Star Wars Disenchantment

[Demodex 557]

4 minutes ago, crumbs said:

 

I've been open about my criticism of things I didn't like in TLJ, but that's where it stops for me. It's just a movie. The incessant ranting, the conspiracy-theorist delusions about the new trilogy being some kind of feminist propaganda to indoctrinate children goes way beyond, "taking issue with some of the creative decisions in the sequel trilogy."

 

Some people clearly have way too much time on their hands and, frankly, need some goddamn perspective in their lives.

 

Exactly. That's why with half of what Mattris complains about my response is " Who cares?"

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

What happens if it becomes 51/49?

[Chen G. 3,943]

8 minutes ago, Demodex said:

I see nothing wrong with it. 

 

Its not like its the end of the world, but its just too strict a criteria to stick to, and it might result in some perfectly-applicable people of either gender being passed-on for no reason other than for the employer wanting an equal outcome.

 

And like I said: it isn't something to strive to. The western ideal is one of equal opportunity. Some jobs are dominated by Men (physical professions, for instance) others - by women (norses, teachers). Both are perfectly equitable with regards to opportunity.

 

More specifically with casts, it can stretch credulity in a film. Like I said, the action-adventure genre is inherently masculine. If such a film was halfway populated with women, it'd seem ridiculous. Look at the resistance: its essentially a military organisation. Are you telling me that the same precent of the female demographic wants to enlist as is with the male demographic? No. On average, women are less interested in those professions.

 

 

10 minutes ago, crumbs said:

the conspiracy-theorist delusions about the new trilogy being some kind of propagandist, feminist agenda to indoctrinate

 

And yet...

 

Quote

Kathy’s [Kathleen Kennedy, Lucasfilm’s president] leadership team has always been 50% women.[...]we are getting a lot more pragmatic and specific about not accepting the level we have regarding women in visual effects and technology. At the moment 75% of the people in visual effects are men and that’s unacceptable. Our ratio at ILM is better than that, but it’s still not enough.

 

and

 

Quote

In the creative community, there's no excuse for not making a more equitable environment. It literally comes down to companies that just aren't trying hard enough.

 

[crumbs 14,300]

1 minute ago, Chen G. said:

If such a film was halfway populated with women, it'd seem ridiculous.

 

Why, because that's an accurate reflection of the earth's population? Why is that "ridiculous"?

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

1 minute ago, Chen G. said:

More specifically with casts, it can stretch credulity in a film. Like I said, the action-adventure genre is inherently masculine. If such a film was halfway populated with women, it'd seem ridiculous. Look at the resistance: its essentially a military organisation. Are you telling me that the same precent of the female demographic wants to enlist as is with the male demographic? No. On average, women are less interested in those professions.

 

 

So you are requiring a sci-fi/fantasy film to be utterly realistic? Interesting.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

So is ILM planning to sack 25% of its workforce (made up of males) just to replace them with women? Is that ethical?

[Chen G. 3,943]

2 minutes ago, Stefancos said:

So you are requiring a sci-fi/fantasy film to be utterly realistic? Interesting.

 

I'm requiring it to adhere to human nature, yes. Otherwise, how can we engage with it?

 

On average, it seems that women are less likely to want to seek out such a profession, because of its inherent masculinity. Anything else is social indoctrination of some sort.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Just now, Norma's Corpse said:

So is ILM planning to sack 25% of its workforce (made up of males) just to replace them with women? 

 

Probably not.

Just now, Chen G. said:

 

I'm requiring it to adhere to human nature, yes.

 

On average, women are less likely to want to seek out such a profession. Anything else is social indoctrination of some sort.

 

Isnt that requirement you demand people to adhere to part of the problem, though?

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

Just now, Chen G. said:

 

I'm requiring it to adhere to human nature, yes.

 

On average, women are less likely to want to seek out such a profession. Anything else is social indoctrination of some sort.

