Star Wars Griefing Thread (SPOILERS) - Safety off

It didn't used to be that bad with the mantra of "you can't hurt female characters!" until fairly recently.

Look at "The Long Kiss Goodnight", that character gets shot, stabbed, blown up, and at one points even screams for help. Does it depower her? Fuck no. Samuel L. Jackson being Samuel L. Jackson doesn't diminish the female protagonist at all. (Come on, that scene where he's half-frozen in the car, she's screaming for help, and he opens his eyes and looks up is completely badass and we both know it)

Leia was: tortured, shot at, hell, she got shot in RotJ, and that didn't diminish her character. Hell, the majority of women I knew at the time of that movie thought it was badass.

But something changed, both in story-telling and in audience attitudes.

To be honest, I blame Twilight.

Now wait, hear me out. Twilight Bella got everything she wanted, and because her blood tasted so delicious, it was a reason that she couldn't be injured in the series because even a paper cut put her life at risk from hordes of vampires. We all know the fact that it was a Mary Sue insert, that she could have been replaced by a Pecan Pie and the story would be the same.

The Hunger Games, the protagonist got hurt, physically, mentally, emotionally, but the movies really blunted it down to "Really cool chick with a bow" and ignored all the messy "hide in the closet under blankets because it's warm and safe and nobody can judge me or see me or hurt me" aspects of the series.

Then suddenly if a female protagonist got injured, critics and smooth brained Twitterati screamed "TORTURE PORN!" and mistook normal anxiety for disgust and trauma.

Weirdly, it follows a conversation I had a few months back with some friends.

Movies and literature have women in male roles, in traditionally male activities, but they (the audience, the character, the real person) strangely enough still carry forward the "you can't hit/hurt me, I'm a girl!!!" that you see in every fucking Worldstar video where some chick is beating on a guy and he gets sick of it and throws a single punch after she's punched him, spit on him, kicked him, clawed him, bitten him, and suddenly HE'S the bad guy.

If you had a movie where women charged the beach on D-Day instead of men, I will lay you dollars to donuts that every critic would freak out and you'd see article after article about how if you like this movie you secretly hate women.

Look at Black Widow's introduction scene in Avengers. She's tied to a chair supposedly exposed to enhanced interrogation (Slapping at the time) and yet her hair is perfectly in place. They couldn't even give her a black eye or a split lip because they knew that audiences would react badly.

Compare that to say, Stark's treatment by the hadji's in Iron Man.

(Don't get me wrong, I think Black Widow is one of the better female characters in film nowadays because she isn't perfect and she isn't the strongest/fastest/toughest/deadliest character in the Avenger films)

If you were to do a war film with a main female lead, it's doubtful they'd injure her at all. Do you think she'd take a beating ala Desmond Doss in Hacksaw Ridge? Hell, do you think she'd take a bullet to the gut like that movie in the 90's about the chopper pilot during Desert Storm?

Shit, do you think they'd beat on her like they did during GI Jane?

It's all about getting the cool powers, the cool abilities, the "respect", the privileges of a male role without all the responsibilities and hardship, even while the critics and Twitterati go on and on about "women's pain" or "women's burden" or whatever.

Female characters have to reflect these Twitterati and upper-execs and Hollywood weirdos who haven't really had any hardship and think that being told "No" is the worst thing in the universe.

Like the meme says:

Death Star Destroys Alderan, Women Most Affected.

Which REALLY REALLY sucks, because they've set back story-telling by decades. Even Grandpappy Tolkien's female characters underwent struggle and hardship.

"The Little Matchgirl" could never be accepted today.

The sexy, sexual, and badass Grace Jones characters from Octopussy and Conan couldn't be done today.

Vasquez from Aliens couldn't be done today.

Soy Wars is just the state of modern storytelling.

A perfect female character who gets no development, growth, training, has no reason for powers and abilities aside from "Yay! Woman!", who treats getting dusty like being gutshot while everyone carries her around talking about how strong and brave she is.

What pisses me off, is not only did Star Wars fans deserve better, but movie-goers, and yes, women, deserve better.

The tale of John Henry is diminished if he doesn't die.

Hacksaw Ridge is lessened if Desmond Doss just wanders around with his uniform perfect and uninjured.

Halloween is ruined if Lorie Strode is in no danger the entire time.

