|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Jul 7, 2018 8:53:16 GMT
"GO TO THERAPY", Mr Gunn must know what he is talking about. After all he gave the world the juvenile dreck a la " Dance Off, you big turd blossom", "Hahaha, I have famously huge turds." "Awwww, my sensitive nipples", "Did you create a penis?", "I'm Mary Poppins y'all" etc. Nothing less than the invention of the raccoon turd - therapy-worthy indeed. Not to forget about his idiot-insert constantly bullying a female character with how ugly she is, and all that culminating in the hyper-misogynist " Don't believe in yourself, believes in me who believes in you"...! You heard it, your MAN defines your self worth, gals. In view of this and the lowbrow fanbase Mr Gunn and his ilk pander to I will lower myself in employing his bottom of-the-barrel penis, turd & nipples output: Dear mr Gunn, I sincerely hope you are in good therapy...and someone threw away the key. I like how the Gunn says that toxic fans need help for attacking people over a movie and this turd attacks him.
^ enter the butthurt MCU-fanboi flinging the proverbial turd. You have been a good apprentice of your MCU guru and his vile teachings. Ironic, how you found an idol who is pathetic...like you. Now go home and rethink your life.
|
|
|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Jul 7, 2018 9:12:27 GMT
Simple: If you don't like what Star Wars has become, just quit and ignore it... and perhaps wait for Dune to show how it's done. Long live the fighters. One, really appreciates your level headed suggestion. There is just one problem. Level headed suggestions are not accepted in any Fandom, but even more so with Star Wars fandom. no, it's not "level headed" a suggestion, it's the idiot's fallacy ("idiot" in the ancient Greek's sense of the word, not modern): If you are not ok with what your country has become, just quit it and ignore it . If you are not ok what your relationship has become just quit and ignore it. If you are unhappy with your life…."Long live the fighters" indeed, how level headed! I am personally ok with the new SW films for the most part, but I glad that the SW fans are not brainless sheeple bleating "Meeeh, moooar Maaaarvel". Quote Mills: Just change pigs for sheeple and you got it right.
|
|
|
Post by Vassaggo on Jul 7, 2018 9:28:05 GMT
He's talking about any movie. Be it DCEU, the recent Ghostbusters, Gone with the Wind, Troll 2. It doesn't matter. nope, reading comprehension for dummies: Quote: "If your self-esteem depends on how good you think the current Star Wars is, or your childhood is ruined because you don’t like something in a movie, GO TO THERAPY." Your old context reading and text comprehension issues rear again. There is a THERAPY for that too btw, why not take the advise of your lowbrow MCU guru? The full quote is: "Star Wars (or any movie) may be important to you, but it doesn’t belong to you. If your self-esteem depends on how good you think the current Star Wars is, or your childhood is ruined because you don’t like something in a movie, GO TO THERAPY." (red coloring and emphasis on "in a movie," added by me for clarification.)The way " in a movie," is used and the way he punctuated the sentence makes the 2 independent clauses separated by the coordinating conjunction "or" individually certifiable. The comma after " in a movie," and before " GO TO THERAPY." indicates both independent clauses are ended with " , GO TO THERAPY." Also " in a movie," is very vague and generic adverbial prepositional phrase. It doesn't have to refer to Star Wars in the other independent clause. So you could word the compound sentence as two simple sentences and still preserve the meaning of the original compound sentence. "If your self-esteem depends on how good you think the current Star Wars is, GO TO THERAPY." "Your childhood is ruined because you don't like something in a movie, GO TO THERAPY." The second simple sentence could be referring any movie. So ThatGuy interpretation is completely valid. The final nail in the coffin, is a very small thing. You see in the part of the quote you left out he literally says "Star Wars (or any movie)." I have a strange idea. The author was talking about any movie not just Star Wars.
