Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****
-
@rancid-schnitzel said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
@crucial said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
I don't think doing a Solo backstory was a completely stupid idea. From SW on there were always 4 main characters (2 more if you count C3PO and R2D2)
We have had Vader's backstory
Luke doesn't have a backstory other than what we got when he was born and where we picked up with him
Leia got the birth backstory but the gap in hers would be rather boring up to where she came in in R1
Han was a bit of a mystery, as was his relationship with Chewie. It was only ever alluded to in bits and pieces in the EU works so was fertile ground to fill in where he came from and how he met Chewie. No one really needed it but if wanted to make a separate movie in the SW universe it was a pretty obvious one to make.
As a movie it is a fun watch and probably one of the closest in feel to the originals.
Sadly it was made a scapegoat by those that decided movies couldn't offend their political sensibilities.
Or it was just because the previous SW film was utter shit and they wouldn't part with their hard earned to watch another one. That tends to happen when the filmmakers care more about making political statements than developing good characters and stories.
See, that's just your interpretation on the movie and that's fair enough, you can interpret things however you think.
All movies about conflict or war will convey some sort of position. The difference is that in the OT days the political undertones were simple. Good v Bad. It was easy then because despite domestic economic politics there were common 'bad guys'. WWII was still in memories or only a generation past, the Cold War was still going etc etc. Mostly there wasn't the collective focussing on day to day issues that the internet brought about.
Now we have people getting further and further apart on societal views as each 'side' gets defensive over challenges to their thoughts and we get the endless tedious name calling and labelling that groups individual thoughts or stances into easily targetable factions. Say you don't care about gay characters in a movie and suddenly you go from being someone who really doesn't give a shit to a card carrying 'social justice warrior' (as if you attend a club or something).
The producers of these movies are on record saying they are only bringing reflections of their experiences to play rather than deliberately campaigning. Isn't that the point of a producer? Bringing a view in that may be different?
If you don't like the movie for its storyline or characters that's fine. But if you are so sensitive about other's life views that they ruin your enjoyment of a movie that is fantasy then you are verging on reading way too much into shit.Plenty of movies I enjoyed watching that wouldn't fit with my personal view on life, but if they entertain then they have served their purpose.
As for Solo, watch it for what it is not for what offended you from another movie.
-
@crucial said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
@rancid-schnitzel said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
@crucial said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
I don't think doing a Solo backstory was a completely stupid idea. From SW on there were always 4 main characters (2 more if you count C3PO and R2D2)
We have had Vader's backstory
Luke doesn't have a backstory other than what we got when he was born and where we picked up with him
Leia got the birth backstory but the gap in hers would be rather boring up to where she came in in R1
Han was a bit of a mystery, as was his relationship with Chewie. It was only ever alluded to in bits and pieces in the EU works so was fertile ground to fill in where he came from and how he met Chewie. No one really needed it but if wanted to make a separate movie in the SW universe it was a pretty obvious one to make.
As a movie it is a fun watch and probably one of the closest in feel to the originals.
Sadly it was made a scapegoat by those that decided movies couldn't offend their political sensibilities.
Or it was just because the previous SW film was utter shit and they wouldn't part with their hard earned to watch another one. That tends to happen when the filmmakers care more about making political statements than developing good characters and stories.
See, that's just your interpretation on the movie and that's fair enough, you can interpret things however you think.
All movies about conflict or war will convey some sort of position. The difference is that in the OT days the political undertones were simple. Good v Bad. It was easy then because despite domestic economic politics there were common 'bad guys'. WWII was still in memories or only a generation past, the Cold War was still going etc etc. Mostly there wasn't the collective focussing on day to day issues that the internet brought about.
Now we have people getting further and further apart on societal views as each 'side' gets defensive over challenges to their thoughts and we get the endless tedious name calling and labelling that groups individual thoughts or stances into easily targetable factions. Say you don't care about gay characters in a movie and suddenly you go from being someone who really doesn't give a shit to a card carrying 'social justice warrior' (as if you attend a club or something).
