Funny Events of the "Woke" world

[Dwarvenhobble]

Literally didn't happen. Christ this is tiresome.

Well two effects of gas exposure are memory loss and tiredness.

Maybe you should turn off those lights you keep insisting on turning on when I'm about?

Someone actually crunched the numbers here, funnily enough, for both references and explicit depiction of romance/sexuality among Dr. Who companions.

Bill Potts is below the average for Nu-Who female companions. 7 out of 12 eps have a mention, and 4 out of 12 have a depiction. As opposed to 21 & 13 out of 35 for Clara, and 24 & 19 out of 31 for Rose.

But you literally do. You've been counting instances of Bill Potts being interested in women as examples to push your case. It's already been established that she actually mentions sexuality in a small minority of episodes.

So what's your argument now? Did I fake them? People can happily go and check you know?

Or care to claim Mandela effect means you never said it because you're from a parallel universe?

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

And now for something completely different

Democrats are apparently selling donor data or improperly handling it

 

[Hawki]

You don't really need him at his peak as such in the sequel Trilogy. You just need to show a bit of him at it. I dunno lets say elderly Luke meets Rey and refuses to train her but she refuses to leave eventually Luke goes something like "Well if you're going to insist on hanging round here you might as well join me for dinner" then you do some sort of crappy dinner table set up and Luke at some point turns to Rey and say something like "I think I owe you at least an explanation as to why I can't be the one to train you" screen fades and he skips through tales of his past showing him in his prime in bits. You have maybe 10-15 minutes at most of flashback showing how Luke ended up as he is now and done we've got to see Luke in or near his prime; it's contrasted him with now; explained why he's bitter and left beyond "I went a bit mad" and better set up his arc.

I don't really agree. We didn't need to see Luke train between Ep 4 and 5, nor between 5 and 6, despite the latter of which clearly establishing that Luke's got a buff since the prior film. Skipping back to Luke in his prime can work a bit, but it isn't that relevant. We've already seen Luke in his prime in Ep. 6.

The problem with that is
1) She happily was wearing a "The Force is Female Shirt" in publicity photos
2) The Publicity photos clearly had some level of official to them considering the background is a screen with logos for JJ Abrams company on it lol along with logos for a film festival.

Gee, imagine there being logos at a films festival...

Anyway, you're still missing the point. "The Force is Female" was a statement that came from Nike, and Kennedy was wearing it on her own time. And even if you want to say that she shouldn't wear anything that could be interpreted as anything, then I assume that, for instance, you're going to chastise Chris Pratt for preaching the gospel at events, despite being the face of at least two major IPs.

Silly as the idea is, the line "the Force is female" is pretty inocuous.

Did it manifest in the films?
Well Finn got Side lined and Rey became the main Jedi lead for the series along with getting a host of new force powers and being shown as the most powerful Jedi ever.

Finn got sidelined in Rise of Skywalker, not before. If anything, it's the 'anti-woke' film that was doing the sidelining, not the 'woke' one (not that I think either film are these things, but that's the paradigm).

Also, first, I doubt Rey is the most powerful Jedi. She still hasn't displayed abilities that Luke has for instance, or displayed the raw power as Anakin. Second, even if she was, it's a leap of logic to assume that "most powerful character is female = feminist." Can it be? Potentially - see Supergirl season 2 where it's outright stated that Kara is more powerful than Clark. But if that's the baseline, that if there's a powerful male character, then no female character can ever be more powerful, then it's a stiffling conceptual game that's being played.

I mean, I can even play that game. Look at Avatar: The Last Airbender. Aang is the most powerful Avatar that we see, does that diminish the likes of Yangchen or Kyoshi? Alternatively, Katara is the most powerful waterbender, Toph the most powerful earthbender, and Azula the most powerful firebender. Does this make them 'feminist?' Jump ahead to Legend of Korra, and you can argue that Korra is even more powerful than Aang, so does that make bending female?

Maybe according to some, but you can hopefully see the nonsense in the ideas behind it, because if your conceptual lens is that if the most powerful/prominent character in a piece of media is inherently representative of a feminine or masculine ideal, then I don't know what to say.

Yeh Holdo is culpable to an extent and the film doesn't acknowledge it but Poe's actions basically cause the fall of most of the resistance. Poe not shutting up and knowing his place nearly cause the villains to entirely win and it was only thanks to Holdo that they didn't.

Which fits in with one of the film's overall themes - failure, coming to terms with it, and learning from it.

It also shoots down the idea of Rey being 'the most powerful Jedi,' because Rey fails at almost everything in the film.