 

In old Soviet Union, womxn fight longside men comrades

[Chen G. 3,943]

4 minutes ago, Stefancos said:

Isnt that requirement you demand people to adhere to part of the problem, though?

 

what problem?!

 

3 minutes ago, Norma's Corpse said:

In old Soviet Union, women fight longside men comrades

 

As they do where I live, as well.

[crumbs 14,300]

4 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

what problem?!

 

You decry the notion of gender equality in a workplace, then criticise a film for portraying anything less than a male-dominated military setting in an action-adventure movie because it's not "realistic."

 

That reads like a self-fulfilling prophecy to me.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

4 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

 

what problem?!

 

You find it unrealistic that there should be a 50/50 even split because you deem it against human nature. 

Is the fact that you think that not part of the problem here? 

 

Why not be open to change rather then resist it because it feels "unrealistic" or "against human nature". 

Mad Max: Fury Road had a final act where a bunch of women of all ages duke it out against a truck load of cis white men, was that unrealistic?

 

2 minutes ago, crumbs said:

 

You decry the mere notion of gender equality in a workplace, then criticise a film for portraying anything less than a male-dominated military setting in an action-adventure movie because it's not "realistic."

 

That reads like a self-fulfilling prophecy to me.

 

Yes.

 

 

[mstrox 6,647]

8 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

 

I'm requiring it to adhere to human nature, yes. Otherwise, how can we engage with it?

 

On average, it seems that women are less likely to want to seek out such a profession, because of its inherent masculinity. Anything else is social indoctrination of some sort.

 

"Inherent masculinity" is the social construct here.  Women are societally discouraged from joining certain occupations because they are "boys' clubs," and that societal discouragement only perpetuates the picture of a boys' club.  It's not the other way around.  The "social indoctrination" of a more equal workplace is just an effort to right that.

[Chen G. 3,943]

3 minutes ago, Stefancos said:

Why not be open to change rather then resist it because it feels "unrealistic" or "against human nature". 

 

Change isn't always good...

 

This isn't some social construct that you're dismantelling with the idea of "equality of outcome" - you're trying to go against something that is, appearantly, hard-wired into our species.

 

2 minutes ago, mstrox said:

"Inherent masculinity" is the social construct

 

It isn't. Just how much of it's genetic and how much of it is socially constructed is unclear, but what is clear is that you're downplaying the part of the hereditery component here.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

3 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

This isn't some social construct that you're dismantelling with the idea of "equality of outcome" - you're trying to go against something that is, appearantly, hard-wired into our species.

 

But to what extent is it nature and to what extent nurture? I would say that it's a mixture of both.

 

3 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

Change isn't always good...

 

That's just a bizarre non-sequitur.

[Chen G. 3,943]

35 minutes ago, mstrox said:

"Inherent masculinity" is the social construct

 

It is both.

 

But the "nature" component tends to be underplayed, where it actually seems to be quite dominant.

 

To seek out 50/50 representation is to ignore it completely, and its just too stiff a concept to actually implement. If you try and make the entire workforce in the world be split exactly according to the general demographic - you'd never get any work done - you'll be too busy sorting people out by gender and race.

 

At the end of the day, 50/50-representation is a social doctrine - whether you agree with it or not - and it is one that Lucasfilm are gradually implementing into their films, in front of and behind the camera.

 

I don't mind it too much. I'm certainly not averse to the idea of a female protagonist (namely because the protagonist of a film tends to be exceptional rather than average).

[crumbs 14,300]

3 minutes ago, Stefancos said:

That's just a bizarre non-sequitur.

 

Currently we don't go swimming in volcanoes. Imagine if we changed that?

 

Ergo, change isn't always good.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

50/50 is unacceptable. It mutht be 100 per thent women...

[Naïve Old Fart 9,498]

4 minutes ago, crumbs said:

 

Currently we don't go swimming in volcanoes. Imagine if we changed that?

 

Ergo, change isn't always good.

Ergo. Ergo... He's 6ft 4, you know that?