|
|
|
Post by Vassaggo on Jul 7, 2018 9:54:44 GMT
One, really appreciates your level headed suggestion. There is just one problem. Level headed suggestions are not accepted in any Fandom, but even more so with Star Wars fandom. no, it's not "level headed" a suggestion, it's the idiot's fallacy ("idiot" in the ancient Greek's sense of the word, not modern): If you are not ok with what your country has become, just quit it and ignore it . If you are not ok what your relationship has become just quit and ignore it. If you are unhappy with your life…."Long live the fighters" indeed, how level headed! I am personally ok with the new SW films for the most part, but I glad that the SW fans are not brainless sheeple bleating "Meeeh, moooar Maaaarvel". Quote Mills: Just change pigs for sheeple and you got it right. The only problem with this is the belief that speaking out against the movie instead of ignoring it will change the studios future installments and plans. The intention of speaking out against the movie, one would believe would be to show dissatisfaction with the studios product. One would believe the individual expressing their dissatisfaction wouldn't be objectless. They aren't speaking in a vacuum. Their object is to get the studio to listen. There isn't any direct evidence that shows a vocal dislike from part of a fanbase causes studios to change future installments. There is only some evidence that shows a correlation between part of a fanbase being vocally dissatisfied and the changing of future installments and plans of the studios. As we all know correlation does not equal causation. You can find direct evidence of the causation of studios changing future installments or canceling them outright based on revenue or lack their of. If people would "quit" the series they are dissatisfied with they would lessen the studios revenue. This would show the dissatisfaction to the studio directly. You can put it a different way by saying the best way to vote on a movie (or any product) is to vote with your wallet. To vote with your wallet to show dissatisfaction would be to withhold money. or to quit the series.
|
|
|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Jul 7, 2018 10:41:27 GMT
nope, reading comprehension for dummies: Quote: "If your self-esteem depends on how good you think the current Star Wars is, or your childhood is ruined because you don’t like something in a movie, GO TO THERAPY." Your old context reading and text comprehension issues rear again. There is a THERAPY for that too btw, why not take the advise of your lowbrow MCU guru? The full quote is: "Star Wars (or any movie) may be important to you, but it doesn’t belong to you. If your self-esteem depends on how good you think the current Star Wars is, or your childhood is ruined because you don’t like something in a movie, GO TO THERAPY." (red coloring and emphasis on "in a movie," added by me for clarification.)The way " in a movie," is used and the way he punctuated the sentence makes the 2 independent clauses separated by the coordinating conjunction "or" individually certifiable. The comma after " in a movie," and before " GO TO THERAPY." indicates both independent clauses are ended with " , GO TO THERAPY." Also " in a movie," is very vague and generic adverbial prepositional phrase. It doesn't have to refer to Star Wars in the other independent clause. So you could word the compound sentence as two simple sentences and still preserve the meaning of the original compound sentence. "If your self-esteem depends on how good you think the current Star Wars is, GO TO THERAPY." "Your childhood is ruined because you don't like something in a movie, GO TO THERAPY." The second simple sentence could be referring any movie. So ThatGuy interpretation is completely valid. The final nail in the coffin, is a very small thing. You see in the part of the quote you left out he literally says "Star Wars (or any movie)." I have a strange idea. The author was talking about any movie not just Star Wars. nah, don't become a lawyer please. Your interpretation is as illogical as it is deflective (and cynical): 1. If your self-esteem depends on how good you think the current Star Wars is, ..GO TO THERAPY . Pretty straight an insult. 2. Now you try to deflect by stating the second part is more general: "or your childhood is ruined because you don’t like something in a movie, GO TO THERAPY." This is an uninformed deflection, and a deliberate out-of-context interpretation: The "ruin my childhood" is specifically and historically a Star Wars fandom slogan/phrase by which SW fans are often (sometimes rightfully) mocked - context-wise Gunn was here specifically referring to the A. Best case (Jar Jar) when the "ruined childhood" phrase was coined. So this is clearly directed at the SW fandom as well. 3. And thirdly you refer to the first sentence, which however has nothing to to with the insult language discussed by me. "Star Wars (or any movie) may be important to you, but it doesn’t belong to you." N evertheless, Gunn then goes on specifically talking about SW fandom in a SW forum context and insults them explicitly.BTW this is is another old, dumb straw-man deflection and lese-majesty-fallacy itself ("regular customers don't you DARE to complain about the declining quality of the food served here, it does not belong to you…. ). LOL 4. Most importantly. The final death-knell nail in the coffin of the deflection is as follows: SO WHAT, even GUNN he had included a general distractor in ever of the sentences, and deflecting that it's just meant generally not specifically is just a dumb, cheap deflection. Let me give you a politicaal example: speech in view of civil rights protest in view of misdemanors:Not racist anymore AT ALL according to your logic? Why, because directed at all races and all states, right? Welcome to the realm of bigotry. Feel right at home. BTW reminds me of the MCU fans here (not you) claiming that calling black people "monkeys" is not racist per se. Sad.