Karen Fukuhara didn't....... that we know off because oddly enough there haven't been masses of article about it.

Burden of proof is still on you. Anything "could" happen, but that isn't much of an argument to say that it did or didn't. I mean, what's more likely?

1: Karen got a load of abuse but it was never reported.

2: Karen didn't receive abuse.

With Kelly Marie Tran it apparently was happening on Instagram which really trolls on Instagram? That's not really the common place for them.

I don't know, and I don't care. I saw the abuse with my own eyes. And the contrary claim is that Tran is lying, or that the claims about Disney running a false flag are true.

Star Wars actress Kelly Marie Tran leaves social media over racist abuse

The actress, who plays Resistance fighter Rose Tico in The Last Jedi, has faced racist trolling for months.

www.smh.com.au

I mean, what do you think is actually more likely? That Tran did receive racist abuse, or that the entire thing is a conspiracy? If you think it's the latter, then I have a lot of thoughts, none of them good.

 

[Hawki]

If I were to hazard a guess it was shippers again because if you think there's fanbase toxicity normally you've never seen shipping fandom toxicity such as the abuse then Candice Patton got tons of it for her role as Iris West in The Flash most of it if not all of it from "Snowbarry" shippers.

Shippers? Seriously?

First, that flies in the face of what we actually saw. Yes, shipping can be toxic, but be honest, who's more likely to go after Tran? The alt-right, or shippers? Because it wasn't shippers in Charlotsville, nor was it shippers who stormed the White House. The cultural war in the US at the time (and arguably still going on) has nothing to do with shipping.

Retrospective | How ‘The Last Jedi’ Became a Battleground In Our Culture War

Last year, I watched all 33-and-counting Godzilla feature films ahead of the release of Godzilla: King of the Monsters. This year, I’ve…

gioiacobucci.medium.com

Shippers can be vicious little bastards, but they generally keep to themselves and their own sphere.

Second, there's another Achilles heel in your argument, because the most vocal shippers for the sequel trilogy are Reylo shippers. Rose has nothing to do with Rey. She doesn't speak to her at all in the film, I don't think they even exchange words in Rise of Skywalker. The only reason that TFA shippers would go after Tran would be if they were aggrieved that Finn seemed to be on a romance course with her rather than Rey. Which is technically possible, but ReyxFinn has never been that popular. I would know, I've written plenty of sequel trilogy fics on FFN, Reylo is insanely popular. It's a ship that I detest, but that aside, Reylo shippers have no reason to go after Tran because Rose doesn't affect Reylo. If anything, Rose allows Reylo to happen.

I mean, again. Shippers? This is like Trump calling the White House storming a false flag by Antifa.

As for Candice Patton, yes, Snowbarry is (or at least was) popular, but isn't it likely that some of that abuse comes from Patton blackwashing Iris West, and just general racism? This is also a red herring, because no matter who went after Patton, we know who went after Tran, and the type of abuse it involved. If you want to talk about Patton, talk about Patton.

The also wasn't the "Alt Right" running round telling everyone who hated Rise of Skywalker to go kill themselves for the good of society and they can't wait for "People like you to go extinct and it's a shame we can't legally do it ourselves" or similar sentiments regularly being expressed.

Maybe because the alt-right was too busy declaring that Jews wouldn't replace them?

Also, hardly anyone likes Rise of Skywalker. I've never seen anyone who does. if there's a group that's going after people who dislike the film, that target is pretty small.

And many of the critics being deemed bigoted alt-right who only hated Poe due to her race actually came out to say she was done dirty by being sidelined and it was a bad move not to try and give her more character development in the film.

"Only hated Poe due to her race? What? Are we talking about Poe or Rose?

And you may disagree, but Rose was done dirty in RoS. Rose is a major character in Last Jedi, and however you feel about her, that's a fairly objective thing to say. If people disliked her (and to be clear, dislking Rose doesn't make someone a racist or a sexist ipso facto - I'm not overly fond of Rose either), then the writers had an opportunity to do something with her. I mean, it's not as if you can't make Rose interesting - there was a prequel comic series that focused on sequel trilogy characters, and I really liked Rose there. The writers could have looked at Rose in Ep. 9, looked at what worked and what didn't, and resolved to do better.

Instead, Rose gets sidelined. She's sidelined so hard that Charlie from Lost has more lines than her. She's sidelined, and even friend-zoned by Finn, as he's involved with Jannah. This isn't a question as to whether one likes Rose or not, it's shoddy storytelling. FFS, even Jar Jar got a role in Ep. 2 after Ep. 1, and made an appearance in Ep. 3. Jar Jar Binks got more dignity given to him than Rose.

