|
Post by Waxer-n-boil on Apr 2, 2018 20:52:55 GMT
* OT fans never wanted the trilogy made Well, they didn't. Especially not one made by Disney (for whatever reason). The idea that there's a new conflict going on and new characters are introduced to fight and win this conflict while Luke and Han and Leia are around is considered insulting to their characters. That's why "They messed up the OT characters!" complaints keep getting made. That is a lie that you have failed to back up. You have provided no evidence for it. I looked at forums, videos, fanbase articles, and media when Disney bought SW and when TFA was being made. Everyone, and I repeat everyone who had OT loyalties wanted this made. They were eager to see a SW that moved away from the prequels. Also a SW that continues what happens after ROTJ. You're just lying about it to support your bogus argument. This is an even bigger lie! Because every, let me repeat every complaint I've seen about Han dying and Luke dying has been about how they died. And particularly how Luke was characterized in TLJ up until his battle with Kylo. All of them as in 100% and 0% supporting your claim. Your claim is a bold lie. You saying it doesn't make it true. Lol This is not true either. I was on the original IMDb message boards. And there were posters there that just came right and said that they didn't like Rey because women shouldn't be fighting heroes. Rey is too masculine and feminist propaganda because she fights men in TFA... and a dozen other types of complaints that arguably centered around genuine misogyny. But I also encountered people like you who scream "MISOGYNIST!!" at any criticism of the Rey character. As if you didn't regard the character, characterization, or writing of Rey as infallible then you had some sexist agenda - which is just as ridiculous as the true misogynists who discredited everything about Rey simply based on her being a female hero. So you're wrong on both counts: there have been outright misogynistic attacks on Rey; and there have been criticism of Rey based on the poor in-universe characterization of her... and poor character development. Again, it's not my fault if you repeatedly choose to ignore the genuine points and slap labels on them that totally disregards the evidence that supports it being something other than sexism. As the old saying goes "You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink".
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Apr 3, 2018 0:13:47 GMT
No it's not. 35% on 1 thread on 1 forum is not representative. And I've seen other forums where I would say the percentage that supports your accusations is somewhere between 10% and 20%. That's hardly a majority. I'm not responsible for your inability to face reality. The reality is that the majority of complainers post valid reasons that have nothing to do with your accusation list. I gave you a link, you give me links to people who DON'T hate the ST characters for existing.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Apr 3, 2018 0:15:49 GMT
Well, they didn't. Especially not one made by Disney (for whatever reason). The idea that there's a new conflict going on and new characters are introduced to fight and win this conflict while Luke and Han and Leia are around is considered insulting to their characters. That's why "They messed up the OT characters!" complaints keep getting made. That is a lie that you have failed to back up. You have provided no evidence for it. I looked at forums, videos, fanbase articles, and media when Disney bought SW and when TFA was being made. Everyone, and I repeat everyone who had OT loyalties wanted this made. They were eager to see a SW that moved away from the prequels. Also a SW that continues what happens after ROTJ. Just not an ST about new characters. And those same people would be saying the same thing no matter HOW they died. Okay then, I was wrong in this regard but still right about how Rey is disliked for truly banal reasons.
|
|
|
Post by Waxer-n-boil on Apr 3, 2018 0:17:23 GMT
No it's not. 35% on 1 thread on 1 forum is not representative. And I've seen other forums where I would say the percentage that supports your accusations is somewhere between 10% and 20%. That's hardly a majority. I'm not responsible for your inability to face reality. The reality is that the majority of complainers post valid reasons that have nothing to do with your accusation list. I gave you a link, you give me links to people who DON'T hate the ST characters for existing. I can refer you to plenty of links. But there's a difference between hating characters for existing and hating them for specific reasons. I'm still not convinced that you know the difference.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Apr 3, 2018 0:26:54 GMT
I gave you a link, you give me links to people who DON'T hate the ST characters for existing. I can refer you to plenty of links. But there's a difference between hating characters for existing and hating them for specific reasons. I'm still not convinced that you know the difference. When those specific reasons boil down to "There's no need for them, Luke and co should've been able to do stuff on their own." then yes, it is hating them for existing. I suppose it was inevitable though, doing a "passing of the torch" was always going to be impossible. Especially since Han had to die in the first movie or else Ford wouldn't come back, meaning the new characters would forever be tainted for debuting in "the film that killed Han Solo".
