|
Neurolimal posted:What aspect of the movie is positive of slavery or depicts protagonists engaging in or supporting slavery? It's notable that, in a star wars film, we are never shown instances of droids being abused or treated as a lesser race being tolerated, the audience insert even trusts his life to a tiny droid. We get the first example of a droid retiring in Star Wars history Did you notice the parts where droids are routinely bought and sold, even inherited? Where Luke gives 3PO to Jabba without 3PO's knowledge or consent?
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 21:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 17:05 |
|
|
homullus posted:Did you notice the parts where droids are routinely bought and sold, even inherited? Where Luke gives 3PO to Jabba without 3PO's knowledge or consent? Did you notice how my use of the word movie was in the singular sense?
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 21:19
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:Did you notice how my use of the word movie was in the singular sense? The comment about pro-slavery was about Return of the Jedi. My second sentence gives a big example from Return of the Jedi. Are we not talking about the same thing?
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 21:21
|
|
|
homullus posted:The comment about pro-slavery was about Return of the Jedi. My second sentence gives a big example from Return of the Jedi. Are we not talking about the same thing? Actually, I'm referencing to when Rey was tempted to sell BB-8 with a years supply of food, but chose to starve instead of selling the freedroid into slavery. It was argued that Rey considers BB-8 as below her because she hesitated at all. It was made a little after the argument that Rey was an enemy of the scavengers and by extension the Jakku proletariat for not letting someone capture BB-8.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 21:27
|
|
|
Cnut the Great posted:My go-to example for a drat good yet ideologically questionable movie is Dirty Harry. Been years since I've seen any of them though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 21:31
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:R2, I dont recall him doing much processing beyond "heres the other map pieces you already got" R2 was deep in meditation. He was not retired.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 21:33
|
|
|
Bongo Bill posted:R2 was deep in meditation. He was not retired. I should try this at my job
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 21:37
|
|
|
Cnut the Great posted:My go-to example for a drat good yet ideologically questionable movie is Dirty Harry. Rambo 2 for this gamer. Insane politics yet it is the acme of action movies.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 21:46
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:I should try this at my job If your job is to be the aide of a senior monk who's gone into seclusion, you might just get away with it. R2 hasn't a full-time spy for a long time.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 21:50
|
|
|
computer parts posted:TFA seems focused foremost on erasing the gains of previous films. This is seen on-screen with them blowing up everything makes the good guys something other than "a rag tag group of Rebels" and off screen by reverting Han & Leia to their base stereotypes from ANH/early parts of ESB. It really does feel like a movie you could've set 5 years after ROTJ and the only major change would be changing Kylo to be Han's cousin or something. On this topic, here's an illuminating tidbit from the upcoming TFA making-of documentary that'll be on the Blu-ray: quote:Abrams also added some backstory saying that Han couldn’t stay in one place and that Leia couldn’t stop fighting. His nature as a rogue and her nature as a freedom fighter clashed. Against that backdrop, Snoke targeted Kylo because of his powers and potential. The implication was that in the absence of solid parenting, Kylo Ren emerged. I'll say again that I think it was bad storytelling to regress Han and Leia's characters from where they were at the end of ROTJ. Prior to TFA, the OT was about the children of the PT generation learning from their parents' mistakes and building a better future for their own children. Now, I don't know what it's about. According to TFA, Luke, Leia, and Han just ended up making all the same mistakes all over again.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 21:57
|
|
|
Cnut the Great posted:I'll say again that I think it was bad storytelling to regress Han and Leia's characters from where they were at the end of ROTJ. Prior to TFA, the OT was about the children of the PT generation learning from their parents' mistakes and building a better future for their own children. Now, I don't know what it's about. According to TFA, Luke, Leia, and Han just ended up making all the same mistakes all over again. I...disagree with this I think? It was definitely about their parent's mistakes but I think it was less about "building a better future for their own children" and more just about finding redemption for the previous generation. I think you can make the argument and structure a story about how, even though they may have achieved this redemption and made the universe a better place, this type of lifelong struggle didn't make them the best candidates for actually building the future, and they should have stepped aside to let others actually lead. Not saying that this was what TFA was about or where the series will be going, but I don't think it necessarily rewrites the OT to something unfathomable.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 22:12
