Star Wars: The Last Jedi (Post-release)
- Thread starter dbuck
- Start date
I DO! I really do! LOL
I really enjoyed TFA. Was it a rehash? Sure. But it felt like a SW movie. It was fun, lighthearted and left me with that same sense of "awe" I had as a kid. The ending was awesome! That's what I want each SW movie to do. I enjoyed SOLO. Another fun filled ride that fueled my passion for the Falcon, but also brought the little kid out of me. I'm still smiling about SOLO. TLJ was SO DIFFERENT in SO MANY WAYS that it was almost disturbing to watch. There was literally NO connection between Ep 7 and 8. It just made no sense. And I really want / wanted to like it.
But... it is what it is. It's cannon now and there is not much we can do about it. Ep 9 will be a challenge as it has to now connect the unconnectable. Is that even a word
I DO! I really do! LOL
I really enjoyed TFA. Was it a rehash? Sure. But it felt like a SW movie. It was fun, lighthearted and left me with that same sense of "awe" I had as a kid. The ending was awesome! That's what I want each SW movie to do. I enjoyed SOLO. Another fun filled ride that fueled my passion for the Falcon, but also brought the little kid out of me. I'm still smiling about SOLO. TLJ was SO DIFFERENT in SO MANY WAYS that it was almost disturbing to watch. There was literally NO connection between Ep 7 and 8. It just made no sense. And I really want / wanted to like it.
But... it is what it is. It's cannon now and there is not much we can do about it. Ep 9 will be a challenge as it has to now connect the unconnectable. Is that even a word
You posted pre-Solo that if Han did not come off as a scoundrel, womanizer, etc., that the film would fail for you. So I'm very surprised you liked it, given he seemed to tag along in virtually every scene of the film like someone's harmless little brother. He kept saying he was bad and an outlaw, but Q'ira didn't buy it, and neither did I. It surprises me anyone did. Especially someone like you, Sofa, who went into the film with that litmus test in mind.
I wasn't expecting a full blown scoundrel or womanizer from the start. Han wasn't born a scoundrel - something turned him into one. And we got a glimpse of that very thing. Q'ira put him on that path. We saw him walk that path near the end of the film with Beckett.
I was afraid they were going to go all PC and change the very essence of Solo. But he has to become Solo first. If that meant being insecure and trying to find your place in the world then I'm OK with it. It's an origin story. Coming full circle with Beckett... It goes to the argument that Han shot first. No, Han shot. Period.
cayman shen
Master Member
That was the whole point of that dialogue. We weren't supposed to think Han was bad. He's had a hardscrabble life and done some questionable things, but deep down, he's the good guy. Unlike his femme fatale ex-flame.
He was a wuss, is what he was.
The Han Solo from Star Wars and The Empire Strikes Back was not a wuss a decade earlier.
Cephus
Master Member
Unfortunately, the reason some people are afraid of having their own name out there is because they are afraid of what other people would do with that information. There are plenty out there who would act like complete trolls whether their own name was attached or not. Lots of people, myself included, argue for anonymity, not so we can act like idiots, but for protection from those who would.
This is my real name. Doesn't make any difference. I've had a few honest arguments here, even called a few people out once or twice, but if it ever goes too far I'm perfectly willing to apologize and mean it. Im here to learn about props and costumes and occasionally have stupid arguments about movies. I'm not interested in making enemies.
(By the way, if any of you ever have an actual beef with me, shoot me a pm. Odds are very good that I'll back off no questions asked rather than continue to hurt feelings)
But I do understand why some want anonymity. Aside from the reasons you gave, which are all true, there's also the fact that some people care more about WHO says a thing than WHAT'S being said. I think that's sad, and it makes anonymity needed in some cases.
cayman shen
Master Member
I actually got doxxed here once when I went awol and someone got concerned. I appreciated the worry, but it made me aware that I've shared WAY too much personal info :lol
kristen jones
Master Member
While I thank you for agreeing that the bullying is wrong and shouldn't happen, the "examples" you gave of Rian Johnson throwing Kelly under the bus aren't examples at all, but merely your opinions on the character, the role and the film... none of which constitutes anything that Rian did or didn't do to harm Kelly. They are simply your opinions.... and aren;'t relevant to my statement.
kristen jones
Master Member
As I'd mentioned about Darkside's response, that is merely your opinion of the character/role/story...not something objectively quantified as a misdeed that Rian Johnson intentionally perpetrated in order to hurt Kelly Marie Tran.
- - - Updated - - -
The movie didn't create the toxicity. That's ridiculous. The movie was received differently by different people. Some of them chose to dislike it, and to move on from criticizing it to criticizing the actors themselves. THAT is the toxicity we are talking about.. and the movie didn't create it. That was the choice of those who engaged in spreading it.