The producers of these movies are on record saying they are only bringing reflections of their experiences to play rather than deliberately campaigning. Isn't that the point of a producer? Bringing a view in that may be different?
If you don't like the movie for its storyline or characters that's fine. But if you are so sensitive about other's life views that they ruin your enjoyment of a movie that is fantasy then you are verging on reading way too much into shit.Plenty of movies I enjoyed watching that wouldn't fit with my personal view on life, but if they entertain then they have served their purpose.
As for Solo, watch it for what it is not for what offended you from another movie.
Well if the producers claim that then it must be right. I mean characters like Holdo and Rose are just a complete coincidence. SW was clearly crying out for a pink haired lesbian and a dumpy Asian chick. Not to mention a robot fighting for robot rights. Or pan-sexual Lando.
GL saw the Ewoks as the Viet Cong so it's not like there haven't been political undertones in SW films. The problem is when it is to the detriment of the films they make. Ray is a joke of a character. A ridiculous Mary Sue who is the result of Kathleen Kennedy's obsession with a strong female lead". TLJ was an abortion. Here's a novel idea. Make a fucking space opera first then insert your politics. Not the other way round.
But I guess it's your side Crucial and that's all people like you give a shit about. Even if the quality of these films falls off a cliff as a result.
-
@crucial said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
I don't think doing a Solo backstory was a completely stupid idea. From SW on there were always 4 main characters (2 more if you count C3PO and R2D2)
We have had Vader's backstory
Luke doesn't have a backstory other than what we got when he was born and where we picked up with him
Leia got the birth backstory but the gap in hers would be rather boring up to where she came in in R1
Han was a bit of a mystery, as was his relationship with Chewie. It was only ever alluded to in bits and pieces in the EU works so was fertile ground to fill in where he came from and how he met Chewie. No one really needed it but if wanted to make a separate movie in the SW universe it was a pretty obvious one to make.
As a movie it is a fun watch and probably one of the closest in feel to the originals.
Sadly it was made a scapegoat by those that decided movies couldn't offend their political sensibilities.
Really ? Have you not seen Rogue one?
-
@mn5 said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
@crucial said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
I don't think doing a Solo backstory was a completely stupid idea. From SW on there were always 4 main characters (2 more if you count C3PO and R2D2)
We have had Vader's backstory
Luke doesn't have a backstory other than what we got when he was born and where we picked up with him
Leia got the birth backstory but the gap in hers would be rather boring up to where she came in in R1
Han was a bit of a mystery, as was his relationship with Chewie. It was only ever alluded to in bits and pieces in the EU works so was fertile ground to fill in where he came from and how he met Chewie. No one really needed it but if wanted to make a separate movie in the SW universe it was a pretty obvious one to make.
As a movie it is a fun watch and probably one of the closest in feel to the originals.
Sadly it was made a scapegoat by those that decided movies couldn't offend their political sensibilities.
Really ? Have you not seen Rogue one?
Funny, I didn't really feel that RO was that similar in style to the old films. Didn't stop it being a very good film for me. In fact, after TFA, it was refreshing to feel like SW stepped out of their lane for a change
-
@rancid-schnitzel said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
@crucial said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
@rancid-schnitzel said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
@crucial said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
I don't think doing a Solo backstory was a completely stupid idea. From SW on there were always 4 main characters (2 more if you count C3PO and R2D2)
We have had Vader's backstory
Luke doesn't have a backstory other than what we got when he was born and where we picked up with him
Leia got the birth backstory but the gap in hers would be rather boring up to where she came in in R1
Han was a bit of a mystery, as was his relationship with Chewie. It was only ever alluded to in bits and pieces in the EU works so was fertile ground to fill in where he came from and how he met Chewie. No one really needed it but if wanted to make a separate movie in the SW universe it was a pretty obvious one to make.