|
|
|
Han's arc ended in ESB, ROTJ just cheapened his death. The Han of TFA is a poltergeist repeating its daily life until it finds the end it deserves.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 22:14
|
|
|
Guy A. Person posted:I...disagree with this I think? It was definitely about their parent's mistakes but I think it was less about "building a better future for their own children" and more just about finding redemption for the previous generation. The previous generation wasn't really redeemed, though, in the sense that none of the bad things they did were erased or undone. The only sense in which they were "redeemed" is that their children managed to do better than they did. But now TFA says that's not really true. quote:I think you can make the argument and structure a story about how, even though they may have achieved this redemption and made the universe a better place, this type of lifelong struggle didn't make them the best candidates for actually building the future, and they should have stepped aside to let others actually lead. Not saying that this was what TFA was about or where the series will be going, but I don't think it necessarily rewrites the OT to something unfathomable. The whole point of the original series was that the OT heroes made the right decisions where the PT characters had previously made the wrong decisions. To say that this somehow implies that the OT heroes would be undesirable as leaders strikes me as incoherent. Cnut the Great fucked around with this message at 22:29 on Mar 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 22:22
|
|
|
Cheesus posted:I'm one of those who thinks TFA was merely "good" and had plenty of criticisms overall, but Maz in't one of them. From a design perspective she started out existence as a brown/orange yoda with a hat. Both she and Yoda fill the role of ancient, wizened mentor. She's not meant to be a simple Yoda clone but this is the really obvious inspiration for the character. If she isn't filling in for Yoda she's a direct answer to Yoda. What is the purpose behind her being a "force-sensitive" being and what the heck does that even mean - can she use the force? (I don't recall this ever happening on screen) You don't need to have special Jesus powers to be a christian of course, seeing how Lors Von Tekka proves that earlier in the movie already. Some scenes from the movie might imply that Maz has lots of midichlorians but that doesn't tell us anything about her actual belief system. Implying that she views things differently doesn't help when we never get to see what she has to say about the Force from her point of view. My memory isn't perfect but the extent of Maz's ideology that I remember generally goes "Take this sword, follow your feelings, leave it all behind and just get to adventuring - the Sith etc. are evil"; however this isn't even really a unique point of view being very similar to Qui-Gon Jinn's concept of the living Force. It's not like we haven't seen other belief systems in Star Wars. The Gungans have their own gods and think the Force is stinkowiff and the Sith are definitely force believers who aren't Jedi (Though Sheev would argue that they aren't so different.) I'm not trying to say Maz is an inherently bad character but very limited screen time means we get very little nuance from Maz's unique point of view. Also this post sounds pretty negative about TFA and I felt it was a good movie that could have been really good or great. For example I think Rey is an interesting character because she fuses characters and mythology from previous Star Wars films and classic literature - In the OT Luke and Leia were siblings - in the PT Anakin and Padme were lovers and in the ST they are actually the same person. She has a great destiny and pulls the sword from the stone which pushes her to embrace her destiny as Queen Arthur. If there is something to get hyped about future films it's got to be Camelot Planet and Knights of the Ren table. Terrorist Fistbump posted:The overriding desire for ideological purity in film (and other media) is a huge weakness of contemporary criticism. There are many good films out there that argue in favor of some strange and reprehensible things, but are nonetheless worth watching because of their other elements. My go-to example is Conan the Barbarian, which is correctly regarded as one of the most fascist films made after 1945 and yet is a good film because of the cinematography, performances, action choreography, production design etc. Looking at this from a different medium, how many goons just freaking love H.P. Lovecraft? The Shadow over Innsmouth is a wonderful horror story but it's got an extremely ugly ideology. Interestingly enough that doesn't stop it from being good, and in some ways even makes it more interesting/horrifying.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 22:28