Rey Parentage being retconned was likely because JJ Abrams planned her to have parentage and well Rian Johnson didn't bother reading the plans and threw out the script outline before reading it and wrote his own thing.

First, Rey's parentage was always up in the air. Daisy Ridley confirmed it in an interview that there was no set plan for Rey going in.

Second, even if Johnson did, the fault is still mainly at Abrams's feet. There's a rule in comedy that if you make a joke/throughline, and someone else goes in another direction, when the mike goes back to you, don't fight against it. A similar rule can be said for shared writing. If you write something, and someone else takes the writing in a direction you disagree with, don't fight against it. Work with what you have, and go from there.

If we look at the sequel trilogy, you can see where the issue lies:

TFA: Who are Rey's parents?

TLJ: Rey's parents were scavengers. She doesn't come from any noble bloodline.

RoS: Actually, Rey's father was Palpatine's grandson, and she does come from a linneage of Force-users.

Abrams is the one at fault, not Johnson. It's not just that Abrams gives a different answer, he gives an answer that contradicts the themes of Last Jedi's answer. It would be equivalent if, in Return, Yoda said that Vader was lying in Empire, which had similar incredulity. The difference is that Return didn't pander to audiences like Rise of Skywalker did. Which of those two is regarded as the better film?

 

[Hawki]

Well Marcus was in Prison so nothing much to do there but eat and work out seemingly.

So Marcus in prison gets more protein than Abby in a base where she has a free run of things?

As Liana K has gone through (I'll link the vids if you'd like) the physique Abby has is based on a professional who has to have a special controlled diet regime and exercise regime and can only maintain that look at most about 2 weeks in every 8 due to how the cycle works. Oh and her regime isn't Tacos from a base cafe.

Like I mean Dwayne Johnson is on like 6 meals a day to maintain his look.

Abby is hardly Dwayne Johnson. And Dwayne Johnson isn't even Marcus Fenix.

I'd like to point out by this point that by the time period of GOW 2 & 3, any chance of meat for the Gears is fish, if at all, and their primary foodstuffs seem to be fruit. Yet the physique remains. Why? Don't really care, but if people are getting whipped up about Abby, then it's fair to apply the 'muscle criteria' elsewhere.

One of the main writers and creators actually too.

And?

So a main writer/creator likes her work because of LGBT stuff? Ooh, the horror.

That she did in official press photos.
In front of a specially made banner.
With the Logo for JJ Abrams production company on it
At a pre arranged PR event where she was there to represent Lucas Films.

Come on we live in an age where people can be fired for independently talking negative about their work on social media and at a PR event Kathleen Kennedy's comments are meant to be taken as hers and hers alone not her as head of Lucas Film?

Much as I dislike cancel culture, "the Force is female" is far more inocuous than anything most people have said.

If people are whipped up in a tizzy over something Kennedy did on her own time, and demand her resignation, then I don't want any of those same people demanding that other people shouldn't be fired for saying things that are worse.

Well people tend not to be too happy when they're told "Well fuck off I don't want to hear from you as I don't think you have anything worthwhile to say." Kind of a symptom of the culture was and perception of Larson kind of fall in line with an unfortunate narrative that was seemingly being pushed for a while the "Shut up it's not for you anymore it's ours now" narrative.

Larson didn't say that.


The statistics she gives are facts. The idea of a more diverse critic audience isn't really objectionable. It becomes objectionable (for me) if you insist on quotas, but she never said that "I don't think you have anything worthwhile to say." I don't agree with everything she said, but unlike some people, I don't make 20 plus videos on the matter while insisting I don't care about Brie Larson.

Oh you mean like #NotmyAerial

The people who insisted mermaids couldn't be dark skinned because "science!"?

Yeah, what about them? Twats.

Just look at the number of reported "Hate crime" events were a worrying number of prominent ones have turned out to be fake. I mean Jussie Smollett anyone?

Jessie Smollett is the exception.

I think the hate crimes issue gets a lot wrong - you can't blame black on Asian crime on "white supremacy" and nothing else, for instance - but because Smollett lied doesn't mean the issue doesn't exist.

If someone comes to me and says they've suffered a hate crime, I'm going to take them out. I say this as someone who's had to call police in to deal with harassers and/or actual violence. I've had staff members racially abused, I've been racially abused, and I've got to say, my first reaction to someone isn't "you're lying."

That Smollett lied doesn't mean that Tran is, for instance.