As a movie it is a fun watch and probably one of the closest in feel to the originals.
Sadly it was made a scapegoat by those that decided movies couldn't offend their political sensibilities.
Or it was just because the previous SW film was utter shit and they wouldn't part with their hard earned to watch another one. That tends to happen when the filmmakers care more about making political statements than developing good characters and stories.
See, that's just your interpretation on the movie and that's fair enough, you can interpret things however you think.
All movies about conflict or war will convey some sort of position. The difference is that in the OT days the political undertones were simple. Good v Bad. It was easy then because despite domestic economic politics there were common 'bad guys'. WWII was still in memories or only a generation past, the Cold War was still going etc etc. Mostly there wasn't the collective focussing on day to day issues that the internet brought about.
Now we have people getting further and further apart on societal views as each 'side' gets defensive over challenges to their thoughts and we get the endless tedious name calling and labelling that groups individual thoughts or stances into easily targetable factions. Say you don't care about gay characters in a movie and suddenly you go from being someone who really doesn't give a shit to a card carrying 'social justice warrior' (as if you attend a club or something).
The producers of these movies are on record saying they are only bringing reflections of their experiences to play rather than deliberately campaigning. Isn't that the point of a producer? Bringing a view in that may be different?
If you don't like the movie for its storyline or characters that's fine. But if you are so sensitive about other's life views that they ruin your enjoyment of a movie that is fantasy then you are verging on reading way too much into shit.Plenty of movies I enjoyed watching that wouldn't fit with my personal view on life, but if they entertain then they have served their purpose.
As for Solo, watch it for what it is not for what offended you from another movie.
Well if the producers claim that then it must be right. I mean characters like Holdo and Rose are just a complete coincidence. SW was clearly crying out for a pink haired lesbian and a dumpy Asian chick. Not to mention a robot fighting for robot rights. Or pan-sexual Lando.
GL saw the Ewoks as the Viet Cong so it's not like there haven't been political undertones in SW films. The problem is when it is to the detriment of the films they make. Ray is a joke of a character. A ridiculous Mary Sue who is the result of Kathleen Kennedy's obsession with a strong female lead". TLJ was an abortion. Here's a novel idea. Make a fucking space opera first then insert your politics. Not the other way round.
But I guess it's your side Crucial and that's all people like you give a shit about. Even if the quality of these films falls off a cliff as a result.
Again with the 'people like you' and 'your side' rubbish.
Stop categorising people and trying to create 'sides' and much of this crap disappears.I get that experiences or slants you would bring to your work wouldn't include different sexual orientations but (apart from being a poorly written character) what on earth is wrong with having a 'dumpy Asian chick' (your words) in a movie? Is that how you would go about casting? Plenty of people look like her in the world I live in. Why not bring some relatable reality to cast? Even if it was deliberately done what is wrong with that? It is only reflecting the real world we live in.
-
@mn5 said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
@crucial said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
I don't think doing a Solo backstory was a completely stupid idea. From SW on there were always 4 main characters (2 more if you count C3PO and R2D2)
We have had Vader's backstory
Luke doesn't have a backstory other than what we got when he was born and where we picked up with him
Leia got the birth backstory but the gap in hers would be rather boring up to where she came in in R1
Han was a bit of a mystery, as was his relationship with Chewie. It was only ever alluded to in bits and pieces in the EU works so was fertile ground to fill in where he came from and how he met Chewie. No one really needed it but if wanted to make a separate movie in the SW universe it was a pretty obvious one to make.
As a movie it is a fun watch and probably one of the closest in feel to the originals.
Sadly it was made a scapegoat by those that decided movies couldn't offend their political sensibilities.
Really ? Have you not seen Rogue one?
Yeah, and I liked it. I thought it was the war movie matinee that Lucas didn't (but maybe should have) do.