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:Han's arc ended in ESB, ROTJ just cheapened his death. The Han of TFA is a poltergeist repeating its daily life until it finds the end it deserves. Han's arc didn't end in ESB. His arc ended in ROTJ when he learned how to love Leia unselfishly, as opposed to possessively. Their relationship in TESB was incompletely developed, because it was based entirely around passion rather than mutual respect and understanding. The resolution of Han and Leia's relationship in ROTJ is a direct counterpoint to the way Anakin and Padme's relationship resolves in ROTS. The story would be incomplete without Han's arc in ROTJ.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 22:29
|
|
|
Picard Day posted:Looking at this from a different medium, how many goons just freaking love H.P. Lovecraft? The Shadow over Innsmouth is a wonderful horror story but it's got an extremely ugly ideology. Interestingly enough that doesn't stop it from being good, and in some ways even makes it more interesting/horrifying. That's a big thing: when people say that TFA can't be feudalist because it's meaningless - that's actually an extremely unfair condemnation of the film. The weird feudalism is the interesting part, along with Rey's more hosed-up qualities. I wish there was more of this extremely questionable 'divine right of kings' stuff. I wanted to see more of that freaky Tetsuo behavior. Like, Return Of The Jedi is bad, but focussing on the racist flirtation with anarchoprimitivism is the best or only way to make it interesting. I dunno if people noticed this from all my other posts, but none of the Star Wars films are 'ideologically pure.' That's why we have redemptive interpretation.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 23:14
|
|
|
I mean, I know a big part of Star Wars is that history goes in cycles, but this isn't that. In the old movies, the idea was that long periods of peace and stability are intermittently punctuated by brief periods of violent upheaval. When the status quo has persisted for so long that the lessons of the past have been forgotten and the people have become complacent, greed and divisiveness become the order of the day. Paralyzed by corruption and by internecine squabbling, the government becomes powerless to respond to even the smallest of problems. Thus, minor local conflicts (like "trivial" trade disputes) are allowed to spiral out of control until they become major conflagrations which threaten to tear apart the whole society. The original six-film cycle illustrates this perfectly. After the Republic is re-established in Episode VI, the story loops back around to Episode I, jumping "forward" in time a thousand years. The events of Episode VI have faded from the public consciousness, and the lessons of the past have at long last been forgotten. Thus, the Republic falls. But there is still hope, as the next generation may learn from the mistakes of their foolish parents and once again rebuild a democratic society, thus serving as inspiration for the many generations that will succeed them. When that flame of inspiration inevitably fades with the long passage of time, the cycle begins anew, and we’re right back at Episode I again. Episode VII seems to disrupt this cycle by having the OT heroes themselves immediately undo all the progress they made by loving up in exactly the same ways as their parents. The original six-film cycle lays no blame on the OT heroes for the eventual downfall of the new Republic. Rather, the blame lies on the stagnant, decadent generation a thousand years removed from the OT heroes which has foolishly failed to remember their example. TFA, on the other hand, renders the OT heroes themselves as failures. I think that’s hosed up, and greatly undermines the message of the original movies--which is that evil is only allowed to take hold in a society where the people have forgotten who they are and where they came from. There's no reason for Luke, Leia, and Han to have already forgotten that. It makes some amount of sense for the children of the heroes to have been the problem this time around. What doesn't make sense is that it appears to be the heroes' fault, as a result of their being failed parents and teachers. It doesn't make sense that the new Republic the heroes built seems to be even more fragile than the old one. It just doesn't make sense, except as part of a cynical effort to immediately revert the series back to the A New Hope status quo in as quick and simple a fashion as possible. Cnut the Great fucked around with this message at 23:26 on Mar 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 23:23
|
|
|
Eh, newly formed governments are often bordering on collapse.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2016 00:15