That's the crux of the Soy Wars debate and argument, when you get right down to it.

The audience deserves a real story, not a 3-movie commercial for merchandise.

Compare today's wokeness with this episode of the 1998 version of Fantasy Island. A woman comes to the island to fulfill her desire to become a combat soldier, only to get sent to an alternative version of WW2, where the soldiers were all women. And she sees firsthand that war is all suffering and sacrifice. I highly doubt this episode could be made today without turning the main character into a superwoman who mows down white male Nazis by the hundreds.
 
According to the new IX dictionary and guide for the film, Disney will no longer be using BBY/ABY (Before and After Battle of Yavin) for the Star Wars calendar's dating system. Instead they'll be using BSI/ASI (Before and After Starkiller Incident) for all years in SW from now on... So currently it is now Year 1 ASI in Plan IX. Therefore Rey and her gang have officially replaced Luke and his friends in every conceivable way.
Hmm, renumbering the timeline to cement your plan in destroying the past ... what does this remind me of?
year_one_france.png


year_zero_cambodia.png

Instead, each studio is semi-autonomous. Iger reviews reports on their financials, is kept abreast by a a small army of advisers. In many ways, he is a King, who doesn't rule the individual towns or cities under his reign and instead he entrusts them to lords. Lords like Kathleen Kennedy.

"Oh, but obviously he would keep a close eye on Star Wars, its worth so much!"

No, not really. In fact, not at all. Fiege has said he has near complete autonomy, and Marvel is worth a -lot- more than Star Wars. What is more, the orders from Iger, according to his book, were to play it as safe as possible.Finally, his adviser, in the form of the 'lord' Kennedy would be able to say whatever she wanted... so long as the financials and other advisers did not disagree.
I think somebody on Twitter put it best - the problem isn't woke capitalism, it's woke managerialism, where capitalists entrust middle managers to run their creative/PR/marketing arms, who will then inject woke SJW politics and alienate their core audience. It's a Principal Agent problem.
 
TBH, it was better than the last one, which I barely remember much of, or even TFA for that matter. At least from what I remembered, Disney seemed to tone down a lot of the SJWisms (Finn didn't black anybody and Poe was what they would call a White Savior), and I liked the part when Ben nonchalantly screams ouch.

Ian McDiarmid is still a BAMF.
 
@Reverend I don't think I'll be able to look at Bob Saget again without laughing and no that isn't to come across as some kind of you ruined my childhood after watching some of that clip.
Bob Sagat was rauchy motherfucker LONG before he stepped into Full House and "America's Funniest Home Videos" the irony that he got those two roles as a normal, well adjusted parent, is beyond me. Someone at ABC must've been on coke when they offered him the job. that or sagat is the ultimate black pilled troll.

Unpossible that Scott "ShillSucking" Mendelson is on the same page as most of the audience. He's still a cunt fucktard who uses the word "Problematic" like any NPC douchecanoe but hey a win is a win in my book whomever the speaker.


Star Wars: The Rise Of Skywalker was also determined to repeat the mistakes that doomed Spider-Man 3, Spectre, Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald and Dark Phoenix.

With today beginning the unofficial two-week “kids are out of school and many adults are off work for the holidays” break period, Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker will have plenty of time to pull a Phantom Menace and make fools of those of us concerned about the $175.5 million domestic and $373.5 million opening weekend. The problem is less the raw number and more everything else. Beyond mixed-negative reviews, the film had a noticeably lower weekend multiplier (1.95 x a $90 million Friday) than the last three Christmas Star Wars flicks and a B+ Cinemascore grade, the lowest such grade from the opening night polling service for any live-action Star Wars movie. Even if you argue that the lower opening is indeed related to so-called Star Wars fatigue or backlash over The Last Jedi, the audience polling is entirely about The Rise of Skywalker.

I don’t pretend to know how the film was made, in terms of potential push-pull between J.J. Abrams, Disney and/or Lucasfilm. But beyond a frantic pace that left little time for character interaction, generic action sequences and oodles of “We’ve got to find that file!” Saturday morning cartoon-level dialogue are two core problems. First, the film spends a large majority of its running time retconning plot beats and character threads from The Last Jedi, in a way that, intentional or not, feels like kowtowing to the very sort of anti-Last Jedi folks who have kept John Boyega on the defensive since 2014 and chased Daisy Ridley and Kelly Marie Tran off social media. Moreover, it seemed dead set on ripping off plot twists and plot turns from some of the most divisive franchise finales and/or franchise sequels from the last 15 years.