|
|
|
Post by Vassaggo on Jul 7, 2018 11:00:16 GMT
The full quote is: "Star Wars (or any movie) may be important to you, but it doesn’t belong to you. If your self-esteem depends on how good you think the current Star Wars is, or your childhood is ruined because you don’t like something in a movie, GO TO THERAPY." (red coloring and emphasis on "in a movie," added by me for clarification.)The way " in a movie," is used and the way he punctuated the sentence makes the 2 independent clauses separated by the coordinating conjunction "or" individually certifiable. The comma after " in a movie," and before " GO TO THERAPY." indicates both independent clauses are ended with " , GO TO THERAPY." Also " in a movie," is very vague and generic adverbial prepositional phrase. It doesn't have to refer to Star Wars in the other independent clause. So you could word the compound sentence as two simple sentences and still preserve the meaning of the original compound sentence. "If your self-esteem depends on how good you think the current Star Wars is, GO TO THERAPY." "Your childhood is ruined because you don't like something in a movie, GO TO THERAPY." The second simple sentence could be referring any movie. So ThatGuy interpretation is completely valid. The final nail in the coffin, is a very small thing. You see in the part of the quote you left out he literally says "Star Wars (or any movie)." I have a strange idea. The author was talking about any movie not just Star Wars. nah, don't become a lawyer please. Your interpretation is as illogical as it is deflective (and cynical): 1. If your self-esteem depends on how good you think the current Star Wars is, ..GO TO THERAPY . Pretty straight an insult. 2. Now you try to deflect by stating the second part is more general: "or your childhood is ruined because you don’t like something in a movie, GO TO THERAPY." This is an uninformed deflection, and a deliberate out-of-context interpretation: The "ruin my childhood" is specifically and historically a Star Wars fandom slogan/phrase by which SW fans are often (sometimes rightfully) mocked - context-wise Gunn was here specifically referring to the A. Best case (Jar Jar) when the "ruined childhood" phrase was coined. So this is clearly directed at the SW fandom as well. 3. And thirdly you refer to the first sentence, which however has nothing to to with the insult language discussed by me. "Star Wars (or any movie) may be important to you, but it doesn’t belong to you." N evertheless, Gunn then goes on specifically talking about SW fandom in a SW forum context and insults them explicitly.BTW this is is another old, dumb straw-man deflection and lese-majesty-fallacy itself ("regular customers don't you DARE to complain about the declining quality of the food served here, it does not belong to you…. ). LOL 4. Most importantly. The final death-knell nail in the coffin of the deflection is as follows: SO WHAT, even GUNN he had included a general distractor in ever of the sentences, and deflecting that it's just meant generally not specifically is just a dumb, cheap deflection. Let me give you a politicaal example: speech in view of civil rights protest in view of misdemanors:Not racist anymore AT ALL according to your logic? Why, because directed at all races and all states, right? Welcome to the realm of bigotry. Feel right at home. BTW reminds me of the MCU fans here (not you) claiming that calling black people "monkeys" is not racist per se. Sad. So it's your contention that " or your childhood is ruined because you don’t like something in a movie, GO TO THERAPY." should be interpreted as "or your childhood is ruined because you don't like something in a Star Wars movie, GO TO THERAPY" That is certainly one interpretation. The great thing about interpretations is that they change from person to person. So good on you for having one. I'll go with my own. As neither our lives or livelihoods are dependent on believing the other's interpretation, nothing substantial is lost. Have a great day, sir.
|
|
|
Post by sdrew13163 on Jul 7, 2018 20:02:50 GMT
I've been seeing him and Rian Johnson and Christopher McQuarrie going off on people on Twitter for this and I'm really surprised how poorly they're handling it.
Don't get me wrong, I like all three of those guys, and some of the people they're arguing with deserve to be treated the way they are, but sometimes these fans bring up genuine critiques and concerns and they just disregard it as racism or sexism or a lack of understanding.
It's actually really pissing me off at this point. The character of Rose is awful and it absolutely is Johnson's fault. He wrote those horrible scenes and lines of dialogue, not Kelly Marie Tran. I don't think her performance helped the cause, but she was horribly written. Not much else to it.
