|
Post by Waxer-n-boil on Jun 19, 2024 4:55:15 GMT
It is presented as a bad thing in some sense since he is blamed for going along with Darth Vader for personal interest and Han Solo obviously cares nothing for money since he can't even be bothered to pay off his debts. But at the same time--all the main white males are presented negatively - even Obi Wan Kenobi ends up as a failure and responsible for Vader's existence.
But if you are looking for consistency, how is the promotion of a matriarchy--which then gets replaced by transgenderism, consistent? It starts with antagonism towards white males, and then goes into a disdain for heterosexuality--which certainly has no benefit for women. Thus it has a death cult philosophy since it seeks transformation rather than stability. What happened to "balance to the Force?" That went out the window too.
[ br] How is Luke Skywalker presented as a failure? He wasnāt. His friend Biggs was not presented as a failure. Even ObiWan being called a failure is very subjective. He succeeded in surviving the extermination of the Jedi. He succeeded in starting Lukeās mentoring in the Force. And before itās suggested that Luke was presented as a failure because he had moments of failure in the trilogy, thatās not fair way to holistically judge his character. Real successes show that they have failures and hurdles to overcome on their way to becoming a success. Or would rather have him be completely successful at everything with ease. That would be indicative of a MarySue/GaryStu character? Thatās not good storytelling.
|
|
|
Post by novastar6 on Jun 19, 2024 6:16:15 GMT
It is presented as a bad thing in some sense since he is blamed for going along with Darth Vader for personal interest and Han Solo obviously cares nothing for money since he can't even be bothered to pay off his debts. But at the same time--all the main white males are presented negatively - even Obi Wan Kenobi ends up as a failure and responsible for Vader's existence.
But if you are looking for consistency, how is the promotion of a matriarchy--which then gets replaced by transgenderism, consistent? It starts with antagonism towards white males, and then goes into a disdain for heterosexuality--which certainly has no benefit for women. Thus it has a death cult philosophy since it seeks transformation rather than stability. What happened to "balance to the Force?" That went out the window too.
[ br] How is Luke Skywalker presented as a failure? He wasnāt. His friend Biggs was not presented as a failure. Even ObiWan being called a failure is very subjective. He succeeded in surviving the extermination of the Jedi. He succeeded in starting Lukeās mentoring in the Force. And before itās suggested that Luke was presented as a failure because he had moments of failure in the trilogy, thatās not fair way to holistically judge his character. Real successes show that they have failures and hurdles to overcome on their way to becoming a success. Or would rather have him be completely successful at everything with ease. That would be indicative of a MarySue/GaryStu character? Thatās not good storytelling.
THEN that would be called toxic masculinity.
Now here's the part I don't get. Everybody knows the way this Mary Sue hero type stuff works, the woman raises herself up because literally EVERYBODY else is beneath her. The villains are stupid, weak, and easily beaten, etc., that doesn't make any sense. A genuinely kickass woman character would be able to take on the worst of the worst and still defeat them. But we're not given that, we're given oh they're so toxic, and they're so stupid, and they're defeated with NO EFFORT WHATSOEVER on the woman's part.
I hate to say it but I next look for the new Disney retcon of the canon franchise to be they have some STRONG FEMALE CHARACTER kill Darth Vader without batting an eye. Now Leia was able to mouth off to him and Tarkin and she survived, because they needed to get the location of the Rebel base from her, but it's one thing to merely stand up to the 2nd most powerful and evil figure in the galaxy, it's a whole other thing for teeny tiny woman with NO fighting experience to singlehandedly destroy the sith lord who has murdered millions of people throughout the universe.
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Jun 19, 2024 6:20:16 GMT
My mission here is done then.