|
|
|
here are a few more gifs http://i.imgur.com/TwisvvD.gifv http://i.imgur.com/nZqw3aW.gifv http://i.imgur.com/OmWxwiL.gifv http://i.imgur.com/YHq2QNg.gifv
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2016 00:41
|
|
|
"Bask in my glorious hair." Still shouldda gone with the the manbun.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2016 00:42
|
|
|
Cnut the Great posted:I mean, I know a big part of Star Wars is that history goes in cycles, but this isn't that. In the old movies, the idea was that long periods of peace and stability are intermittently punctuated by brief periods of violent upheaval. When the status quo has persisted for so long that the lessons of the past have been forgotten and the people have become complacent, greed and divisiveness become the order of the day. Paralyzed by corruption and by internecine squabbling, the government becomes powerless to respond to even the smallest of problems. Thus, minor local conflicts (like "trivial" trade disputes) are allowed to spiral out of control until they become major conflagrations which threaten to tear apart the whole society. You've articulated this point really well in this post, it's probably the thing that bothers me the most about TFA. It's the most cynical, boring, uninspired way of making their new characters relevant, I think. Rian Johnson and Colin Trevorrow could correct this to an extent depending on how they handle Luke, Leia, and the Republic in their movies, but as it stands in TFA I think this post is on point.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2016 00:56
|
|
|
Terry Grunthouse posted:here are a few more gifs They really got hamill in shape and looking like and old Luke. I was really impressed. T
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2016 00:58
|
|
|
Beeez posted:You've articulated this point really well in this post, it's probably the thing that bothers me the most about TFA. It's the most cynical, boring, uninspired way of making their new characters relevant, I think. Rian Johnson and Colin Trevorrow could correct this to an extent depending on how they handle Luke, Leia, and the Republic in their movies, but as it stands in TFA I think this post is on point. This spineless gently caress couldn't even take the most basic step towards salvaging that shitshow Jurassic World. I was seriously 100% MAD when I saw Jurassic World and they went into the spooky lab with all the samples and he somehow failed to include the scene where the camera pans to a human fetus in a jar. He's a coward and he's gonna be the guy who finally saves Return of the Jedi from the being the worst Star Wars movie.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2016 01:06
|
|
|
Cnut the Great posted:I mean, I know a big part of Star Wars is that history goes in cycles, but this isn't that. In the old movies, the idea was that long periods of peace and stability are intermittently punctuated by brief periods of violent upheaval. When the status quo has persisted for so long that the lessons of the past have been forgotten and the people have become complacent, greed and divisiveness become the order of the day. Paralyzed by corruption and by internecine squabbling, the government becomes powerless to respond to even the smallest of problems. Thus, minor local conflicts (like "trivial" trade disputes) are allowed to spiral out of control until they become major conflagrations which threaten to tear apart the whole society. The cycle isn't a good thing. It's an endless spinning death machine that gradually consumes whole planets, built on the backs of the droids and other oppressed. And we do have a clear explanation for why the cycle was finally (tentatively) interrupted: Vader's spirit, the authentic light side, threw a wrench into things by influencing Kylo Ren. Kylo was then, of course, immediately exploited by Snoke. And then snoke used that power to crush the flawed heroes of the OT. But Kylo has the right idea: ending the cycle. And this, of course, makes Rey the true villain of the film. Her goal is to repair and restore the cycle of death.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2016 01:17
|
|
|
Hello Stars Warsiors - here is a picture that I think illustrates how Star's War goes from arc, to orbit, to trajectory.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2016 01:21
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:The cycle isn't a good thing. It's an endless spinning death machine that gradually consumes whole planets, built on the backs of the droids and other oppressed. Misguided hero rather than villain, I would say.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2016 01:27
|
|
|
I'm really hoping that Luke and Rey get some nice father-daughter bonding time and that the two of them drop some truths on each other so they both grow into better people
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2016 01:42
|
|
|
Bongo Bill posted:Misguided hero rather than villain, I would say. Nah, she's pretty evil, did you see what she did to Kylo's beautiful face!