I just thought that Solo had a bit more of the 'fun' that was in SW and ROTJ -
@crucial said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
@rancid-schnitzel said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
@crucial said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
@rancid-schnitzel said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
@crucial said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
I don't think doing a Solo backstory was a completely stupid idea. From SW on there were always 4 main characters (2 more if you count C3PO and R2D2)
We have had Vader's backstory
Luke doesn't have a backstory other than what we got when he was born and where we picked up with him
Leia got the birth backstory but the gap in hers would be rather boring up to where she came in in R1
Han was a bit of a mystery, as was his relationship with Chewie. It was only ever alluded to in bits and pieces in the EU works so was fertile ground to fill in where he came from and how he met Chewie. No one really needed it but if wanted to make a separate movie in the SW universe it was a pretty obvious one to make.
As a movie it is a fun watch and probably one of the closest in feel to the originals.
Sadly it was made a scapegoat by those that decided movies couldn't offend their political sensibilities.
Or it was just because the previous SW film was utter shit and they wouldn't part with their hard earned to watch another one. That tends to happen when the filmmakers care more about making political statements than developing good characters and stories.
See, that's just your interpretation on the movie and that's fair enough, you can interpret things however you think.
All movies about conflict or war will convey some sort of position. The difference is that in the OT days the political undertones were simple. Good v Bad. It was easy then because despite domestic economic politics there were common 'bad guys'. WWII was still in memories or only a generation past, the Cold War was still going etc etc. Mostly there wasn't the collective focussing on day to day issues that the internet brought about.
Now we have people getting further and further apart on societal views as each 'side' gets defensive over challenges to their thoughts and we get the endless tedious name calling and labelling that groups individual thoughts or stances into easily targetable factions. Say you don't care about gay characters in a movie and suddenly you go from being someone who really doesn't give a shit to a card carrying 'social justice warrior' (as if you attend a club or something).
The producers of these movies are on record saying they are only bringing reflections of their experiences to play rather than deliberately campaigning. Isn't that the point of a producer? Bringing a view in that may be different?
If you don't like the movie for its storyline or characters that's fine. But if you are so sensitive about other's life views that they ruin your enjoyment of a movie that is fantasy then you are verging on reading way too much into shit.Plenty of movies I enjoyed watching that wouldn't fit with my personal view on life, but if they entertain then they have served their purpose.
As for Solo, watch it for what it is not for what offended you from another movie.
Well if the producers claim that then it must be right. I mean characters like Holdo and Rose are just a complete coincidence. SW was clearly crying out for a pink haired lesbian and a dumpy Asian chick. Not to mention a robot fighting for robot rights. Or pan-sexual Lando.
GL saw the Ewoks as the Viet Cong so it's not like there haven't been political undertones in SW films. The problem is when it is to the detriment of the films they make. Ray is a joke of a character. A ridiculous Mary Sue who is the result of Kathleen Kennedy's obsession with a strong female lead". TLJ was an abortion. Here's a novel idea. Make a fucking space opera first then insert your politics. Not the other way round.
But I guess it's your side Crucial and that's all people like you give a shit about. Even if the quality of these films falls off a cliff as a result.
Again with the 'people like you' and 'your side' rubbish.
Stop categorising people and trying to create 'sides' and much of this crap disappears.I get that experiences or slants you would bring to your work wouldn't include different sexual orientations but (apart from being a poorly written character) what on earth is wrong with having a 'dumpy Asian chick' (your words) in a movie? Is that how you would go about casting? Plenty of people look like her in the world I live in. Why not bring some relatable reality to cast? Even if it was deliberately done what is wrong with that? It is only reflecting the real world we live in.
You're not defending the films, you're defending the (very openly expressed) politics of those making the film. You wouldn't care less otherwise. I wouldn't defend the filmakers inserting their politics, even if I 100% agreed with them. It's fucking Star Wars not a university newspaper.
And news flash Crucial. This is SW, not the real world. It's a sci-fi movie, not the real world. Since a huge number of fans are probably fat, sweaty, white nerds, how about casting one of them as well? Isn't that reflecting the world in which we live?
