fly by LOL.

In Arnie’s words - I’ll be back ;D

Val

Yeah not trying to say otherwise, just that there was one other strong character in there and even though she doesn’t get much screen time, she does have a strong presence and is believable as being in that position of power.

The others were just simply in regards to representation of females which I agree could have been higher and better represented in leading roles by today’s standards but I think it is entirely expected and the norm for the time it was made in. Star Wars '77 is akin to other movies that were more directed at portraying a young male as the main protagonist who starts out as a nobody (ie. the boys watching the movie) who goes on to find high adventure, rescue a damsel in distress and ultimately saves the day. Most female characters in such movies are only there to support the main male character and not much more, it is actually a small miracle that we got Princess Leia as she was, who in the frame of only Star Wars '77 existing at the time, is still literally called a “Princess” who is rescued and offers her hero a kiss who is holding her as they’re about to swing across a chasm on a rope. Pretty cliche stuff.

In saying that, many females still loved the OT movies and actually looked up to Luke as their hero and inspiration as he was a great character that both males and females could relate to and the same could be said of Leia. Furthermore, yes there could be more females as lead characters in the OT but is this an issue in relation to the story? No. As long as the characters themselves are compelling and effectively tell and communicate the story being told then it matters not whether they are male or female. The very fact that Katee Sackhoff made an awesome Starbuck in the 2004 remake of the Battlestar Galatica is proof enough of this and the fact that many females look up to Luke’s character despite being of the opposite gender.

The only actual issue a lack of female leads across a multitude of movies and genres points to is equal opportunity and that’s what needs to be addressed, not putting females in lead roles who are not fit to convincingly portray that character just to balance out a ratio which has no impact at all on how good a movie will be.

In regards to the female pilots, I looked it up recently via this article which seems to indicate it being in 1977 for the original Star Wars. I am wondering if they are mistaken though, if you look behind Lando between 0:18 and 0:19 in the below ROTJ video I am sure you can see the same female pilot as is seen in the below image taken from the article:

https://www.cinemablend.com/new/Revealed-Star-Wars-Originally-Had-Female-X-Wing-Pilots-34581.html

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWXVUJfSvDs

Another reference actually talks about 4 female pilots, with 3 being cut and the below one being dubbed over with a male’s voice (I remember learning about this particular example some time ago myself but had since forgotten about it):

Anyway getting back to strong female characters in Star Wars, I meant to add my own to the thread in my previous reply, which would be Mara Jade from the Heir to the Empire book trilogy by Timothy Zahn. I’ve only read it once so far in the past year but I think she’s a great character that can stand on her own against the biggest characters in the OT.

While the story of that series wasn’t perfect by any means, I think an adaptation could have been absolutely brilliant as it feels infinitely more like Star Wars than the current ST and logically furthered the story of the existing saga up to that point. Even if it wasn’t made into the new ST, I wish the new ST could have been made so that the Heir to the Empire series could easily coexist within the time jump from the OT to the ST.

Val

Sorry but it’s clear both of you haven’t actually read my posts, maybe you glanced over them and made some assumptions at best as neither make sense in context to what I actually said. Please pay me the respect of at least reading them properly and with an open mind before replying with something that addresses what I actually said.

What you said Snooker is especially out of line as it’s completely counter to what I said and almost comes off as an attack on my character. You’re either unaware of what I said due to not actually reading it or you are flat out calling me a deceitful liar. Which is it?

Val

ray_afraid said:

Valheru_84 said:

it created such a media sensation.

I’ve never once heard/seen it mentioned outside of this site…

Skip to 47:35 if the time stamped link doesn’t work:

https://youtu.be/zdVtKHRTfe8?t=2855

Here you have a mainstream TV show mentioning it and referencing a different article again than linked above, followed by the actors themselves talking about it and followed by a video rant in a car that is not the media but shows the disgust likely felt by many when hearing about Pando Lando and finding out what this actually referred to in the movie which is mechnophilia / robosexuality and is actually not part of being a pansexual which at this point, “Lando is a pansexual” feels like an attempt to divert and misconstrue what is actually inferred in the movie which is a very weird and unsettling choice for the movie, especially being Star Wars.

Val

Darth Muffy said:
I understand the term Mary Sue means different things to different people and can be wrongly used when validating the new films but for this thread if you could please watch the video like Valheru now has explaining that term used within this particular discussion as I except Rey to be a Mary Sue within the context outlined in the video but I personally still also very much like Force Awakens & Last Jedi as well.

Hey Darth Muffy, a couple of things you said above don’t quite make sense, so just confirming for clarification that my below explanation is what you refer to and also that you meant “I accept Rey to be a Mary Sue within the context outlined in the video” is what you intended to say instead of “except”?