At what point do we claim it can be regarded as from Disney though if the head of Lucas film was happily wearing the shirt for it in official PR photos?

Maybe when there's an official statement from Disney themselves and/or in-universe evidence of the Force being 'gendered.'

Because the implication was John was there and he and his wife were a team.

They were, until John was killed, until Kate took command of the Resistance, and sent the T-850 back in time, and programmed it so it wouldn't obey John's orders (in some areas), but would hers.

As much as I hate to be the one pointing this stuff out but part of the perceived attack on femininity is the idea motherhood is bad. It's a stupid messed up thing to try and explain but well Anita Sarkeesian best showcases this will her thesis on why Bella Swan is bad but Buffy is good and portrayals of women in media where as negative portrayals of women it was mostly traits deemed feminine while positive female leads qualities were mostly masculine ones.

First, when does any Terminator film attack femininity? Like, at all? Any loss of femininity (T2, Genisys) is presented as a tragedy, not as an aspiration.

Second, plenty of people hate Bella Swan. It isn't because she has a baby at the end.

With SCC there was no outrage as we never did learn who became the leader and we did know from T3 that John Connor had some generals too who the Terminators were picking off so the assumption would have been one of them took the mantle of leader.

SCC undermines its own premise with its season 2 ending. If John is the destined saviour of humanity, as reinforced by Skynet's constant attempts to kill him, yet it ends with a future where John never became leader, yet the Resistance is operating regardless...um...you tell me.

Yes, you're right about T3, but it's Kate who becomes overall commander, and even outranks him in a practical sense. I don't think this is a problem (I have issues with John's supposed fate in T3, but that's another matter in a film I detest), but the point is that if T3 was released today, it would get the backlash Dark Fate did. If Dark Fate is anti-men, then so is T3 (John is killed in both films, a woman leads the Resistance in both films, a female Terminator/cyborg exists in both films, etc.)

Yeh because by they point they expected bad. Also yeh people cared because they really didn't do anything with Finn and essentially prove fans wrong that he was a well written well thought out character with a satisfying arc. Also as we didn't know how far ahead the timeline had gone people still thought Stormtroopers were likely still made up a majority of clones

What does that have anything to do with what I said about the double standards? You think that because people expected RoS to be bad, they left men in charge as sort of reverse psychology attempt?

Finn's arc grinds to a halt in RoS, I agree. It's one of the film's many screwups, what's your point?

Stormtroopers were recruit-based before A New Hope, at least by the old canon. By Empire, the 501st (a clone unit) was the exception, not the rule.

The twats who screeched at a black stormtrooper couldn't even get their canon right.

Yes, problem is girls had already been Ghostbusters and any-one pointing this out was met with "You just hate women you sexist bigot women can be ghostbusters" and mostly not listened to.

First, I agree to a point, Feig has blamed sexism on the film's commercial failure.

Second, doesn't change the fact that a lot of criticism to the film WAS biggoted.

Third, what could Sony actually change by the time the first trailer went up? Not much, I'd wager.

I pointed out a ton of times about Kyle Griffin but no the narrative carried on that these were "The first female Ghostbusters" or whatever.

Where did they state that? If they did, I actually agree, it's demonstrably false.

Also people saw it as a reboot but seemingly treading the same ground trying to do a reboot and replace.

A reboot treading old ground? That's...kind of what reboots do.

Batman Begins doesn't "replace" Batman 89 for instance.

The whole "It's an alternative universe" wasn't actually out out there

I thought it was obvious from the outset.

(Out of time, I may address the DW stuff later.)

 

[Seanchaidh]

Literally didn't happen. Christ this is tiresome.

Isn't Soros a Billionaire?

Yes. Incidentally, he's also been a big supporter of Ukrainian integration with Europe since the early 1990s. The right wing obsession with Soros is kind of hilarious; his 'philanthropy' seems to amount to being a CIA laundromat woke-washing American imperialism. But the right hates him for imagined payment en masse of BLM protestors and tepid support for incremental criminal justice reform in the United States.

The International Renaissance Foundation has supported the development of independent media outlets in Ukraine, and backed a multi-year campaign to establish an independent public service broadcaster that led to the launch of the National Public Broadcasting Company of Ukraine in 2015.

While this was going on: government bans opposition media and political parties to no apparent concern by the IRF. Oh well!