-
@rancid-schnitzel said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
And news flash Crucial. This is SW, not the real world. It's a sci-fi movie, not the real world. Since a huge number of fans are probably fat, sweaty, white nerds, how about casting one of them as well? Isn't that reflecting the world in which we live?
Maybe because that demographic has already been covered?
-
@mooshld said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
@rancid-schnitzel said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
Or it was just because the previous SW film was utter shit and they wouldn't part with their hard earned to watch another one. That tends to happen when the filmmakers care more about making political statements than developing good characters and stories.
I didn't read this whole thread, and I am sure I am going to regret asking this. But what political statements were made?
None.
Well... some rather tiresome analogies of robots/slavery. But funnily enough, that is NOT what people are alluding to.
Some people seem to believe that the movies are pushing an agenda of brainwashing our children to start fucking toasters and fridges. Because of a couple of poor jokes in the movie, which were NOT saying that at all, and a throwaway gag by the (comedic) actor. Which again - was NOT seriously saying that at all.
But... despite having had this pointed out several times, minds do not change. So not really looking forward to the "copy-paste" responses. -
Thanks, I read back. Yeah I don't know what to say without getting involved.
I just watch the film, all this the producer said this and the writer wrote the character as that , isn't just shit to keep people talking about their films. Who follows that crap. Seriously and then to base your enjoyment of it around this??
In the modern age the film seems like its never enough for some people. They always seem to be trying to get more and more out of it. Who ever asked these questions back in the 80's or 90's. Can you imagine asking the director of commando what Arnie carrying a tree on his shoulder was supposed to be a metaphor for?? People take this all way to seriously.
When I see a new star wars film is coming out I watch the trailer then the film then forget about it till the next one. Maybe I am in the minority. I thought the robot rebellion was quite funny.
-
@mooshld said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
Thanks, I read back. Yeah I don't know what to say without getting involved.
I just watch the film, all this the producer said this and the writer wrote the character as that , isn't just shit to keep people talking about their films. Who follows that crap. Seriously and then to base your enjoyment of it around this??
In the modern age the film seems like its never enough for some people. They always seem to be trying to get more and more out of it. Who ever asked these questions back in the 80's or 90's. Can you imagine asking the director of commando what Arnie carrying a tree on his shoulder was supposed to be a metaphor for?? People take this all way to seriously.
When I see a new star wars film is coming out I watch the trailer then the film then forget about it till the next one. Maybe I am in the minority. I thought the robot rebellion was quite funny.
How dare you come flying in here with all sorts of reasonableness!
I can't even tell what 'side' you are on or whose politics you are defending FFS! -
@crucial said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
@rancid-schnitzel said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
And news flash Crucial. This is SW, not the real world. It's a sci-fi movie, not the real world. Since a huge number of fans are probably fat, sweaty, white nerds, how about casting one of them as well? Isn't that reflecting the world in which we live?
Maybe because that demographic has already been covered?
Porkins ( still cracks me up that that is his name ) bulk clearly effected the maneuverability of his ship and that's why he was shot down first
Imagine the furore if he was there today? Lots of dumpy Asians and skinny dykes with purple hair would be outraged at their lack of representation.
-
@crucial said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
@rancid-schnitzel said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
And news flash Crucial. This is SW, not the real world. It's a sci-fi movie, not the real world. Since a huge number of fans are probably fat, sweaty, white nerds, how about casting one of them as well? Isn't that reflecting the world in which we live?
Maybe because that demographic has already been covered?
Give him as much screen time as Rose and a kissing scene as well. We all know how important it is for the fans to have someone to relate to in a scifi flick.
-
@kruse said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
@mooshld said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
@rancid-schnitzel said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
Or it was just because the previous SW film was utter shit and they wouldn't part with their hard earned to watch another one. That tends to happen when the filmmakers care more about making political statements than developing good characters and stories.