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Jul 7, 2018 21:25:49 GMT
He's talking about any movie. Be it DCEU, the recent Ghostbusters, Gone with the Wind, Troll 2. It doesn't matter. nope, reading comprehension for dummies: Quote: "If your self-esteem depends on how good you think the current Star Wars is, or your childhood is ruined because you don’t like something in a movie, GO TO THERAPY." Your old context reading and text comprehension issues rear again. There is a THERAPY for that too btw, why not take the advise of your lowbrow MCU guru? Read that again. "...or your childhood is ruined because you don’t like something in a movie..." Let me repeat the part that you went blind on "in a movie". You see that part? Do you see it?
Go home Tristan. You are drunk.
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Jul 7, 2018 21:30:34 GMT
I like how the Gunn says that toxic fans need help for attacking people over a movie and this turd attacks him.
^ enter the butthurt MCU-fanboi flinging the proverbial turd. You have been a good apprentice of your MCU guru and his vile teachings. Ironic, how you found an idol who is pathetic...like you. Now go home and rethink your life. Guess you didn't watch the video about irony being ironic. Just got triggered again and started slamming the keys, huh?
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Jul 7, 2018 21:33:31 GMT
nope, reading comprehension for dummies: Quote: "If your self-esteem depends on how good you think the current Star Wars is, or your childhood is ruined because you don’t like something in a movie, GO TO THERAPY." Your old context reading and text comprehension issues rear again. There is a THERAPY for that too btw, why not take the advise of your lowbrow MCU guru? The full quote is: "Star Wars (or any movie) may be important to you, but it doesn’t belong to you. If your self-esteem depends on how good you think the current Star Wars is, or your childhood is ruined because you don’t like something in a movie, GO TO THERAPY." (red coloring and emphasis on "in a movie," added by me for clarification.)The way " in a movie," is used and the way he punctuated the sentence makes the 2 independent clauses separated by the coordinating conjunction "or" individually certifiable. The comma after " in a movie," and before " GO TO THERAPY." indicates both independent clauses are ended with " , GO TO THERAPY." Also " in a movie," is very vague and generic adverbial prepositional phrase. It doesn't have to refer to Star Wars in the other independent clause. So you could word the compound sentence as two simple sentences and still preserve the meaning of the original compound sentence. "If your self-esteem depends on how good you think the current Star Wars is, GO TO THERAPY." "Your childhood is ruined because you don't like something in a movie, GO TO THERAPY." The second simple sentence could be referring any movie. So ThatGuy interpretation is completely valid. The final nail in the coffin, is a very small thing. You see in the part of the quote you left out he literally says "Star Wars (or any movie)." I have a strange idea. The author was talking about any movie not just Star Wars. It was his idea to try to make me look bad. Like I was going to forget the what was there. Even while trying to edit out a single sentence from it he left in Gunn being broad about it.
|
|
|
Post by merh on Jul 10, 2018 0:26:41 GMT
Meh. No movie (regardless of how much I love or hate it) affects my self-esteem. That said, in the end a movie is meant to be watched by people. Meant to be watched by the audience. So you can't just go, "Fuck the audience. This movie is not for you. If you don't like it, you can go fuck off." Yeah, that's not a winning attitude right there. The responsible movie producer/director should listen to feedback from audiences. P.S. - I do agree with his point regarding not taking out your hate on the actors though. Don't do it. The actors are just professionals doing the job they were tasked to do. Just because you hate their characters doesn't mean you should take it out on the actors. When you pay to go to a museum to see a painting if you don't like what you see, do you send death threats to the artist? Do you ask the artist to paint over it to your exacting specifications? Do you attempt to dictate what the artist will paint next? When you hear a piece of music by your favorite artist that you don't like, do you take any of the actions listed above? Of course not, it's much more likely that you'd decline to partake in that artist's future work than to start a campaign meant to persecute her or him or pressure that person into reissuing their previous works in a state that more closely aligns with your own sensibilities. There is a point at which we must all say, "this thing is passed, I have enjoyed it but, the time has come for me to set it aside, it is no longer meant for me." This is how we are meant to face childhood's end. For better or worse, The Force Awakens, Solo, and The Last Jedi are a part of the Star Wars canon. Lucas Film/Disney cannot serve two generations equally and thoroughly. The older must diminish as the younger takes hold. The Studios don't quite have the integrity of some musicians or artists but, they do have something in common with them. The work they create often reflects the tastes and sensibilities of the era it originated in. If you don't like what you see, you are likely are at odds with the times. Filmmakers make