If you read their press releases about Ukraine, the foremost concern is always demonizing Russia and/or promoting 'western' influence; corruption isn't bad for its own sake, it's bad because (since 2014) it discredits pro-western politicians. The Donbas issue wasn't one with two sides and military violence between them, it was solely attributable to Russia. Fomenting anti-gay sentiment isn't so much bad for its own sake, it's bad because it can be used against pro-western politicians due to the EU being comparatively less backward. It is transparent. The IRF isn't interested in democracy in Ukraine, they're interested in expanding western influence there. And because that also means the continuation of neoliberal politics there, it is good for the finances of people like George Soros-- wealthy people like Musk, Bezos, Buffett, Gates, Kolomoisky and other oligarchs.

 

[Seanchaidh]

The cultural war in the US at the time (and arguably still going on)

Not arguably. It's still going on.

 

[Silvanus]

Well two effects of gas exposure are memory loss and tiredness.

Maybe you should turn off those lights you keep insisting on turning on when I'm about?

Accusing me of psychological abuse because I disagreed with you about Dr. Who.

Stay classy, Dwarven.

So what's your argument now? Did I fake them? People can happily go and check you know?

Did you actually read the post on the other side of that link?

"References: Any mention - from a companion briefly talking about it (think Rose asking Gwyneth about boys in the Unquiet Dead) all the way up to romantic partners onscreen with them."

So: not references to her being a lesbian. Just references to romantic feelings in any form. So for instance, a guy says "my wife"-- that counts. And if Bill refers to a romantic interest in exactly the same way that a straight character would, with zero attention drawn to the fact that it's gay, then that counts too.

Notice how Bill has fewer such references than most Who companions.

 

[Silvanus]

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

I don't really agree. We didn't need to see Luke train between Ep 4 and 5, nor between 5 and 6, despite the latter of which clearly establishing that Luke's got a buff since the prior film. Skipping back to Luke in his prime can work a bit, but it isn't that relevant. We've already seen Luke in his prime in Ep. 6.

Not really only him just out of training really

Gee, imagine there being logos at a films festival...

Anyway, you're still missing the point. "The Force is Female" was a statement that came from Nike, and Kennedy was wearing it on her own time. And even if you want to say that she shouldn't wear anything that could be interpreted as anything, then I assume that, for instance, you're going to chastise Chris Pratt for preaching the gospel at events, despite being the face of at least two major IPs.

Silly as the idea is, the line "the Force is female" is pretty inocuous.

At a PR event she was invited to. Most likely as a representative of Lucas Films not as an individual.

Also is Chris Pratt really known to do that? I thought normally his religious beliefs were more of a personal thing to him?

Also, first, I doubt Rey is the most powerful Jedi. She still hasn't displayed abilities that Luke has for instance, or displayed the raw power as Anakin. Second, even if she was, it's a leap of logic to assume that "most powerful character is female = feminist." Can it be? Potentially - see Supergirl season 2 where it's outright stated that Kara is more powerful than Clark. But if that's the baseline, that if there's a powerful male character, then no female character can ever be more powerful, then it's a stiffling conceptual game that's being played.

It's stifling conceptually but in reality shows the kind of dumb trend to one upsmanship that seemingly gets played out that a character can't be seen as a strong female one without a male character having to be lowered.

Captain America didn't punch Hitler, America Chavez did.

Jane Foster as Thor was more powerful than regular Thor.

America Chavez's girlfriend became the smartest person in the MCU before Moongirl then took that title.

As you pointed out Supergirl being stated as stronger then Clark

I mean, I can even play that game. Look at Avatar: The Last Airbender. Aang is the most powerful Avatar that we see, does that diminish the likes of Yangchen or Kyoshi? Alternatively, Katara is the most powerful waterbender, Toph the most powerful earthbender, and Azula the most powerful firebender. Does this make them 'feminist?' Jump ahead to Legend of Korra, and you can argue that Korra is even more powerful than Aang, so does that make bending female?

Maybe according to some, but you can hopefully see the nonsense in the ideas behind it, because if your conceptual lens is that if the most powerful/prominent character in a piece of media is inherently representative of a feminine or masculine ideal, then I don't know what to say.

Welcome to the screwed up paradigm of the modern culture war where characters can't be equals.

Burden of proof is still on you. Anything "could" happen, but that isn't much of an argument to say that it did or didn't. I mean, what's more likely?

1: Karen got a load of abuse but it was never reported.

2: Karen didn't receive abuse.

Either could be true. For years we didn't know the actress who played Cho Chang got a ton of abuse.

The problem with the burden of proof is what happens when you know if there was proof it has long since been wiped from the internet?

I don't know, and I don't care. I saw the abuse with my own eyes. And the contrary claim is that Tran is lying, or that the claims about Disney running a false flag are true.