I didn't read this whole thread, and I am sure I am going to regret asking this. But what political statements were made?
None.
Well... some rather tiresome analogies of robots/slavery. But funnily enough, that is NOT what people are alluding to.
Some people seem to believe that the movies are pushing an agenda of brainwashing our children to start fucking toasters and fridges. Because of a couple of poor jokes in the movie, which were NOT saying that at all, and a throwaway gag by the (comedic) actor. Which again - was NOT seriously saying that at all.
But... despite having had this pointed out several times, minds do not change. So not really looking forward to the "copy-paste" responses.There's been plenty more than that but you choose what you want to focus on. And then piss off never to be seen again.
-
@mooshld said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
Thanks, I read back. Yeah I don't know what to say without getting involved.
I just watch the film, all this the producer said this and the writer wrote the character as that , isn't just shit to keep people talking about their films. Who follows that crap. Seriously and then to base your enjoyment of it around this??
In the modern age the film seems like its never enough for some people. They always seem to be trying to get more and more out of it. Who ever asked these questions back in the 80's or 90's. Can you imagine asking the director of commando what Arnie carrying a tree on his shoulder was supposed to be a metaphor for?? People take this all way to seriously.
When I see a new star wars film is coming out I watch the trailer then the film then forget about it till the next one. Maybe I am in the minority. I thought the robot rebellion was quite funny.
You guys just don't get it do you? It's been explained umpteen times, but you still choose to ignore it. Here it is in easy to understand form.
TLJ shit film
Fans protest shit film
Filmmakers slander shit out of fans who protest shit film. Accuse them of sexism, racism etc.
Fans explain that their concern is about shitty characters, plot holes etc. Not interested in politics just good scifi films.
Filmmakers slander shit out of fans who protest shit film. Accuse them of sexism, racism etc.
Fans boycott Solo. -
@rancid-schnitzel said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
@mooshld said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
Thanks, I read back. Yeah I don't know what to say without getting involved.
I just watch the film, all this the producer said this and the writer wrote the character as that , isn't just shit to keep people talking about their films. Who follows that crap. Seriously and then to base your enjoyment of it around this??
In the modern age the film seems like its never enough for some people. They always seem to be trying to get more and more out of it. Who ever asked these questions back in the 80's or 90's. Can you imagine asking the director of commando what Arnie carrying a tree on his shoulder was supposed to be a metaphor for?? People take this all way to seriously.
When I see a new star wars film is coming out I watch the trailer then the film then forget about it till the next one. Maybe I am in the minority. I thought the robot rebellion was quite funny.
You guys just don't get it do you? It's been explained umpteen times, but you still choose to ignore it. Here it is in easy to understand form.
TLJ shit film
Fans protest shit film
Filmmakers slander shit out of fans who protest shit film. Accuse them of sexism, racism etc.
Fans explain that their concern is about shitty characters, plot holes etc. Not interested in politics just good scifi films.
Filmmakers slander shit out of fans who protest shit film. Accuse them of sexism, racism etc.
Fans boycott Solo.I can't go so far as to call it a shit film. It is SW, I am extremely loyal and there are good points in the movie.
But this post is bang on.
-
@mn5 said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
@rancid-schnitzel said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
@mooshld said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
Thanks, I read back. Yeah I don't know what to say without getting involved.
I just watch the film, all this the producer said this and the writer wrote the character as that , isn't just shit to keep people talking about their films. Who follows that crap. Seriously and then to base your enjoyment of it around this??
In the modern age the film seems like its never enough for some people. They always seem to be trying to get more and more out of it. Who ever asked these questions back in the 80's or 90's. Can you imagine asking the director of commando what Arnie carrying a tree on his shoulder was supposed to be a metaphor for?? People take this all way to seriously.
When I see a new star wars film is coming out I watch the trailer then the film then forget about it till the next one. Maybe I am in the minority. I thought the robot rebellion was quite funny.