corporate-sponsored art. We trust artists to create work that widens our perceptions and brings joy into our lives. You can be critical of a work; however, you can't spew hate and bile at the artist if you disagree with what he or she has done. All your hopes, dreams and fantasies should never be tied to an escapist and frankly disposable artform. This kind of behavior was minimal before Social Media. Its 3 generations then. When I went to Solo the 3rd time it was largely people closer to my age (58), those who have been following since 1977. We introduced our children to Star Wars. Some of us lived our lives, but watched the movies. Some of us followed the books & comics & animations. The prequels were for my kid. I felt disappointed because what I remember Lucas hyping it was there was more to it than it turned out. Oh well. As I said, for my kid. She was 8 & loved Amidala. I found Amidala rather tame after how strong Leia had been, but whatever. My kid loved Jar Jar & I found the anger against him stupid. He was made for kids like mine, like R2 was in my generation. Did you not find R2 rather persnickety for a robot? How did he & 3PIO get so much personality when much of the other droids were functional? They were meant for kids. THAT'S NOT BAD. Bugs Bunny is for kids, but I love him. But Lucas split the fandom, not Disney. You have the old timers-my generation. You have the Prequel fans-my kid's generation of millennials And you have the kids now. Hell, one can maybe split it into 4. I was 30 when I had my kid so she was a generation behind the kids of others my age. You had a generation that grew up with stuff on tv like the original movies, but the prequels were pretty much this century rather than last. So what? The special edition fans? The ones who didnt see SW in its original glory where Han shot first because Lucas's kids were traumatized Han did that to Greedo so Lucas fixed it
|
|
|
Post by merh on Jul 10, 2018 0:38:58 GMT
Now if you don't like Disney Star Wars you're labeled mentally ill. This guy is paid by Disney. Forgive me if I roll my eyes. Why does everyong go 0 to 60 in 5 seconds? Is that what Gunn said? When fanboys claim someone raped their damned childhood with a movie, there's a problem & its not the movie.
|
|
|
Post by merh on Jul 10, 2018 1:38:43 GMT
I see Force Awakens as a blatant retelling of A New Hope (for good and bad reasons) with a few new threads that were interesting. ? New Hope was a coming of age movie. Farmboy becoming a man. It was a popcorn movie. It was sold as a fun summer movie. Luke's father wasnt a real issue. Old dude knew Luke's daddy, said he was a good man, said Bad Guy killed him. Rey's story isn't coming of age. She is the orphan looking for her true parents. That's not Luke's story. She is a seeker, looking for a missing piece of her life Luke was a boy finding his place in the world . K-2SO was cool, but I liked the team. I love Mads Mikkelsen (Hannibal!!!) I found Jyn rather annoying at first, but she became better after she lost the general rage & found a more focused point. You need to watch New Hope, then Solo. I'm not a Luke fangirl. Han & Chewie were who I loved when I saw the film in 1977. That most assuredly those 2 in Solo. As Qi'ra tells Han when he says he's an outlaw-no. He is a good guy. When I saw Star Wars for the first time in the summer of 1977 I couldnt believe when Han left. No. That wasn't who he was. He was a good guy, a hero. Lucas aimed that return at me, I swear. I am positive I cheered when Han came back. Solo gives us the just on his own Corellian pirate before he is that, when his goal is getting his ship. Leave diversity out of it. I like Poe like I liked Han. Not as much, but he has a dash of Han in him. It felt like they were doing their best to stomp on Poe who I assumed was their nod to the Hispanic community. How did people hate Rose? That side trip had nothing to do with her & EVERYTHING to do with taking a swipe at Trump. Surprised they didn't thinly veil Mar-a-Lago as the name. No. Johnson apparently set out to piss people off.I do not know how they decided on him. Star Wars is mythology-the Hero's Journey. I see nothing in his prior work to suggest this is in his skill set. MAYBE he could have done Solo, but I would not have wanted him ANYWHERE near Han. Brothers Bloom was interesting, but quirky. Looper I tried watching a couple times but the characters didnt draw me in. Another waste. Why did we go there? I really dont get the big studio mentality. Like WB & the DCEU. Why? You have a property loved by many already. There are similarities. I'm a Marvel fangirl-Thor & Cap specifically but I have always liked Supes so why when they have the Reeve movies to draw on do they think they have to make Kal dark like Bats? Because you have the Batman fans who have taken over the DC fandom? Batman can beat everyone with enough prep time? These studios need to learn to flip off the extremes. They need to put fans in charge, not studio sycophants. People who have their fingers on the pulse of the general fandom & not the extremes. I swear their plan for Kylo is to Darth Vader save him in the 3rd film. He committed patricide so there should be no return, but they have that in their bag of tricks. Darth didn't kill his parents. Yeah, he killed a bunch of kids which makes him horrible & why he had to die at the end. He repents, does good & is saved in the next life. Kylo is an idiot who was tempted by a nobody (Snoke). There is nothing to save.