[Chen G. 3,943]

I'm actualy 6 foot 2. 😉

[crumbs 14,300]

2 minutes ago, Richard said:

Ergo. Ergo... He's 6ft 4, you know that?

 

I didn't know he was that tall but I'm quite partial to The Escape of Loth.

 

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

I'm only 5'10...

[Fabulin 3,510]

.

[Chen G. 3,943]

15 minutes ago, Fabulin said:

He likely does not care enough to want or not to want. He is a businessman, not a passionate storyteller

 

'Tis bollocks.

 

As for similar locations in IX: there's no knowing - from similarity in locations alone - that the film's content and themes will be deriviative. The Last Jedi had a ton of superficial similarities to Empire Strikes Back: Walkers, a space pursuit, a cave, etcetra - I'd hardly blame it for being deriviative, though. Because they're just that - superficial.

 

In general, I'd hazard against looking too much into setting, specifically. Since the plot of each Star Wars film happens across several planets, not any one of them can be explored terribly well, and to keep them easily distinguishable you need to give every planet a unique look. Now, the basic types of environment aren't too numerous: you basically have forest, desert, glacial and urban (so, Endor, Tatooine, Hoth and Curoscant), so some repitition is going to happen, purely through the generic nature of the environment. That doesn't mean that its deriviative.

 

You would be right to expect something that "feels" more like The Force Awakens, both because JJ's behind both films, and because its become a calling-card for trilogies to have their first and third installments function like two "bookends" that have a strong semblence of each other: Return of the Jedi, The Dark Knight Rises, The Last Crusade, etcetra.

[Fabulin 3,510]

.

[Chen G. 3,943]

That depends. If you ask Rian Johnson its because "the legacy of the Jedi is failure.[...]at the height of their power they allowed Darth Sidius to rise" yada yada.

 

If you ask any filmgoer that watched the prequel trilogy, they'll tell you "because the film needed them to."

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

6 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

That depends. If you ask Rian Johnson its because "the legacy of the Jedi is failure.[...]at the height of their power they allowed Darth Sidius to rise" yada yada.

 

But isn't that Lucas' take on it as well? 

[Chen G. 3,943]

No. Its a point we've discussed before.

 

Lucas wasn't intentionally providing commentary on the Jedi's hubris and stiffness. That's just Rian Johnson being apologetic and trying to retcon the whole thing - quite unsuccesfuly, I should add.

 

If that was Lucas intention, he wouldn't have the Jedi's strict rules (for instance, their objection to matrimony) be reinforced by the outcomes of Revenge of the Sith. His film proves that the Jedi were right.

 

Lucas must've thought that it was so cool, stoic and zen-like to have Yoda ramble on about how just about everything that makes us human is "a path to the darkside". But it wasn't. It was inane.

 

Not to mention, he needed things to fall into place like that for the plot of his film to work.

[Dixon Hill 4,232]

3 hours ago, Norma's Corpse said:

I'm only 5'10...

 

I didn't know they stacked shit that high!

 

- TGP, obviously having watched Full Metal Jacket several times recently

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

I'll see it someday!

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

It has a lot of bad language!

[Dixon Hill 4,232]

Great quotability.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Just now, TGP said:

Great quotability.

 

 

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

I just remember the sargent man reprised his role in Half-Life: Opposing Force.

[Bilbo 3,709]

Full Metal Jacket is great!

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

I remember when I first heard of it, I really thought it was about someone wearing a jacket with metal bits on it.

[mstrox 6,647]

34 minutes ago, Norma's Corpse said:

I just remember the sargent man reprised his role in [every thing he did after that]

 

[Jay 37,287]

1 hour ago, Norma's Corpse said:

I just remember the sargent man reprised his role in Half-Life: Opposing Force.

 

That wasn't him, that was Jon St. John [voice of Duke Nukem] imitating R L Ermy.

[Nick Parker 3,040]

But @mstrox's point stands. Also, JJ Abrams is a dude who really seems to love what he does, but does anyone consider him an original storyteller? I'm not just talking on a superficial "Force Awakens apes the original" play-by-play list.