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Jun 19, 2024 6:34:51 GMT
[ br] How is Luke Skywalker presented as a failure? He wasnāt. His friend Biggs was not presented as a failure. Even ObiWan being called a failure is very subjective. He succeeded in surviving the extermination of the Jedi. He succeeded in starting Lukeās mentoring in the Force. And before itās suggested that Luke was presented as a failure because he had moments of failure in the trilogy, thatās not fair way to holistically judge his character. Real successes show that they have failures and hurdles to overcome on their way to becoming a success. Or would rather have him be completely successful at everything with ease. That would be indicative of a MarySue/GaryStu character? Thatās not good storytelling. Luke isn't a failure until the Disney sequels when he is sitting around for 30 years drinking green milk.
But Obi Wan becomes a failure by ROTJ since he admits he caused Darth Vader by trying to teach like Yoda and he seems kind of glum on the log-saying Luke's father is beyond redemption.
But the bigger point is that the movies establish an anti-male theme--it was there in the first movie in subtle ways--Luke is a goofy farm boy, Obi Wan is a fuddy duddy, Han is a bum... There's no Flash Gordon in the show.
Lando is the major character who blows up the second Death Star (without the Force).
I don't know how conscious these decisions are but they go in a certain direction. I am not surprised. The fact that Terminator starts with the hero of the future needing his mother saved--to eventually being killed and replaced by a Mexican girl--I am not surprised. I see the pattern. Likewise for Indiana Jones, James Bond...He Man...
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Jun 19, 2024 12:39:02 GMT
https://www.reddit.com/r/saltierthankrayt/comments/1dj6x12/9_minutes_after_the_episode_aired/
Just in case anyone (cough Nova) actually thought there was any objectivity to these ratings.
I'm not watching this show and don't care about it, but this is pathetic.
|
|
|
Post by Hauntedknight87 on Jun 19, 2024 12:50:00 GMT
The funny thing is that if they did remove the ability to rate things these chuds will scream "censorship" despite abusing it.
|
|
|
Post by Waxer-n-boil on Jun 19, 2024 12:52:24 GMT
[ br] How is Luke Skywalker presented as a failure? He wasnāt. His friend Biggs was not presented as a failure. Even ObiWan being called a failure is very subjective. He succeeded in surviving the extermination of the Jedi. He succeeded in starting Lukeās mentoring in the Force. And before itās suggested that Luke was presented as a failure because he had moments of failure in the trilogy, thatās not fair way to holistically judge his character. Real successes show that they have failures and hurdles to overcome on their way to becoming a success. Or would rather have him be completely successful at everything with ease. That would be indicative of a MarySue/GaryStu character? Thatās not good storytelling. Luke isn't a failure until the Disney sequels when he is sitting around for 30 years drinking green milk.
But Obi Wan becomes a failure by ROTJ since he admits he caused Darth Vader by trying to teach like Yoda and he seems kind of glum on the log-saying Luke's father is beyond redemption.
But the bigger point is that the movies establish an anti-male theme--it was there in the first movie in subtle ways--Luke is a goofy farm boy, Obi Wan is a fuddy duddy, Han is a bum... There's no Flash Gordon in the show.
Lando is the major character who blows up the second Death Star (without the Force).
I don't know how conscious these decisions are but they go in a certain direction. I am not surprised. The fact that Terminator starts with the hero of the future needing his mother saved--to eventually being killed and replaced by a Mexican girl--I am not surprised. I see the pattern. Likewise for Indiana Jones, James Bond...He Man...
- That only goes to my original point that the original trilogy is not āwokeā in comparison to the sequel trilogy. - ObiWan already admitted to this dynamic in episode 4 when he told Luke that Vader was a pupil of his who turned evil and hunted down the Jedi knights. His focus was on Luke now throughout the trilogy. - Luke and Han started out that way but werenāt that way by the end of the trilogy. Itās character development. - It was blown up by Lando and Wedge. And it was an easy shot because they were able to fly into the center of the Death Star superstructure.
|
|
|
Post by Waxer-n-boil on Jun 19, 2024 13:17:57 GMT
So much retconning (and bad retcon) going on on that show they may as well reboot the entire saga.