|
|
|
Post by merh on Jul 10, 2018 2:21:18 GMT
"GO TO THERAPY", Mr Gunn must know what he is talking about. After all he gave the world the juvenile dreck a la " Dance Off, you big turd blossom", I'm a 58 year old widow, but you come off a bigger prude that I could ever dream of being. You remind me of my mother-in-law who was 30 yrs older than I am. Or was it 40 yrs? First, get the line of your outrage right, dude. Its "what are you doing?" "I'm distracting you, you big turdblossom" then Ronan turns to see Drax & Rocket have a weapon aimed at Ronan's weapon which loosens the infinity stone. WOW! THERE'S A REASON FOR THE TRASH TALK! [/i]" etc. [/quote]You are so tight... Or did you never have a child? There is a certain childlike directness to Drax. Kids are fascinated with body functions. My child hit a point where she figured out how to untape her disposable diapers & paint the nearest surfaces with the content. Not with me. I kept close enough supervision she never managed to do it around me. Her grandmother. The daycare person. People busy doing other stuff. You sound like that would have killed you. I assume you also don't scoop the catbox or clean up after the dog. You have too many hangups to wade through, dude.
|
|
|
Post by Hauntedknight87 on Jul 10, 2018 7:39:40 GMT
lmao so not only is Rhian Johnson sucking his own dick, but he just recently blamed Gamergate for this.
Not only is he rehashing shit from old films in his new film, but he's also rehashing a hashtag from 2014.
This is amazing.
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Jul 10, 2018 14:55:45 GMT
How can you demonstrably prove that the presence of diversity had a direct correlation with a lack of quality storytelling? Isn't it possible that the storytelling was poor in spite of the diversity and not because of it? No matter how you frame this, to the general public, it just looks like traditionalist fans are against diversity in Star Wars films. Now now, don't twist my words around. I never said that the presence of diversity resulted in poor storytelling and characterization. I'm saying no one was complaining about diversity. They complained that storytelling and characterization were poorly done, seemingly in the effort to highlight diversity. There are many instances where this was obvious but I can give you three specific examples. One of the goals of the movie was obviously to have more women in the movie and give them more powerful roles right? That's the "diversity" part and I don't believe anyone really complained about that. What people complained about was that in the act of trying to make the women seem more powerful, they also portrayed every man as either a villain, selfish, brash or just plain incompetent. Even if it meant completely changing the personalities of male characters that were already established in previous movies. - character failure In their goal to give women more powerful roles, they ended up giving them powers that just plain didn't make sense. Leia surviving and flying in outerspace, Rey being good at everything without putting much effort into it, etc. And these complaints would still be valid even if these characters were male. - storytelling and character failure Creating the character of Rose was not an issue. What was an issue is them creating a completely unnecessary side quest just to give her more emphasis, a sidequest that took time, time that could have been spent fleshing out the main plot instead. - storytelling failure Those are just 3 examples (there are many more) where they sacrificed proper storytelling and character development in order to highlight their so-called "agenda". Now, you may or may not agree with this and that's fine, but I'm simply clarifying what the post that you linked was complaining about. This is what it was complaining about, not diversity in itself. Regardless of what the Star Wars fandom is actually saying or, supposes itself to be saying, all people are hearing is that you're all racist and sexist. That's an image problem that needs to be resolved before the franchise can even to begin to think about moving forward in a single, unified direction.
|
|
|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Jul 10, 2018 15:07:23 GMT
nope, reading comprehension for dummies: Quote: "If your self-esteem depends on how good self-esteem depends on how good you think the current Star Wars is, or your childhood is ruined because you don’t like something in a movie, GO TO THERAPY." Your old context reading and text comprehension issues rear again. There is a THERAPY for that too btw, why not take the advise of your lowbrow MCU guru? Read that again. "...or your childhood is ruined because you don’t like something in a movie..." Let me repeat the part that you went blind on "in a movie". You see that part? Do you see it?
Go home Tristan. You are drunk.