|
|
|
Post by Waxer-n-boil on Apr 3, 2018 0:51:33 GMT
I can refer you to plenty of links. But there's a difference between hating characters for existing and hating them for specific reasons. I'm still not convinced that you know the difference. When those specific reasons boil down to "There's no need for them, Luke and co should've been able to do stuff on their own." then yes, it is hating them for existing. I suppose it was inevitable though, doing a "passing of the torch" was always going to be impossible. Especially since Han had to die in the first movie or else Ford wouldn't come back, meaning the new characters would forever be tainted for debuting in "the film that killed Han Solo". Except the reasons don't boil down to there's no need for them. That's what passing the torch means. Passing from one competent hero to another because there is a need. But some of these OT characters were just made to be uncharacteristicly incompetent. So truthfully, the ST characters never had to worry about being portrayed as useless. The issue has always been against the OT characters.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Apr 3, 2018 0:55:08 GMT
When those specific reasons boil down to "There's no need for them, Luke and co should've been able to do stuff on their own." then yes, it is hating them for existing. I suppose it was inevitable though, doing a "passing of the torch" was always going to be impossible. Especially since Han had to die in the first movie or else Ford wouldn't come back, meaning the new characters would forever be tainted for debuting in "the film that killed Han Solo". Except the reasons don't boil down to there's no need for them. That's what passing the torch means. Passing from one competent hero to another because there is a need. And it the OT characters were maintained as the ultimate heroes who took down the Empire (the way they were at the end of ROTJ) then that means there never could be a need for new competent heroes because the OT Leads were too competent to ever need replacements. This is just like when they hinted at Mutt becoming a hero in Crystal Skull and the MASSIVE backlash against that. And no, do NOT say it was because he was played by Shia. Friggin Chris Evans or Chris Pratt could've played Indy's son and still the audience would've hated it for the sheer gall of the idea.
|
|
|
Post by Waxer-n-boil on Apr 3, 2018 1:00:04 GMT
Except the reasons don't boil down to there's no need for them. That's what passing the torch means. Passing from one competent hero to another because there is a need. And it the OT characters were maintained as the ultimate heroes who took down the Empire (the way they were at the end of ROTJ) then that means there never could be a need for new competent heroes because the OT Leads were too competent to ever need replacements. This is just like when they hinted at Mutt becoming a hero in Crystal Skull and the MASSIVE backlash against that. And no, do NOT say it was because he was played by Shia. Friggin Chris Evans or Chris Pratt could've played Indy's son and still the audience would've hated it for the sheer gall of the idea. That's an unfounded opinion stuck in your head. And it's bogus because there's already Legends EU stories that prove that false.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Apr 3, 2018 1:03:44 GMT
And it the OT characters were maintained as the ultimate heroes who took down the Empire (the way they were at the end of ROTJ) then that means there never could be a need for new competent heroes because the OT Leads were too competent to ever need replacements. This is just like when they hinted at Mutt becoming a hero in Crystal Skull and the MASSIVE backlash against that. And no, do NOT say it was because he was played by Shia. Friggin Chris Evans or Chris Pratt could've played Indy's son and still the audience would've hated it for the sheer gall of the idea. That's an unfounded opinion stuck in your head. Not unfounded, all the "There was no need for the First Order as bad guys" opinions support it well enough. The EU always has the OT heroes end up triumphing in the end without the need for replacement characters. If anything, anytime a potential replacement character is introduced it's usually just to kill THEM off as a way of reaffirming that the OT characters aren't going anywhere!
|
|
|
Post by Waxer-n-boil on Apr 3, 2018 1:10:20 GMT
That's an unfounded opinion stuck in your head. Not unfounded, all the "There was no need for the First Order as bad guys" opinions support it well enough. Never, ever heard that before from anybody. And it wasn't in that link you provided. Nope. Not true. You don't know your SW.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Apr 3, 2018 1:34:48 GMT
Not unfounded, all the "There was no need for the First Order as bad guys" opinions support it well enough. Never, ever heard that before from anybody. And it wasn't in that link you provided. If you read the whole thing you'd see complaints over there being a First Order or a new conflict relating to them as the story of the ST. Anytime a new Imperial Remnant pulls out a new weapon, it gets destroyed. An invasion from outside the Galaxy? Defeated. And absolutely NO threat of new characters taking over for Luke and co. Ever.