Valheru_84 said:
I think Thor says it best himself in that whether you think Rey is one or not, it has no doubt caused the term to surface and feature prominently in discussions around the ST and this would not have happened if there weren’t comparable issues with the character of Rey.

Val

Nice retrospective review with some very salient points regarding the fandom and the unfortunate results of when things are taken too far in the name of movie criticism.

But yeah, a good read that I would recommend to others and I look forward to your other reviews throughout the year.

Val

As others have said, it will already be better preserved by other means or others preserving the same tapes. So I would keep it sealed to keep it’s collectable value in tact. Also if the tape is already damaged due to no regular use then you would ruin it’s collectable value for nothing.

Val

Anakin Starkiller said:
There’s no such thing as a strong female character; only a strong character.

I like this comment, though the thread title is fine and required in order to only talk about strong characters that are female 😛

screams in the void said:
good point . I am going to leave the title of the thread as is though as I feel female characters in Star Wars movies were grossly under represented in the OT…Leia being the only main female character , and it’s nice to see this changing and seeing more of a female presence to give more avatars for the female audience to plug themselves into .

Strong OT characters that are female:

• Princess Leia will always take the cake of course
• Mon Mothma

As far as OT representation goes:

• Princess Leia
• Mon Mothma
• Aunt Beru
• Oola
• Sy Snootles (SE I know but it’s still a female character in the OT)
• Yarna d’al’ Gargan
• TESB Echo Base Map-Reading Woman
• Various background females at the Cantina, Cloud City and Jabba’s Palace

*Source for the names of the last few (that I remember but never knew their name) and others that fall into the various background category: https://www.thrillist.com/entertainment/nation/women-in-star-wars

Yeah, not a lot of representation still but a little bit more than you might casually think. You’re probably aware also that there were originally meant to be 3 female Xwing pilots in 1977 ANH but they were later edited out, apparently due to the thought of how seeing female Xwings getting blown up on screen might be received. Definitely still pretty obvious that the movies were originally targeted at boys and young males in times where it was thought they would be the only ones really interested in such a movie.

Val

Anakin Starkiller said:

openly mocking fans (“Your Snoke theory sucks”) for simply theorising on events and questions setup by TFA

Tbf, all the Snoke and Rey theories did suck. There were a couple for Rey that were decent (memory wiped student of Luke and new Chosen One), but I wasn’t actively rooting for them to come true. Everything else it was blatantly clear wasn’t gonna happen if you have any basic understanding of storytelling and the direction of these movies. Seriously, why did so many people think Snoke would be revealed as that guy Palpatine mentions once a film that these new ones are clearly ignoring? I got both what I hoped for and expected with these two mystery boxes, and no plausible alternatives were presented within the films themselves.

I’m not saying that many of them weren’t either ridiculous, wishful thinking or illogical and inconsistent with Star Wars itself. It was the fact that he openly mocked fans and in retrospect it’s more inline with directly insult since in the end his own explanation was: nothing.

It’s akin to a group of co-workers coming up with different plans to resolve an issue (some of them legitimately good and interesting) but the boss turns around and says all their ideas and plans suck. When they ask him what his grand plan is then - “oh sorry, I don’t have a plan either…but yours sucks regardless”.

Personally I had no theory myself or cared about any particular one other people came up with. I just had a lot of questions from TFA and was genuinely interested to learn more about this character. That interest was actually massively stoked by how powerful and threateningly imposing he is shown to be in TLJ (it finally felt like there was a credible and real threat behind the First Order since the rest of them are bumbling fools), right up to the point he is killed off without so much as a tidbit of background info that would not only tell me about him but why the fuck was the universe in the situation it was in after the previous 6 movies and the ultimate triumph over the Empire and the Emperor!

Val

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

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.

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.

Thanks for a voice of reason and logic in this “insane” discussion though despite Rey winning both encounters I think the use of “effortlessly” was an inaccurate term in both cases.

Rey is definitely the winner though in TLJ. They both essentially tie in trying to take Anakin’s lightsaber but it is Rey’s assistance that gets Kylo out of his headlock and Rey gets away in the end. Once it becomes clear to Kylo that Rey won’t join him, you have to assume that he would take her prisoner again, maybe even kill her and if not straight away then eventually. She was in the belly of the beast where her enemy wanted her to join him or be taken out of the equation, so Rey managing to escape by stealing a ship to return and help the Resistance, taking out many Tie fighters and directly affecting the battle in favour of the Resistance I would 100% consider her as winning against Kylo.