Star Wars actress Kelly Marie Tran leaves social media over racist abuse

The actress, who plays Resistance fighter Rose Tico in The Last Jedi, has faced racist trolling for months.

www.smh.com.au

I mean, what do you think is actually more likely? That Tran did receive racist abuse, or that the entire thing is a conspiracy? If you think it's the latter, then I have a lot of thoughts, none of them good.

If I'd not seen the origins of #Notmyaerial happen I wouldn't believe it could happen myself but then I saw it go down. I saw bots being used to push it to try and create a narrative. I've seen and heard about other similar tings happening. At this stage I'm far more open to it being a false flag that got played out or similar.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

Shippers? Seriously?

First, that flies in the face of what we actually saw. Yes, shipping can be toxic, but be honest, who's more likely to go after Tran? The alt-right, or shippers? Because it wasn't shippers in Charlotsville, nor was it shippers who stormed the White House. The cultural war in the US at the time (and arguably still going on) has nothing to do with shipping.

The Alt-right never stormed the whitehouse.
It was Capital Hill and Congress that was stormed.

Thing is the culture war and tactics in it hit everywhere. Snowbarry Shippers regularly get called racists.

The shipping wars are just another screwed up front to a greater or lesser degree.

Retrospective | How ‘The Last Jedi’ Became a Battleground In Our Culture War

Last year, I watched all 33-and-counting Godzilla feature films ahead of the release of Godzilla: King of the Monsters. This year, I’ve…

gioiacobucci.medium.com

Shippers can be vicious little bastards, but they generally keep to themselves and their own sphere.

They haven't kept to their own spaces for a long time it's just almost no-one is willing to call out the crap.

Second, there's another Achilles heel in your argument, because the most vocal shippers for the sequel trilogy are Reylo shippers. Rose has nothing to do with Rey. She doesn't speak to her at all in the film, I don't think they even exchange words in Rise of Skywalker. The only reason that TFA shippers would go after Tran would be if they were aggrieved that Finn seemed to be on a romance course with her rather than Rey. Which is technically possible, but ReyxFinn has never been that popular. I would know, I've written plenty of sequel trilogy fics on FFN, Reylo is insanely popular. It's a ship that I detest, but that aside, Reylo shippers have no reason to go after Tran because Rose doesn't affect Reylo. If anything, Rose allows Reylo to happen.

I'm sure here's some ReyFinn shippers out there too. It doesn't have to be the most popular ship out there I mean there's always shipping fights between different groups and it doesn't matter which is the dominant ship because all shipping is considered fine as such.

I mean, again. Shippers? This is like Trump calling the White House storming a false flag by Antifa.

As for Candice Patton, yes, Snowbarry is (or at least was) popular, but isn't it likely that some of that abuse comes from Patton blackwashing Iris West, and just general racism? This is also a red herring, because no matter who went after Patton, we know who went after Tran, and the type of abuse it involved. If you want to talk about Patton, talk about Patton.

No we know what articles say. Most of them very light on actual examples.

Maybe because the alt-right was too busy declaring that Jews wouldn't replace them?

Also, hardly anyone likes Rise of Skywalker. I've never seen anyone who does. if there's a group that's going after people who dislike the film, that target is pretty small.

Yet to this day if you say TLJ was bad there's still a fair chance you'll have some-one coming in to tell you how you're an awful person on social media.

"Only hated Poe due to her race? What? Are we talking about Poe or Rose?

Sorry brain fart, yes Rose.

And you may disagree, but Rose was done dirty in RoS. Rose is a major character in Last Jedi, and however you feel about her, that's a fairly objective thing to say. If people disliked her (and to be clear, dislking Rose doesn't make someone a racist or a sexist ipso facto - I'm not overly fond of Rose either), then the writers had an opportunity to do something with her. I mean, it's not as if you can't make Rose interesting - there was a prequel comic series that focused on sequel trilogy characters, and I really liked Rose there. The writers could have looked at Rose in Ep. 9, looked at what worked and what didn't, and resolved to do better.

Instead, Rose gets sidelined. She's sidelined so hard that Charlie from Lost has more lines than her. She's sidelined, and even friend-zoned by Finn, as he's involved with Jannah. This isn't a question as to whether one likes Rose or not, it's shoddy storytelling. FFS, even Jar Jar got a role in Ep. 2 after Ep. 1, and made an appearance in Ep. 3. Jar Jar Binks got more dignity given to him than Rose.

Yeh and many of the critics deemed Alt-Right for daring to criticise TLJ pointed similar out but people conveniently didn't care because it's only worthwhile to bring up something they have said when it works to reinforce a narrative normally.