Today In: Business
First, Rian Johnson’s The Last Jedi didn’t retcon or undo anything from The Force Awakens. J.J. Abrams’ franchise restarter ended with a major cliffhanger (Daisy Ridley’s Rey discovering Mark Hamill’s Luke Skywalker alone on an uncharted island). Considering the exposition offered by Harrison Ford’s Han Solo (Ben Solo was seduced by Snoke and destroyed Luke’s Jedi training school, which in turn led Luke to disappear), what exactly did fans think was going to be Luke’s reaction to a random nobody showing up on “exile Island” with his old lightsaber? Moreover, with the knowledge that he had no intent of returning for an additional-Star Wars movie, director J.J. Abrams left the origins of Snoke, the fate of a comatose John Boyega’s Finn and/or Rey’s parentage completely up in the air. Even Oscar Isaac’s Poe was a blank slate as he was supposed to die in The Force Awakens.


Spoilers for The Rise of Skywalker from here onward.

J.J. Abrams probably had concrete answers to the questions he posed in The Force Awakens but was willing to let Rian Johnson continue and (at the time) Colin Trevorrow finish the story he began. Whether you like or agree with the answers Johnson came up with (Luke has given up, Rey’s parents were nobodies, Poe is a cocky narcissist and Snoke is just a step to Kylo Ren’s path to ultimate power), they were no more or less valid with the information The Force Awakens gave us than anything fans might have speculated. What’s doubly frustrating about the retcons, specifically the reveal that Snoke was a clone created by Sheev Palpatine (Ian McDiarmid) and that Rey was actually Palpatine’s granddaughter and that her parents were actually heroes who hid her from grandpa and gave their lives to keep her safe, is that it both painfully patronizing and entirely unnecessary.

Going the expected/lazy route had no bearing on Rey’s “the belonging you seek is not behind you but in front of you” arc, or the Resistance trying to maintain hope after being ignored by their allies. The time spent retconning Last Jedi in a diabolical game of “No, but…” improv, be it Kylo and Rey’s redundant conversations about Rey’s expanded past (“I know your secrets, but I’m not going to divulge them until the next scene!”) or introducing new characters so that Rose Tico could become a glorified background player, left little time for actual character interaction and/or plot amid the various action sequences. It wasn’t just bad storytelling but a waste of valuable time. As far as Rey’s character, it invalidated the whole “anyone can cook” messaging and makes Rey yet another female hero (Interstellar, Tomb Raider, etc.) who is only in the game because of her father or grandfather.

The other weird issue was that Chris Terrio’s screenplay seemed to be a hybrid of many story beats and plot turns from series finales both loved and loathed. Spectre, arguably plotted as a finale in case Daniel Craig didn’t come back, offered a newly introduced Blofeld who was the secret puppet master behind the scenes of the previous three 007 movies and had a surprising relation to James Bond. Spider-Man 3 retconned Uncle Ben’s murder so that Thomas Haden Church’s Sandman (pre-transformation, natch) was kinda-sorta the real culprit. Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald spent much of its running time teasing the dark secrets of its newer characters with a final reveal that Ezra Miller's Credence Barebone is Dumbledore’s brother. Even the climactic “Rey Skywalker” reveal brought back memories of Joseph Gordon-Levitt revealing at the end of The Dark Knight Rises that his real first name was Robin.



WARNER BROS.
Avengers: Endgame didn’t invent all the good guys showing up for a last-minute rescue. The season finale of Power Rangers: Mega Force, the finale of The Two Towers and the climax of Pitch Perfect 2 arguably pulled the same trick. But it was still an odd case of two Disney mega-hits using the same plot device (think Maleficent’s “kiss from the prince doesn’t work” bit months after Frozen) but to much lesser results. The Rise of Skywalker’s similarities to Frozen II can wait for another time (-starts to hum “Show Yourself”-), but a comparison between the two highlights why character and emotional authenticity trumps plot when it comes to these beloved franchises. And yes, Rey’s showdown with Palpatine, down to the “the Jedi who died before Rey giving her strength and telling her to stand up” beat, felt like an inferior riff on Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part II.