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2016 02:00
|
|
|
Bongo Bill posted:Misguided hero rather than villain, I would say. Rey could be called a hero in the classical sense, where she's basically just a preternaturally talented jerk. However, she is held up against - contrasted with - this Christian character, Kylo Ren. So what we have is another case of those 'certain points of view'. Kylo is an enemy to the pagan heroes, but... "Within the pagan horizon, the Event of Christ is the ultimate scandal. The figure of the Devil is specific to the Judeo-Christian tradition. But more than that, Christ himself is the ultimate diabolic figure, insofar as diabolos (to separate, to tear apart the One into Two) is the opposite of symbolos (to gather and unify). He brought the 'sword, not peace,' in order to disturb the existing harmonious unity. Or, as Christ told Luke: 'If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and his mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters–yes even his own life–he cannot be my disciple.' In order for there to be a properly unified 'symbolic' community of believers, Christ had to first come and perform the Holy Spirit’s separating 'diabolical' founding gesture." -Zizek And, of course, the choice between Christianity and paganism is not some Coke/Pepsi arbitrary decision. It's everything.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2016 02:10
|
|
|
Picard Day posted:This spineless gently caress couldn't even take the most basic step towards salvaging that shitshow Jurassic World. I was seriously 100% MAD when I saw Jurassic World and they went into the spooky lab with all the samples and he somehow failed to include the scene where the camera pans to a human fetus in a jar. He's a coward and he's gonna be the guy who finally saves Return of the Jedi from the being the worst Star Wars movie.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2016 02:12
|
|
|
Terrorist Fistbump posted:I just want to say that as many flaws TFA has, I'm extremely pleased that it wasn't as shoddily made as Jurassic World. Now that Trevorrow has a big blockbuster under his belt, my hope is that he'll be more confident in his filmmaking and attentive to all-around quality with Episode 9. Hes gonna have Rian Jonhson and JJ Abrams to help for the story and production also. Both are producing it and I think Jonhson is also writing
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2016 03:03
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:in a star wars film, we are never shown instances of droids being abused or treated as a lesser race being tolerated, https://youtu.be/g6PDcBhODqo?t=44
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2016 06:40
|
|
|
Cantina Satan at 0:28 is still my favorite thing about this scene.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2016 07:25
|
|
|
Again, "in a star wars film" meant "TFA is a Star Wars film, and yet it is notable for...". I can understand the misreading, but at the same time it should be obvious that reading it as "droids are never abused" would be entirely at-odds with C3P0's treatment through most of the OT and PT.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2016 07:30
|
|
|
MrSmokes posted:Cantina Satan at 0:28 is still my favorite thing about this scene. I like how there was a satan on the jedi council whose name was http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Saesee_Tiin
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2016 07:40
|
|
|
El Burbo posted:I like how there was a satan on the jedi council whose name was It's a shame the PT didn't have a council evacuation scene, so one of the jedi that fights Anakin could say "Get behind me, Saesee Tiin!"
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2016 07:52
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:Again, "in a star wars film" meant "TFA is a Star Wars film, and yet it is notable for...". I can understand the misreading, but at the same time it should be obvious that reading it as "droids are never abused" would be entirely at-odds with C3P0's treatment through most of the OT and PT. oh then i'll change my answer TFA is an awful "star wars" film and doing away with one of the main background themes for no reason is odd
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2016 07:52
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:It's a shame the PT didn't have a council evacuation scene, so one of the jedi that fights Anakin could say "Get behind me, Saesee Tiin!" That reminds me of how ROTS is interesting in that it covers a very dramatic moment in the opening crawl (Palpatine's kidnapping) and then skips over it to get to the rescue attempt.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2016 07:54
|
|
|
Elfgames posted:oh then i'll change my answer TFA is an awful "star wars" film and doing away with one of the main background themes for no reason is odd It's not 'done away with', progress is made. Droids are free, but there still exist people trying to enslave them, and they still work their old positions. Star Wars protagonists just don't tolerate it in the same way older protagonists did.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2016 07:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 17:05 |
|
|
Neurolimal posted:It's not 'done away with', progress is made. Droids are free, but there still exist people trying to enslave them, and they still work their old positions. Star Wars protagonists just don't tolerate it in the same way older protagonists did. why? what changed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2016 07:55
|
|