wankgate | 251: back in my day wank meant something

sadly the people that disney has had working on their tentpole projects have been, largely, out of touch with the fan base of the product. if you do not understand what made a thing popular in the first place, what drew people to it, ignore or even deface the existing lore and culture around it, you are bound to fail.

disney star wars wanted to pave a new road that wouldn't have involved them paying rights and royalties to any existing creators or their estates. by doing so they crapped on the lore that existed, so to compensate they went with buzz words and marketing, but they failed to quality check the product.

i love seeing more representation out there on all sides of the camera and script, it is such a new and different time for creatives than it was 40 years ago, but that doesn't mean you hand the reins to just anyone and let them run wild. you have to ensure that the product is enhancing what came before, not making it less. sadly too often the former is done without the thought required for the latter.

maybe someday it'll get better, but that will mean different stewards of the franchise, same for marvel, same for disney classics going live action. i can dream, and a dream is still a wish your heart makes.

tl:dr make better stuff, people will watch it and enjoy it.

if you do not understand what made a thing popular in the first place, what drew people to it, ignore or even deface the existing lore and culture around it, you are bound to fail.

disney/marvel did this with almost all of their properties and still largely succeeded though? the only marvel property i can think of offhand that's pretty close to what made it popular is deadpool, the rest aren't quite whole-cloth inventions, but they're pretty pale shadows. similarly, christian bale's batman/joker were very little like the comics batman/joker, and people still hold that joker up in particular as the gold standard.

sa, *christopher nolan

i always forget his name because i think he sucks, but i'm one grump in a sea of adoring fans

eh, the difference is also in overall quality.

like, i didn't enjoy the nolan batman films at all but i can acknowledge they were generally well made, just not what im looking for in movies.

the disney star wars content is both crappy forced-out schlock and lacks the things that made the pre-disney star wars content delightful. the old expanded universe even pulled off a 'somehow Palpatine returned' that was better than the sequels managed.

ayrt, yeah that's what i'm saying: pandering to lore nerds isn't required at all if the content is good (for a very broad, popular definition of good), and it doesn't make bad or mediocre content better. 'they shit on the lore' is something chuds constantly bring up as a reason things they hate are bad, but old lore can be made irrelevant in good adaptations

i see what you're getting at, but there's a broad middle ground between pandering to lore nerds and demonstrating contempt for the existing story.

one of the things that made both the nolanverse batman and the disney mcu work is that they started from the ground up and made their own universe with a different tone than the existing story, so it runs parallel to other content rather than overriding it or trying to frankenstein with it. contrast that with disney star wars that is trying to messily graft itself onto the existing original and prequel trilogies while maintaining a drastically different tone and story approach.

the racist and sexist chuds among the fanbase can kick rocks, their opinions are garbage and so are they. the fanbase who love star wars for being campy heroic space opera get to be legit disappointed that the folks in charge of disney lucasfilm wouldn't know camp if it bit them on the ass and think optimism is for children.

it's so funny watching you guys run around in circles trying to pretend there's no correlation between 'we're prioritizing the message over the story' and 'the story sucks'

???

that was expressly discussed in this very subthread, except no one used the exact term "the message"

if you didn't understand that, maybe you're fixated on something

is it

is it really

have you...actually watched new star wars content, or do you just get mad at stuff because it's not exactly like the original

the mandalorian is like, all camp, and the tone of everything new SW is optimistic except rogue one/andor

the tone of the new stuff is that the old stuff sucked

shockingly, this is alienating to people who liked the old stuff

also shockingly, the stuff that doesn't start from the assumption that the old stuff sucked (mandalorian, rogue one, andor) is not nearly as divisive.

the 'let the past die, kill it if you have to' line almost made me walk out of the theater. it was such an obviously spiteful meta message against the previous canon material and fans that it turned me off the entire sequel trilogy that i had been iffy on up till then.

clone wars did a similar line better with "One must let go of the past to hold onto the future."

reading those lines as a "spiteful meta message" proves once again that people these days suck at media comprehension. jfc.

you're right

how could anybody walk away from the disney material thinking they had a hate-on of spite for the prior canon just because they doubled down on making the jedi assholes every time they had the opportunity, made luke 'literally ready to die rather than strike down Darth Vader in anger' skywalker a psychotic asshole who tried to murder his own nephew, undid all of han solo's character development and made him a self-centered manchild again, completely undid the entire victory against the empire, and generally just shit all over every square inch of the original trilogy and made everything and everyone in it pathetic retroactively

i don't know where anybody could get that idea, they must just be mad because there's a woman in it.

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2024-08-22 01:59 (UTC) - Expand

dda

(Anonymous) - 2024-08-22 02:02 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2024-08-22 02:09 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2024-08-22 02:16 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2024-08-22 03:39 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2024-08-22 12:20 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2024-08-22 14:07 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2024-08-22 16:58 (UTC) - Expand

+1

(Anonymous) - 2024-08-22 18:08 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2024-08-22 18:32 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2024-08-22 02:40 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2024-08-22 03:22 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2024-08-22 03:52 (UTC) - Expand

i was going to make fun of you for being that kind of greasy star wars nerd but i guess i shouldn't punch down

see, that's definitely not how i read that line. i took kylo ren's meaning as this: you are not defined by what you've grown up with. you are not defined by the events that happened to you in the past. whatever you went through when you were younger, can only break you if you allow it to.

but whatever ig i'm crazy for assuming it was a revelation about his character's motivations, and not some sooper secret middle finger toward luke skywalker and friends

+1

With the added bonus of a revealing look into his own psyche because he's clearly utterly defined by his own past and letting it dictate every single action he takes.

This is going to sound crazy but you're not actually supposed to take the villain's line of thinking as correct.

This is a big yikes, pity their rp partners.

technically no

but in some series, when you find yourself agreeing with the villains more than the heroes, then the writer fucked up somewhere

this has happened to me before

it DID suck

the lack of minority and female representation is inherently bad

why are you so bad at bait

i can't even imagine how terrible your rp must be

dances on your lawn

Re: STAR WARS

Re: STAR WARS

Re: STAR WARS

Re: STAR WARS

Re: STAR WARS

da

Re: da

Re: da

Re: da

Re: da

Re: da

dda

Re: dda

da

Re: dda

Re: dda

Re: dda

Re: dda

+1

+ 0.5

Re: da

Re: da

Re: da

Re: da

Re: da