If I were being optimistic, I would merely presume that J.J. Abrams came back for the third film, not entirely of his choosing, and then just made the movie that he would have made had he also directed the second film (or had Last Jedi not gone in unexpected directions). As a result, The Rise of Skywalker both feels like a retcon of and a loose remake of The Last Jedi. In that sense, it would make sense that Rose Tico wouldn’t have a huge role to play in this threequel, or that the big Rey reveal would be both bad news (your grandpa is Space Hitler) and in line with Star Wars tropes. Sure, it would still invalidate the core of the Rey vs. Kylo conflict (a man born of privilege and destined for greatness goes evil while a woman from nothing becomes the great hope), but c’est la vie.

Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker won’t be the first time a franchise shot itself in the foot by placating the “hardcore fans” (or giving audiences what they find the fan base wants) at the expense of general moviegoers. Think, relatively speaking, bringing Khan back for Star Trek into Darkness, killing off Emma Stone’s Gwen Stacey in Amazing Spider-Man 2, or making the last X-Men movie a redo of the “Dark Phoenix” arc 13 years after X-Men: The Last Stand. It also prioritized plot and plot twists over character, a mistake made by Fantastic Beasts compared to Harry Potter and (initially) DC Films compared to the MCU. Its commercial fate is yet untold, but The Rise of Skywalker failed because it was dead set on retconning a prior movie at the expense of itself and seemed determined to repeat the mistakes that doomed the franchise films that came before it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Unpossible that Scott "ShillSucking" Mendelson is on the same page as most of the audience. He's still a cunt fucktard who uses the word "Problematic" like any NPC douchecanoe but hey a win is a win in my book whomever the speaker.
Looks like so much pro-TLJ cope to me. 🤔
 
Looks like so much pro-TLJ cope to me. 🤔

I think Scott is riding the current wave to get all the views he can and shift the message as quickly as he can so more folks will forget what a shitweasel he is.

The reaction to Rise of Skywalker among my friends is split.

Some hate it, others loved it and admitted to crying during the movie.

The later reaction baffles me.


Anyone who cried during this movie needs immediate therapy and counseling. This isn't a movie that makes you think no matter how much of a fan either way you are. This isn't "Joker" level mental backflips that go on in your brain, this is straight Clockwork orange OMGPRETTY! on the screen for 2 hours and 20 min. The tunnel scene in Willy Wonka and the Chocolate factory is more thought provoking than a JJ Abrams FAst and Furious in Space movie.
 
So this is what Finn was DYING to tell Rey during the whole movie?


Abrams apparently revealed Finn's Force sensitivity after the Q&A, when fans "wanted to talk and take pics," ren clarified in a follow-up tweet. When "one person asked about what Finn wanted to say," the Force-sensitivity answer "is what J.J. confirmed with him."


Finn: Hey Rey!
Rey: <glare>
Finn: I can do the force thing too!
Poe: What's that lil buddy?
Finn: I can do the force thoughts and shit, it's pretty bad ass
Rey: <Fucks off to be alone on another planet>
Finn: Hey wait, I need a light saber!
 
Doesn't matter. It's the acting head of Lucasfilm parading around with a dumb grin on her face wearing a T-shirt that suggests the disembodied, genderless cosmic maybe-entity that governs the Star Wars universe has a vagina. It's very indicative of her mindset, especially in the context of how overpowered Rey is (and how much more overpowered Kennedy allegedly wanted to make her).

Exactly. I keep hearing that dumb "it wasn't an official SW shirt, it was a Nike shirt!" thing and it drives me crazy. Let's set aside that SHE IS THE HEAD OF STAR WARS and should be circumspect about the brand and how she reps it. But in deeds she has upheld the "Force is Female" sentiment. Holy shit do I wish it was only as bad as her wearing a stupid T-shirt. It was literally the tent pole of this fucking trilogy.
 
Rey ditched all of them for her dick appointments with Kylo Ren lmao. I saw it today with a friend that's a big fan but hadn't seen it and the ride back was dead silent. Even when they were almost at something decent, they still had Disney it up somehow and I laughed when Kylo Ren died immediately after kissing Rey because that's so stupid and cheesy that it could only be Star Wars and could only be Disney.
 