First, Rey's parentage was always up in the air. Daisy Ridley confirmed it in an interview that there was no set plan for Rey going in.

Second, even if Johnson did, the fault is still mainly at Abrams's feet. There's a rule in comedy that if you make a joke/throughline, and someone else goes in another direction, when the mike goes back to you, don't fight against it. A similar rule can be said for shared writing. If you write something, and someone else takes the writing in a direction you disagree with, don't fight against it. Work with what you have, and go from there.

If we look at the sequel trilogy, you can see where the issue lies:

TFA: Who are Rey's parents?

TLJ: Rey's parents were scavengers. She doesn't come from any noble bloodline.

RoS: Actually, Rey's father was Palpatine's grandson, and she does come from a linneage of Force-users.

Abrams is the one at fault, not Johnson. It's not just that Abrams gives a different answer, he gives an answer that contradicts the themes of Last Jedi's answer. It would be equivalent if, in Return, Yoda said that Vader was lying in Empire, which had similar incredulity. The difference is that Return didn't pander to audiences like Rise of Skywalker did. Which of those two is regarded as the better film?

Rey's parentage wasn't known by the cast but there seemingly was a possible plan of sorts

J.J. Abrams' Initial Plan For Rey's Parentage Was Far Different Than What We Saw In 'The Last Jedi' - SlashFilm

Actor Simon Pegg has revealed that writer/director J.J. Abrams initially had a different plan for Rey's parents in the new Star Wars movies. Read more about the J.J. Abrams Rey's parents revelation here.

www.slashfilm.com

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

So Marcus in prison gets more protein than Abby in a base where she has a free run of things?

Plenty of convicts seem to be able to get fairly jacked when they have all the time inside.

Also Abby doesn't have free run of the place as such she has the lunch selection just like everyone else and additional jobs for the group etc etc.

Abby is hardly Dwayne Johnson. And Dwayne Johnson isn't even Marcus Fenix.

I'd like to point out by this point that by the time period of GOW 2 & 3, any chance of meat for the Gears is fish, if at all, and their primary foodstuffs seem to be fruit. Yet the physique remains. Why? Don't really care, but if people are getting whipped up about Abby, then it's fair to apply the 'muscle criteria' elsewhere.

Ok easy explanation with Gears.

It's another planet.
They're not technically Terran Humans.

And?

So a main writer/creator likes her work because of LGBT stuff? Ooh, the horror.

And that seems to be part of the focus of it and reason given to watch it. Not that it's good or fun or whatever else.

Much as I dislike cancel culture, "the Force is female" is far more inocuous than anything most people have said.

If people are whipped up in a tizzy over something Kennedy did on her own time, and demand her resignation, then I don't want any of those same people demanding that other people shouldn't be fired for saying things that are worse.

I think the mess Star Wars became is more reason to consider firing her. I mean come on at some point she OKed a Star Wars comic where one of the main characters is a rock. As in just a rock.

Larson didn't say that.


The statistics she gives are facts. The idea of a more diverse critic audience isn't really objectionable. It becomes objectionable (for me) if you insist on quotas, but she never said that "I don't think you have anything worthwhile to say." I don't agree with everything she said, but unlike some people, I don't make 20 plus videos on the matter while insisting I don't care about Brie Larson.

Except it's kind of fucking stupid when we don't actually ask about additional context for the stats.

What s considered a top critic? Just those who are with papers / publications of do independents count too?

If they do then we're arguing what that Black women aren't what? As capable of setting up a computer and recording their thoughts to dump on youtube now?

Some people have got big recording reviews on cellphones before.

It's also hilariously kind of dumb about the whole adding critics thing. I've been to two critic screenings (yes in an insane way I found my way into two critic screenings for films in my time because it really isn't hugely hard to find, they're far from special invite only things they're more walk into a regular cinema and get ushered into a screen with an entirely different title over the screen door).

Also it's rather short sighted to suggest a 40 year old White dude possibly would be too white and dudeish not to be able to talk about a film in a way that their own personal bias is minimised and they try to understand or showcase why the thing is great and may be loved even if it didn't fully work for them. It's the rather silly idea that people can't try to see any possible position other than their own. I mean then again Brie is part of Hollywood the home of narcissism but still.

Oh and Brie Larsons speech was 4:35 long so yeh that "Her Full words" is an edited version lol.

The people who insisted mermaids couldn't be dark skinned because "science!"?

Yeah, what about them? Twats.

They never existed.