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Jun 19, 2024 16:45:59 GMT
- That only goes to my original point that the original trilogy is not āwokeā in comparison to the sequel trilogy. But it still goes in that direction. That's my point. If they didn't want to go in that direction (consciously or not) they wouldn't have made Luke goofy or had a woman villain somewhere (a Force witch or something). The theme of deconstruction of male authority figures is in the original trilogy. The path was set, so it wasn't surprising where they have gone with it--and I bet Lucas wouldn't disapprove of the gist of it.
|
|
|
Post by novastar6 on Jun 19, 2024 18:36:35 GMT
So much retconning (and bad retcon) going on on that show they may as well reboot the entire saga.
Didn't somebody say that was the next plan for Disney?
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Jun 20, 2024 17:18:50 GMT
At this point, the online discourse surrounding The Acolyte sounds more engaging and entertaining than the series itself.
|
|
|
Post by novastar6 on Jun 21, 2024 0:54:43 GMT
At this point, the online discourse surrounding The Acolyte sounds more engaging and entertaining than the series itself.
That's the way it is with all woke projects. It's far more entertaining listening to Critical Drinker beat to death everything wrong in She-Hulk and Velma than actually wasting the time to watch that crap.
|
|
|
Post by Waxer-n-boil on Jun 21, 2024 0:59:24 GMT
So much retconning (and bad retcon) going on on that show they may as well reboot the entire saga.
Didn't somebody say that was the next plan for Disney?
I hadnāt heard that. But I wouldnāt be surprised if itās true. The retconning in The Acolyte is so bad that they have to reboot the saga for it to be real Star Wars. And thatās not even addressing the other problems in the show. People may be review bombing this show but thereās no way thatās completely responsible for a 70 point difference between critics score and audience score on Rotten Tomatoes. Here are some examples of the horrible retcon: Episode 1, Mae baited a Jedi into a fight (played by Carrie Ann Moss). When the Jedi brings out her lightsaber Mae tells the Jedi that Jedi never ignite their lightsaber unless they intend to use it to kill. Not true. Through 3 trilogies thereās at least half a dozen examples (or more) of Jedis starting their lightsabers but not killing anyone and not intending to. Then this Jedi turned off her lightsaber because a Sith apprentice told her she was doing things wrong. Why would a Sith apprentice know more about Jedi etiquette than a Jedi master? And why would a Jedi master listen to them and believe them? Episode 4, Ki-Adi Mundi shows up saying that Anakin is not the first child created by the Force. That itās been done before (most notably with the twins in the show). So this establishes that he lied to the Jedi Counsel in episode 1. The problem is that heās not even supposed to be born yet at the time period of The Acolyte. And the writer of the episode even admitted to it. Admitting that they made this up because theyāre trying to retcon something that shouldnāt or canāt be retconned in the first place. And this is only a handful of examples. Thereās much more and theyāre only halfway through the series. But yeah. This show is only getting bad audience reviews because of bigots and racists review bombing it. (insert eye roll š here)
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Jun 21, 2024 5:54:07 GMT
At this point, the online discourse surrounding The Acolyte sounds more engaging and entertaining than the series itself.
That's the way it is with all woke projects. It's far more entertaining listening to Critical Drinker beat to death everything wrong in She-Hulk and Velma than actually wasting the time to watch that crap.
Do you get kickback for anytime you mention that dipshit or post his videos?
|
|
|
Post by Hauntedknight87 on Jun 21, 2024 10:52:23 GMT
So who's going?
|
|
|
Post by novastar6 on Jun 21, 2024 14:19:54 GMT
That's the way it is with all woke projects. It's far more entertaining listening to Critical Drinker beat to death everything wrong in She-Hulk and Velma than actually wasting the time to watch that crap.
Do you get kickback for anytime you mention that dipshit or post his videos?
He's more entertaining than the movies he's demolishing. It's a fact.
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Jun 21, 2024 18:29:40 GMT
Do you get kickback for anytime you mention that dipshit or post his videos?Ā
He's more entertaining than the movies he's demolishing. It's a fact.
I feel like it'd get boring hearing a monotone Scotsman circle through the same one point over and over again.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Jun 22, 2024 18:46:16 GMT
Didn't somebody say that was the next plan for Disney?