Val

Shopping Maul said:

RogueLeader said:

I understand you but it is just weird to me how, generally, guys seem to complain that she is a Mary Sue much more than female fans of the movies. Like I said, generally. I’m sure someone could pull up some YouTube videos of women saying she is a Mary Sue to try to refute my opinion, but even then if you were to flip it around, you would probably have more men saying she isn’t a Mary Sue than women saying she is a Mary Sue.

The Mary Sue claims just seem strangely disproportionate. Yeah, there might be more male Star Wars fan than women, but even if you were to take that into account it still seems like it would be disproportionate on average.

Like I’ve already said, that’s not saying that men who think that are sexist. I AM NOT SAYING THAT. I just think it is worth exploring why a lot of guys seem hung up on it when more female fans seem to accept/enjoy her character without this issue.

If Rey was such a badly written female character, you would think there would be a more vocal concern from the female fan communities who might want better representation, so you would assume you would hear more female fans complaining about it than male fans. But it seems like it is predominantly male fans that are the most vocal regarding this issue, does it not?

I dunno. Just curious to me. I just feel like men and women do have unconscious biases regarding the opposite sex that affect the way we perceive characters of one gender compared to the other (and by extension people in real life). It is just might not be immediately clear to us, and difficult for us to articulate.

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!

Makes sense and partly echoes what I just said myself.

RogueLeader said:
If Rey was such a badly written female character, you would think there would be a more vocal concern from the female fan communities who might want better representation, so you would assume you would hear more female fans complaining about it than male fans. But it seems like it is predominantly male fans that are the most vocal regarding this issue, does it not?

I dunno. Just curious to me. I just feel like men and women do have unconscious biases regarding the opposite sex that affect the way we perceive characters of one gender compared to the other (and by extension people in real life). It is just might not be immediately clear to us, and difficult for us to articulate.

I think there’s definitely some truth in what you say above and probably comes down to how we similarly often can’t see faults within ourselves until someone offers a 3rd person perspective that gives you the same window to look at yourself through. I think to a lesser extent, we sometimes don’t see or don’t find fault with some of the shortcomings of your own sex but will willingly point them out when present in the other.

As to why there is not as many females voicing the same concerns - I think the above is part of it but also just because on pure numbers, females would still be in the minority of the Star Wars audience and a far greater minority again of those that are interested and invested as much to bother saying anything about the matter.

Val

Darth Muffy said:

So we all agree then that we need James Cameron as producer for Episode X 😎

Also to anyone who thinks Aliens has just a single female charactor in a sea of dumb male soldiers…

I was trying to think of how to fit Vasquez into one of my replies earlier and then promptly forgot to mention her 😛

She is another example of a well written female character amongst male characters that aren’t written just to elevate the female character. She is physically strong and mentally tough in the grunt sense that she can mix with and won’t be intimidated by her fellow male Colonial Marines. She isn’t portrayed as all that intelligent which does stereotype her somewhat into the Army role but I think it helps cement her as one of them, as probably the only properly intelligent one out of the lot is Hicks who is in a leadership role because of the capability it lends him.

In today’s movie making climate I doubt many writer or director would dare to portray her in that manner. Instead she would be smarter than all her fellow marines and her next in command and would often have to explain things on camera to the dim-witted males. There would also be a scene where it showed her in peril and one of the males would attempt to save her only to show her sorting it out herself in the end and exclaiming she doesn’t need his help.

Val

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.)

OutboundFlight said:

I think the difference between Star Wars and Alien is all in the tone.

Alien is established, from the outset, as a dark film. It’s horror! The characters make bad choices and we fear with them. Darker films like this often critique social issues as it fits the tone. So Alien’s critique on capitalism works.

Star Wars, on the other hand, is not a dark film. It’s fun escapism. This is why so many call Canto Bight “not my Star Wars” because they want an timeless story separate from the real world.

That is not to demean either approach. Critiques on our society are often well called for while timeless tales are a lot of fun to watch.

The interesting thing about the Last Jedi is it tries to renounce it’s escapist nature. I don’t really think doing this on the 8th episode of a 9 part saga is a good idea, but Rian certainly tried to make TLJ into a “dark film”- Canto Bight and Luke are some examples. You know, I’d be willing to see how a Dark TLJ turned out.

Unfortunately Rian opened the film with a yo mamma joke, instantly eliminating any chance of a darker tone. What we have now is a confused tonal mess.

This is a great post with some insightful points and perspectives that help to explain the why TLJ is criticised and rejected by many fans, rather than constantly denying there are no issues with the film and (a great) many people are simply making stuff up because of assumed ulterior motives of those raising the points in discussion.

Val