|
|
|
Post by kuatorises on Apr 3, 2018 19:38:52 GMT
Coherent? The prequels, LOL?!
|
|
|
Post by simplemoviecommenter on Apr 3, 2018 19:52:35 GMT
Coherent? The prequels, LOL?! Yes, coherent. For all the many deep flaws of the Prequels, they are still more coherent than the ST.
|
|
|
Post by kuatorises on Apr 4, 2018 14:01:50 GMT
Coherent? The prequels, LOL?! Yes, coherent. For all the many deep flaws of the Prequels, they are still more coherent than the ST. These are only some of the more obvious ones too. It’s fine if you like those movies, but you’re only fooling yourself if you are pretending they are well-made.
|
|
|
Post by Waxer-n-boil on Apr 4, 2018 14:23:03 GMT
Never, ever heard that before from anybody. And it wasn't in that link you provided. If you read the whole thing you'd see complaints over there being a First Order or a new conflict relating to them as the story of the ST. Anytime a new Imperial Remnant pulls out a new weapon, it gets destroyed. An invasion from outside the Galaxy? Defeated. And absolutely NO threat of new characters taking over for Luke and co. Ever.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Apr 4, 2018 14:25:11 GMT
If you read the whole thing you'd see complaints over there being a First Order or a new conflict relating to them as the story of the ST. Anytime a new Imperial Remnant pulls out a new weapon, it gets destroyed. An invasion from outside the Galaxy? Defeated. And absolutely NO threat of new characters taking over for Luke and co. Ever. There was NO way to create new conflict in the ST that would've appeased OT fans. None at all. They refused to accept any real conflicts could happen after ROTJ. Similarly, there was no way to do a passing the torch storyline without making Rey or Finn into insulting tagalong kids who'd just there to make Luke and Han look better. Like your idea of making Rey a useless criminal who needs Han and Leia to help her every step of the way through.
|
|
|
Post by Waxer-n-boil on Apr 4, 2018 14:31:03 GMT
There was NO way to create new conflict in the ST that would've appeased OT fans. None at all. They refused to accept any real conflicts could happen after ROTJ. Similarly, there was no way to do a passing the torch storyline without making Rey or Finn into insulting tagalong kids who'd just there to make Luke and Han look better. Like your idea of making Rey a useless criminal who needs Han and Leia to help her every step of the way through.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Apr 4, 2018 14:50:37 GMT
There was NO way to create new conflict in the ST that would've appeased OT fans. None at all. They refused to accept any real conflicts could happen after ROTJ. Similarly, there was no way to do a passing the torch storyline without making Rey or Finn into insulting tagalong kids who'd just there to make Luke and Han look better. Like your idea of making Rey a useless criminal who needs Han and Leia to help her every step of the way through. The EU has Imperial Remnants and invaders from outside the Galaxy as bad guys, no one cares...because the OT characters handle them without the need for new characters. The ST gives us a Neo-Empire and suddenly it ruins the OT, just because they dared to give us new characters. You can't win, you just can't win. BTW, if you reply with a pic of a deluded madman, you're admitting I'm right.
|
|
ryboto
Sophomore
@ryboto
Posts: 776
Likes: 724
|
Post by ryboto on Apr 4, 2018 17:33:09 GMT
The EU has Imperial Remnants and invaders from outside the Galaxy as bad guys, no one cares...because the OT characters handle them without the need for new characters. The ST gives us a Neo-Empire and suddenly it ruins the OT, just because they dared to give us new characters. You can't win, you just can't win. BTW, if you reply with a pic of a deluded madman, you're admitting I'm right. Plenty of new characters were introduced. If you skip to 30 years from ROTJ in the EU, there's even more that are front and center.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Apr 4, 2018 18:19:42 GMT
The EU has Imperial Remnants and invaders from outside the Galaxy as bad guys, no one cares...because the OT characters handle them without the need for new characters. The ST gives us a Neo-Empire and suddenly it ruins the OT, just because they dared to give us new characters. You can't win, you just can't win. BTW, if you reply with a pic of a deluded madman, you're admitting I'm right. Plenty of new characters were introduced. If you skip to 30 years from ROTJ in the EU, there's even more that are front and center. And none of those new EU characters took over as leads, Luke/Han/Leia were always still upfront and in charge. In fact, they killed off some of the new characters but refused with the older ones except Chewbacca. The ST dared to give us new LEADS.
|
|