[Kasey Kockroach 2,343]

Super 8's pandering nostalgia annoyed me a lot more than TFA's.

[Arpy 4,145]

Sacrilege!

1 hour ago, kaseykockroach said:

Super 8's pandering nostalgia annoyed me a lot more than TFA's.

 

[Nick Parker 3,040]

2 hours ago, kaseykockroach said:

Super 8's pandering nostalgia annoyed me a lot more than TFA's.

 

The Force Awakens might be his best movie! I keep harping on it over and over, but from the interviews at the time, it really sounds like Lawrence Kasdan contributed a lot to what works in The Force Awakens; his input really prompted Abrams to dig deeper as a filmmaker...I can only hope this influence was staying.

[Kasey Kockroach 2,343]

I can at least say I like Rey as a protagonist more than I ever did Luke.

I don't think the OT had better writing, just...simpler. Though simplicity would be nice for these new romps. 

[Nick1Ø66 4,688]

6 hours ago, Chen G. said:

That depends. If you ask Rian Johnson its because "the legacy of the Jedi is failure.[...]at the height of their power they allowed Darth Sidius to rise" yada yada.

 

If you ask any filmgoer that watched the prequel trilogy, they'll tell you "because the film needed them to."

 

Well the legacy of the Jedi is quitting. Running away.

 

Yoda more or less fought Palpi to a draw in ROTS. So what does he do, get back in the fight? No he jumps into Bail Organa's hot rod and spins away. And what does he do then? Say to Organa "our forces we must gather, strike before it's too late".  No, he runs away into exile and orders Kenobi to do the same thing. Maybe Yoda & co. would have had a chance to fight back and stop the Emperor before he consolidated his power. I don't know, at least try.  But don't just run away.

 

Then Luke does the same thing, apparently sometime between ROTJ and TFA. When things get bad, he throws himself into exile and sulks.  And the whole sorry state of affairs comes to a culmination with the symbolic tossing of the light sabre.

 

So in this way, I guess RJ is keeping with the spirit of the previous films. When the going gets tough the Jedi get going...as far away as they can!

 

To think I collected Jedi action figures.

 

 

 

[Arpy 4,145]

Well, Luke certainly carries this misconception of the Jedi, blaming them for the rise of Palpatine. From the events of Revenge of the Sith, can anyone blame the Jedi? A powerful sith Lord manipulating things from behind the scenes and all whilst seducing a powerful jedi to the dark side - clouding the Jedi's judgment.

[The Illustrious Jerry 3,356]

It was a genius plan. 

[Mattris 416]

13 hours ago, Holko said:

Look on this very forum where people (both fans and more casuals) not hating the movie (ranging from those loving it to those more indifferent), based on those who have talked about it, are absolutely in the majority. In fact, you are the only one here who keeps tying to argue against it. I remember back in December 3-5 people really didn't like it, since then all I've seen are 1-2 minimalist posts saying "I didn't really like 7 or 8" or so. That's it.

.....

I'm aware JWFan is not representative of the fandom, but you asked for the same kind of link you provided, and those were definitely not representative either. In fact, a forum with many film and music lovers should be a more balanced source than random comment sections filled with members of an agenda-driven angry vocal minority mob known for actively seeking out stuff they don't like just to trash it.

 

Ok, then.

 

See this Variety poll taken shortly after Solo was released. SPOILER ALERT: Solo and TLJ are last.

 

Star Wars movie poll taken on Jedi Temple Archives   (TLJ was last)

 

Comments copy-pasted from this article on IndieWire:

 

Comments copy-pasted from this Variety article regarding Kathleen Kenndy's contract extention.

[Nick1Ø66 4,688]

Dude...WTF.

 

Enough already.  Do you really expect anyone hear to read that crap...a thread from another web site?  Don't we have enough threads here?

[Demodex 557]

TL,DR

[Bilbo 3,709]

Yeeeesh, that’s a terrible idea