I hadnāt heard that. But I wouldnāt be surprised if itās true. The retconning in The Acolyte is so bad that they have to reboot the saga for it to be real Star Wars. And thatās not even addressing the other problems in the show. People may be review bombing this show but thereās no way thatās completely responsible for a 70 point difference between critics score and audience score on Rotten Tomatoes. Here are some examples of the horrible retcon: Episode 1, Mae baited a Jedi into a fight (played by Carrie Ann Moss). When the Jedi brings out her lightsaber Mae tells the Jedi that Jedi never ignite their lightsaber unless they intend to use it to kill. Not true. Through 3 trilogies thereās at least half a dozen examples (or more) of Jedis starting their lightsabers but not killing anyone and not intending to. Then this Jedi turned off her lightsaber because a Sith apprentice told her she was doing things wrong. Why would a Sith apprentice know more about Jedi etiquette than a Jedi master? And why would a Jedi master listen to them and believe them? Episode 4, Ki-Adi Mundi shows up saying that Anakin is not the first child created by the Force. That itās been done before (most notably with the twins in the show). So this establishes that he lied to the Jedi Counsel in episode 1. The problem is that heās not even supposed to be born yet at the time period of The Acolyte. And the writer of the episode even admitted to it. Admitting that they made this up because theyāre trying to retcon something that shouldnāt or canāt be retconned in the first place. And this is only a handful of examples. Thereās much more and theyāre only halfway through the series. But yeah. This show is only getting bad audience reviews because of bigots and racists review bombing it. (insert eye roll š here) The show has problems, but not necessarily for the reasons some of these guys say it does. Perhaps ironically, the show had the potential to be good, but maybe not for the reasons the showrunner intended, either. Here's what I don't like: The writing, overall, is lousy. Not from a Star Wars perspective, but just from a general story/dialogue perspective. Character choices and decisions are borderline nonsensical, and characters contradict themselves within a given conversation or even a single sentence. At one point Sol says, "Jedi don't take children," then immediately goes on to explain how he was taken from his family when he was four, and how the jedi academy has thousands of children. (I suppose it depends on how you define 'take,' but they do run off with these kids even if the family is uncomfortable with it.) And again, generally speaking, the dialog is all choppy and delivered poorly by the actors. But I have to say it's gotta be tough to spit this stuff out when it makes zero sense in the first place. It would be like having students trying to read Middle English in a school drama class. The retcons are a problem, but they're only a problem if they aren't explained by the end of the series. Honestly, I don't care if someone else was created by the Force before Anakin. That was a dumb idea in the first place. Sure this goes against a plot point of the prequels, but maybe the Jedi were wrong. Maybe they didn't want to accept it. Maybe they were mind wiped. But ultimately I just don't care, because it seems inconsequential to the actual plot of Star Wars to me. But this Conehead Jedi even being there is anachronistic, so that's a problem in itself. The good news is that for all casual viewers know, Beldar here is 500 years old. Why he would speak falsely to the council is another matter entirely. (Go back a few sentences for possible explanations.) Either way I don't see how Anakin's journey is any less important or unique to the Star Wars universe if someone else was also 'created' by the force. Anakin can still be the 'chosen one' whether his background is similar to another character, or if his mother had been knocked up by a Tusken Raider or gangbanged by Jabba's goons. Some of the other stuff you mentioned I don't really see as a problem, and it's actually what I like about the show. We've only ever gotten the Jedi or Sith perspective on the Force and other Force users, I actually find this new religious sect an intriguing addition to the Star Wars mythos. Hell, they don't even call it the Force. How many religions are there on this blue dot we call Earth, is it so far-fetched that a galaxy filled with different cultures, beliefs and practices would see things a different way? Mae mischaracterizes Jedi. A lot. But that's kind of the point, she sees them as evil, or at least as soulless goons out to enforce their views on everyone else. Is she wrong? That's up to the viewer, isn't it? Of course we think she's wrong because we have a previous history with the Jedi and this entire universe. One of the other characters says the 'Thread' is called the 'Force' by those who view it as a weapon. And again, we