I almost like The Last Jedi because my idea for the sequels was that Luke turns to the dark side and then he gets killed. That didn't happen in The Last Jedi, but what did happen is almost ok. The movie is abysmal, but at this point I actually hate Star Wars, OT included, and I like to see the subversion. I never saw The Force Awakens, and I only saw 1 short clip of Rise Of Skywalker. But I like the subversion in The Last Jedi because Star Wars is banal and any subversion is a good thing..

George Lucas describes Star Wars as a soap opera. Soap operas are banal. The prequels are just a terrible soap opera and nothing more. At least The Last Jedi was a little anti social and that's almost interesting to me.

That's an interesting take, but unfortunately it's also one with some serious logical inconsistencies.

First, let's get the obvious out of the way: One of the most common beliefs across the entire Star Wars fandom during the lead-up to TFA is that when Disney got the license, they were going to wind up simply adapting one of three stories from the EU: Dark Empire, the Thrawn Trilogy, or the Vong trilogy, When Disney threw the EU out, most assumed they were going to make their own, but that's not what happened at all. Instead, they basically combined Dark Empire with Jedi Prince and put their own cast in the driver's seat. I could expound for pages on just how much TFA in particular steals openly from Dark Empire, but multiple Kiwis have already done that for me in this thread.

The second problem comes in from your insistence that what Disney Wars did with Luke was in any way groundbreaking or subversive. It wasn't. As explained, Disney was openly ripping off an existing story, which had done similar (Luke apparently as an antagonist), only worse. The ST doesn't handle things with anywhere near the grace or dignity of its EU counterpart and its seeming sole purpose behind doing so is tearing Luke's character down. And we know now from the various interviews with the cast and crew that this was done specifically in a way to alienate and anger fans, not for any payoff story-wise. And that's exactly the fucking problem. Subversion is all well and good, but subversion literally only has value when what you're giving at the end of the day is a worthy payoff, and the ST fucking isn't.

All of the cast of the OT is treated, at best, as set dressing or accessory (Chewie in particular has less screentime than the fucking Porgs) and at worst, sees complete violations of their character. Even if you factor in the Disney Wars EU stuff, the reasons provided therein are a bandage over a shotgun wound and many of them don't hold up to even passing scrutiny, they're attempts to get the fans the ST already had from realizing they're being dicked. Why are the OT characters sidelined? To bolster the ST cast, the bulk of whom don't get a chance to shine in their own fucking movies. The tragedy is that Disney wasted the very last time we could have gotten the gang of the OT back together - and for what?

Nothing. No payoff, no fond sendoff, just wasted, like every other opportunity the ST had.

You call Star Wars banal, but its patently clear you know nothing about the series beyond the movies. Which is fine in and of itself, but you can't really call an entire series with generations of fucking stories banal when there are literally infinite stories you could tell using that universe, and a flotilla of previous writers had no trouble doing so with across countless media forms for decades - everything from simple retellings of the original films, to horror, romance, and mysteries, because the universe itself was that big and offered that many options. All you needed was decent writing, and the sky was the limit - Star Wars wasn't for kids, it was for everyone. Nothing was stopping you from making a Heist or Murder Mystery movie in the Star Wars universe.

It's fine if you like the ST movies because you personally like them - more power to you if you do but they are objectively worse in every single capacity than the OT and PT - worse in writing, worse in characterization, worse in damage done to the franchise as a whole, worse in implications for the series. Years from now, when the CGI and effects of the ST are no longer impressive, when all it can really stand on is the strength of its writing and characters (or utter lack thereof), the ST will be remembered as worse than the Prequel Trilogy, and there's nothing you, I, or anyone else can do about it. And it never needed to pan out this way.
 
If you look here it seems like the box office take is dropping rather quickly


DateDOWRankDaily%± YD%± LWTheatersAvgTo DateDay
Dec 20, 2019Friday1$89,615,288--4,406$20,339$89,615,2881
Dec 21, 2019Saturday1$47,467,565-47%-4,406$10,773$137,082,8532
Dec 22, 2019Sunday1$40,301,011-15.1%-4,406$9,146$177,383,8643

Look at the way the take dropped from $89M to $47M to $40M
DaP2VfdXcAAb2Fp.jpg

Honestly, I'm eager to see what happens next.
 
Back