You guys just don't get it do you? It's been explained umpteen times, but you still choose to ignore it. Here it is in easy to understand form.
TLJ shit film
Fans protest shit film
Filmmakers slander shit out of fans who protest shit film. Accuse them of sexism, racism etc.
Fans explain that their concern is about shitty characters, plot holes etc. Not interested in politics just good scifi films.
Filmmakers slander shit out of fans who protest shit film. Accuse them of sexism, racism etc.
Fans boycott Solo.I can't go so far as to call it a shit film. It is SW, I am extremely loyal and there are good points in the movie.
But this post is bang on.
Same thing happened with Ghostbusters. It was terrible, and any criticism of the awful script, acting or direction was just dismissed as sexist.
-
@mn5 said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
@crucial said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
@rancid-schnitzel said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
And news flash Crucial. This is SW, not the real world. It's a sci-fi movie, not the real world. Since a huge number of fans are probably fat, sweaty, white nerds, how about casting one of them as well? Isn't that reflecting the world in which we live?
Maybe because that demographic has already been covered?
Porkins ( still cracks me up that that is his name ) bulk clearly effected the maneuverability of his ship and that's why he was shot down first
Imagine the furore if he was there today? Lots of dumpy Asians and skinny dykes with purple hair would be outraged at their lack of representation.
Funny thing is, until RS went off about her, I didn't even think about Holdo being a lezza or not. I don't really care either way, but she was a pretty average character, and her sexual orientation doesn't really alter that either way for me. But there are lots of average characters in SW, George Lucas was very good at that. Amazing how SW started out as GL making this B grade style matinee film (good term, whoever used it earlier), and now for some it has become almost religious. Is this how the bible started out, as a pulp novel?
-
@canefan said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
@mn5 said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
@crucial said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
@rancid-schnitzel said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
And news flash Crucial. This is SW, not the real world. It's a sci-fi movie, not the real world. Since a huge number of fans are probably fat, sweaty, white nerds, how about casting one of them as well? Isn't that reflecting the world in which we live?
Maybe because that demographic has already been covered?
Porkins ( still cracks me up that that is his name ) bulk clearly effected the maneuverability of his ship and that's why he was shot down first
Imagine the furore if he was there today? Lots of dumpy Asians and skinny dykes with purple hair would be outraged at their lack of representation.
Funny thing is, until RS went off about her, I didn't even think about Holdo being a lezza or not. I don't really care either way, but she was a pretty average character, and her sexual orientation doesn't really alter that either way for me. But there are lots of average characters in SW, George Lucas was very good at that. Amazing how SW started out as GL making this B grade style matinee film (good term, whoever used it earlier), and now for some it has become almost religious. Is this how the bible started out, as a pulp novel?
If she was a dynamic hot lesbo I'd have no issue in the slightest.
-
@mn5 said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
@canefan said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
@mn5 said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
@crucial said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
@rancid-schnitzel said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
And news flash Crucial. This is SW, not the real world. It's a sci-fi movie, not the real world. Since a huge number of fans are probably fat, sweaty, white nerds, how about casting one of them as well? Isn't that reflecting the world in which we live?
Maybe because that demographic has already been covered?
Porkins ( still cracks me up that that is his name ) bulk clearly effected the maneuverability of his ship and that's why he was shot down first
Imagine the furore if he was there today? Lots of dumpy Asians and skinny dykes with purple hair would be outraged at their lack of representation.
Funny thing is, until RS went off about her, I didn't even think about Holdo being a lezza or not. I don't really care either way, but she was a pretty average character, and her sexual orientation doesn't really alter that either way for me. But there are lots of average characters in SW, George Lucas was very good at that. Amazing how SW started out as GL making this B grade style matinee film (good term, whoever used it earlier), and now for some it has become almost religious. Is this how the bible started out, as a pulp novel?
If she was a dynamic hot lesbo I'd have no issue in the slightest.
Here we go, how hard can it be to turn this into the guns and strippers thread v2?