know this is false, that the Jedi don't believe this. But these witches see it differently. I wonder how the Jedi come across through three episodes if The Acolyte was someone's introduction to Star Wars? As a certain Star Wars character once said, "Good is a point of view." The shame of it all, to me, is that there's actually an intriguing story here. Yes, there are gay characters, empowered women, minorities (DEI!), and whatever other boomer trigger labels you want to throw out there; But to me, that isn't what this story is about at its core. It's like a great premise for a Star Trek TNG episode, but executed poorly at every level. It's a moral quandary in space. Who are the Jedi to tell these people how to use the Force? Who are they to decide who deserves to wield a power, and how to raise their children? How do you, the viewer, feel about a religious cult who forces children into roles they do not desire for themselves (and that goes for the Jedi and these witches alike)? What should be the age of reasonable consent for a child to make a major life altering decision for themselves? Are the Jedi or the witches right? Are they both wrong? Do the Jedi, as an arm of the government, wield too much political power in the overall grand scheme of 'preserving order' in the galaxy? You can insert plenty of 'woke agenda' metaphors into all of this, and you wouldn't be wrong to do so. By that definition, both Star Trek TNG and TOS are incredibly 'woke' properties going back decades. But by that same definition, Star Wars was never devoid of politics or social commentary, either. And there's still plenty of personal character melodrama to focus on in this show as well, it never (at least to me) feels like they're beating you over the head with some feminist or LGBTQ diatribe or anything. Cranks like novastar see a gay character and automatically write off the entire project as radical propaganda, but we can't and shouldn't take idiots like that too seriously. Now, ha, all that being said, this is still not a great show. I respect that they're taking a swing here, it's a different kind of Star Wars story, and at this point I think that's a good thing. (And honestly, this is the place for it. Not in a tentpole movie; away from the core characters whose stories and personalities are well established at this point; in another corner of the galaxy, a hundred years before even the prequels. I say go for it. At worst, all I have to do is stop watching.) But despite a few bright spots ("Who's he?" "I thought he was with you." I chuckled at that one.) and a solid premise, the writing (and especially a lot of the dialog) is so cringeworthy as to make it really tough to sit through. And if they continue to retcon established canon, soon the entire franchise will completely unravel, which defeats the purpose of calling this a Star Wars property in the first place.
|
|
|
Post by novastar6 on Jun 24, 2024 0:53:51 GMT
What would be funny would be if at this point, people don't so much downvote The Acolyte, but instead start upvoting the Star Wars Holiday Special just out of spite.
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Jun 26, 2024 2:31:31 GMT
The retcons are a problem, but they're only a problem if they aren't explained by the end of the series. Honestly, I don't care if someone else was created by the Force before Anakin. That was a dumb idea in the first place. Sure this goes against a plot point of the prequels, but maybe the Jedi were wrong. Maybe they didn't want to accept it. Maybe they were mind wiped. But ultimately I just don't care, because it seems inconsequential to the actual plot of Star Wars to me. But this Conehead Jedi even being there is anachronistic, so that's a problem in itself. The good news is that for all casual viewers know, Beldar here is 500 years old. Why he would speak falsely to the council is another matter entirely. (Go back a few sentences for possible explanations.) Either way I don't see how Anakin's journey is any less important or unique to the Star Wars universe if someone else was also 'created' by the force. Anakin can still be the 'chosen one' whether his background is similar to another character, or if his mother had been knocked up by a Tusken Raider or gangbanged by Jabba's goons. I haven't been following this show too closely, but are people not aware that Anakin was created by Palps and his master? It's implied in RotS and outright spelled out in the Plageuis book. I know that's now "legends" and don't know what the lore has been saying about Anakin's birth post-Disney, but I doubt anyone who hates this show cares about the Disney canon. Furthermore, I don't recall anyone saying Anakin was the first "virgin birth", or even that that was in of itself evidence that he was the chosen one. And Rise of Skywalker already fucked that whole prophesy either way. Anakin didn't bring balance to the force, he didn't even end the reign of that one asshole.
|
|