Keycube
Well-Known Member
I would love to have this done as a social experiment, because I was at first going to comment that the emasculating part would be to be dressed down by someone that doesn't project an authority demanded of the position...to that, I had found that to be the case with Holdo, simply because I thought she was a poorly-written character.
Would I feel differently with a male in more of a clichéd embodiment of the character? I confess, I don't know now. Damn.
kristen jones
Master Member
A decade earlier in real world time, yes. But in universe time, that was long after. And how do you suppose he became that way? I reckon Sofa King is right that Han had to become that cool character through being less so earlier in life, and having to bleed for it.
Character development.
Axlotl
Master Member
That's actually a lot of people's opinion. Very few people like that character.
Intentional or not, he did hurt her, and he is responsible.
Sorry, Kristen - the movie absolutely created the toxicity.
It's simple cause and effect. The toxicity didn't exist until the movie did. The toxicity is a reaction to the movie.
TLJ is an insult to Star Wars fans. A literal insult to Star Wars fans.
The only way it could be more blatant is if Rian Johnson himself came to your house and personally **** on your porch.
I am baffled that a woman of your intelligence is defending this film.
How can you not see it for what it is?
Snikt
Sr Member
What do you mean the movie didnt create toxicity? It was the catalyst for it. Obviously if Rose was either a kick ass character, or the movie was universally acclaimed, there wouldnt BE any toxicity. Well, at least not to this degree perhaps. The reason why we know about it is because the nature of the origin of the toxicity; social media. I personally think social media should be shut down lol. I cant stand it, and all it does is seem to cause problems.
Axlotl Dude, very well said. I couldnt agree more.
Last edited by a moderator:
kristen jones
Master Member
Point #1: Many may indeed hold that opinion. it is still an opinion only.
Point #2: Toxicity within a fanbase--any fanbase--did not suddenly pop into existence in 2017. Toxicity is a human condition, and one that flares up when certain humans forget how to be decent human beings and instead direct their displeasure over an inanimate object at other human beings.
point #3: I don't know what to tell you. You hated it, I didn't. we are both intelligent adults... and we disagree. That is all. And I don't begrudge anyone for disliking it. What I do begrudge is the implication that because I did like it--and because i stick up for that fact--that i am somehow less intelligent, or that it should be a surprise to you that someone (like me) whom you view as intelligent should somehow be above liking something just because others don't.
In the end, we disagree. And I'm OK with that. we agree on enough other things that I'm happy to let this one pass.
kristen jones
Master Member
Being a catalyst isn't creating it. Having a catalyst implies there was an underlying state of affairs which the "catalyst" ignited. But still, the catalyst did not create the state of affairs.
Your last statement I think is much more spot on. Social media absolutely was the vehicle for it getting this far out of hand... because it not only gives a voice to everyone (which in theory is a good thing) but also allows a minority to sound like a majority (which again--in theory--should be a good thing).
I agree 100% with your last thought. SM does seem to be more of a hindrance to happiness and health these days than it is a good thing. :/
Solo4114
Master Member
I would love to have this done as a social experiment, because I was at first going to comment that the emasculating part would be to be dressed down by someone that doesn't project an authority demanded of the position...to that, I had found that to be the case with Holdo, simply because I thought she was a poorly-written character.
Would I feel differently with a male in more of a clichéd embodiment of the character? I confess, I don't know now. Damn.
Exactly! And here's the thing: that's ok. There's a TON of below-the-surface stuff like that in our society that we often don't even realize is happening, but it's still there. Movies like this can sometimes wake you up to that sort of thing. As long as you're willing to engage with that thought process and, if you determine that maybe you've looked at things in a way you aren't comfortable, you decide to change things, then there's nothing wrong with starting from mindset and getting to another.
I tend to think about a comparable scene in the beginning of Top Gun, where the squadron commander chews out Tom Cruise's character for being a reckless flyboy. I don't see it as all that different from Holdo chewing out Poe (although, obviously, there's less of a sense of impending doom in Top Gun). I'm comfortable with the character of Holdo, but I can still recognize that there's a part of my brain saying "Hang on. This doesn't look quite right." And that's entirely because of the visuals involved and that fact that Holdo is a woman, and our preconceived notions about figures of authority in the military and what they're "supposed" to look like.
I dunno if Holdo is a well written character or a poorly written one. I think it's tough to tell, given that she doesn't get a ton of screen time. But I also don't think the thought of "Is she a well written character?" would occur...if it were this guy doing the chewing out:
My brain wouldn't stop to process anything about that sequence, even if literally all the dialogue was exactly the same.
JD
Master Member
Yet, you're replying to a post that is using bully tactics. :rolleyes
Similar threads
