wankgate | 251: back in my day wank meant something

251: back in my day wank meant something

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

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.

lol man i don't even really like the sequel trilogy but you need to touch some grass

my spouse was super into the EU and fwiw they felt that actually the characterization of luke was actually quite consistent with specifically the EU's look at him

--in particular the fact that apparently luke is shit at teaching in every timeline, womp womp

TO BE CLEAR that is not to say that disliking the new films' interpretation can't also be based on solid, thoughtful interpretation of established canon. i just wanted to share this as a counterpoint.

(overall, my spouse liked the first and second movies of the new trilogy a lot, but was disappointed in the third. since the movies were also what they used to get ME into star wars, i will confess to a continued fondness for them, despite the damage the third film did.)

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

it's funny to me that people always get the maddest about the second new trilogy movie because it was the only one that had even remotely interesting ideas and sprinkles of decent writing

in a way though it affirms that trying to pander to fans of the original was their worst decision

think it's funny to even bring up han solo's character development. like what development, he's easily the most static character of the trio. his development is having a bad romance arc with leia that dudes loved because of the "taming the shrew" trope and being jealous of luke until learning he's her brother.

like the sequel trilogy is bad for a lot of reasons and last jedi is no diamond in the rough, but at a minimum it tried to be more than just nostalgia pandering.

you're right and you should say it. han never stopped being a selfish dick, he just gritted his teeth and did a few unselfish things because the girl he liked would've been mad if he didn't. him being halfway divorced and in denial just doing what he'd always done as a matter of habit/comfort was probably the most linear thing they could've done with him, the script's many flaws aside

hi there harrison ford, so nice of you to join us

in what world

he came back for luke in the first movie, he stayed on hoth for luke in the second movie. both times he put aside his own safety to help because it was the right thing to do.

his cringe-inducing "romance" with leia (which the others in this thread are right to criticize it was in fact dogshit) had nothing to do with either instance, he just happened to get stuck with her through coincidence in most of esb.

there's not much interesting about luke ending up as one more bitter old failure in life who has to be talked into one last stand and then die.

idk, it felt like another lazy variation on that "cancer mcalcoholic's heartwarming but ultimately terminal redemption at the hands of a spunky kid" script that metastasized in hollywood decades ago, and there's just no cutting it out.

basically the only character they didn't completely reset into a boring hollywood trope about washed up old losers is leia and they probably would have ruined her too if carrie fisher had lived long enough

I love EU Luke. Retired with dignity after his custody battle with Cthulhu.

see, you joke, but at least one disney director explicitly blamed 'racist and sexist' fans for the movies she directed bombing at the box office

any links to that? i wanna see that tittybaby tantrum with my own eyes.

i googled for this because it seemed too stupid, and unless i'm missing a completely different interview it looks like she said there are fandom spaces that are racist and sexist and homophobic and she avoids them, and blog "journalists" looking for sensational headlines linked it to a movie or movies bombing (if they even did, i have no idea)

so is there a link to this or do you just skim headlines without noticing where they're from or clicking through

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

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

251: back in my day wank meant something

dda

Re: dda

da

Re: da

dda

Re: da

Re: da

Re: da

Re: da

Re: da

Re: da

+1

Re: da

Re: da

Re: da

Re: da

Re: dda

Re: dda

Re: dda

Re: dda

+1

+ 0.5