WRONG dude, by this Gunn specifically referred to non-current SW as the "ruined your childhood" (a SW fandom phrase) indicated, because context-wise he was ranting on A Best's recent comment. Nobody is that dumb (not even James "I have famously huge turds" Gunn) when aiming specifically at SW fans to include that infamous fanbase-mocking-phrase.
Apart from that, it's irrelevant: have you seen the brilliant hyperbole-analogy I made above, let's do another one: "All you darkies who's self esteem depends on how well the state forces treat you, as well as all you affirmitive action recepients who don't like such treatment, SHOULD GO TO THERAPY." Means to include all colors and races and is not bigotted white-racist omega crap at all...
Also, dude, FYI: I do not drink (alcohol), or smoke (anymore) or sniff raccon turd.
|
|
|
Post by Hauntedknight87 on Jul 10, 2018 15:51:47 GMT
So I wonder who will be blamed next? North Korea? Russian bots? Berniebros?
This probably the best thing to come out of the Star Wars franchise since KOTOR.
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Jul 10, 2018 17:53:57 GMT
Read that again. "...or your childhood is ruined because you don’t like something in a movie..." Let me repeat the part that you went blind on "in a movie". You see that part? Do you see it?
Go home Tristan. You are drunk.
WRONG dude, by this Gunn specifically referred to non-current SW as the "ruined your childhood" (a SW fandom phrase) indicated, because context-wise he was ranting on A Best's recent comment. Nobody is that dumb (not even James "I have famously huge turds" Gunn) when aiming specifically at SW fans to include that infamous fanbase-mocking-phrase.
Apart from that, it's irrelevant: have you seen the brilliant hyperbole-analogy I made above, let's do another one: "All you darkies who's self esteem depends on how well the state forces treat you, as well as all you affirmitive action recepients who don't like such treatment, SHOULD GO TO THERAPY." Means to include all colors and races and is not bigotted white-racist omega crap at all...
Also, dude, FYI: I do not drink (alcohol), or smoke (anymore) or sniff raccon turd.
"Ruined/raped childhood" goes for anything that is made off of something from long ago that one would see as bad. Some examples would be the Transformers movies, TMNT, Master of the Universe, Star Trek, etc. Hell, it has even gone with things that has been rebooted right after like Raimi Spider-man movies to the Amazing Spider-man movies.
|
|
|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Jul 11, 2018 8:56:37 GMT
WRONG dude, by this Gunn specifically referred to non-current SW as the "ruined your childhood" (a SW fandom phrase) indicated, because context-wise he was ranting on A Best's recent comment. Nobody is that dumb (not even James "I have famously huge turds" Gunn) when aiming specifically at SW fans to include that infamous fanbase-mocking-phrase.
Apart from that, it's irrelevant: have you seen the brilliant hyperbole-analogy I made above, let's do another one: "All you darkies who's self esteem depends on how well the state forces treat you, as well as all you affirmitive action recepients who don't like such treatment, SHOULD GO TO THERAPY." Means to include all colors and races and is not bigotted white-racist omega crap at all...
Also, dude, FYI: I do not drink (alcohol), or smoke (anymore) or sniff raccon turd.
"Ruined/raped childhood" goes for anything that is made off of something from long ago that one would see as bad. Some examples would be the Transformers movies, TMNT, Master of the Universe, Star Trek, etc. Hell, it has even gone with things that has been rebooted right after like Raimi Spider-man movies to the Amazing Spider-man movies.
sure, and the holy Feige-sheeple brings all those painted raccoon turds to MCU fans at Easter... Even if that was so (it is not, the term is broadly associated with "Georg Lucas ruined my childhood", there are even songs about it), Gunn still ranted this in context with discussing the A. Best case. Let alone that this kind of hypocritical distractor would not save him, as my analogy amply demonstrates. Btw ever heard of the legal doctrine of contra proferentem (Latin: "interpretation against the offeror"), meaning ambiguous language will in doubt be interpreted against the interests of the party who stated it? Fair rule, but rules of law, logic and debate hardly apply to the rabid MCU crowd. Anyway, we should all agree that Mr Gunn is the epitome of a hack that should be silenced by his masters for good. I just read that James "don't believe in yourself, believe in me, who believes in you woman" Gunn allegedly fought Nicole Perlman (the first female scriptwriter for a Marvel film) for sole writing credit on the GotG-script. Marvel deplorably let Gunn write it by himself and the results were childish, misogynistic manchildren fodder that makes Batman & Robin look like Shakespeare...It would explain so much.
|
|