The Hashtag was set trending by Indian own bot farms lol

Jessie Smollett is the exception.

And the Poop Swastikas?
The Nascar Noose?
The KKK on Kampus?
The Nooses on Campus?
The girl who had her Hijab pulled off?
The Gay Influencer beaten up outside a night club in a claimed homophobic attack?
How about the racial abuse letters?
The woman who accused an MP in the UK of sexual abuse?
The Rolling Stones campus rape thing?

It's not just Smollett it's been a worrying pattern of high profile events that keep turning out to be fake.

I think the hate crimes issue gets a lot wrong - you can't blame black on Asian crime on "white supremacy" and nothing else, for instance - but because Smollett lied doesn't mean the issue doesn't exist.

Yeh the issue exists. But it's make a lot more prominent looking by these big headlines

If someone comes to me and says they've suffered a hate crime, I'm going to take them out. I say this as someone who's had to call police in to deal with harassers and/or actual violence. I've had staff members racially abused, I've been racially abused, and I've got to say, my first reaction to someone isn't "you're lying."

That Smollett lied doesn't mean that Tran is, for instance.

Tran may not have lied. Some troll or tool may have said something and she saw it.

Or maybe she didn't and her publicist told her it was happening and shut down the channels.

Who knows.

Maybe when there's an official statement from Disney themselves and/or in-universe evidence of the Force being 'gendered.'

So we waiting until they unfreeze Walt then?

They were, until John was killed, until Kate took command of the Resistance, and sent the T-850 back in time, and programmed it so it wouldn't obey John's orders (in some areas), but would hers.



First, when does any Terminator film attack femininity? Like, at all? Any loss of femininity (T2, Genisys) is presented as a tragedy, not as an aspiration.

Second, plenty of people hate Bella Swan. It isn't because she has a baby at the end.

Because of the comments about how Sarah Conner was only the mother of the saviour as though that wasn't a big thing or important to helping John grow into the person to save humanity.

SCC undermines its own premise with its season 2 ending. If John is the destined saviour of humanity, as reinforced by Skynet's constant attempts to kill him, yet it ends with a future where John never became leader, yet the Resistance is operating regardless...um...you tell me.

Other Generals.
Hell we don't know where the plot was going but who knows maybe the 3rd faction were leading the resistance now posing as humans.

Yes, you're right about T3, but it's Kate who becomes overall commander, and even outranks him in a practical sense. I don't think this is a problem (I have issues with John's supposed fate in T3, but that's another matter in a film I detest), but the point is that if T3 was released today, it would get the backlash Dark Fate did. If Dark Fate is anti-men, then so is T3 (John is killed in both films, a woman leads the Resistance in both films, a female Terminator/cyborg exists in both films, etc.)

Except the idea is John is killed at some point in the future war likely just before the end and sending Terminators back in time. So He was implicitly still there for the majority of it. Hell a better argument would be arguing about Salvation which actually reduced the role / importance of John Connor in the future quite a bit initially.

What does that have anything to do with what I said about the double standards? You think that because people expected RoS to be bad, they left men in charge as sort of reverse psychology attempt?

Finn's arc grinds to a halt in RoS, I agree. It's one of the film's many screwups, what's your point?

Stormtroopers were recruit-based before A New Hope, at least by the old canon. By Empire, the 501st (a clone unit) was the exception, not the rule.

The twats who screeched at a black stormtrooper couldn't even get their canon right.

Depends how much extended lore people read at the time beyond the films.

First, I agree to a point, Feig has blamed sexism on the film's commercial failure.

Second, doesn't change the fact that a lot of criticism to the film WAS biggoted.

Third, what could Sony actually change by the time the first trailer went up? Not much, I'd wager.

Second: was it?

I mean was the awful whipping and vilification in the press for James Rolfe's statement justified?

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

Where did they state that? If they did, I actually agree, it's demonstrably false.

A Fair few places actually

First female Ghostbusters action figures revealed | Lyles Movie Files

lylesmoviefiles.com

I'm sure there's a few more


^Evidence of it going on more than it happening there and then

The Female 'Ghostbusters' Team Already Looks Amazing & Hilarious Together — PHOTO

The 40th anniversary episode of Saturday Night Live brought us many gifts, including blast-from-the-past sketches, an epic Weekend Update, and Leonardo DiCaprio's man bun in the audience, but one of the best parts of SNL 40 was at the after party.…

www.bustle.com

It's the modern narrative.

Like how Black Panther was the first every black lead superhero film

How Captain Marvel was framed some places as the first every female lead superhero film.

A reboot treading old ground? That's...kind of what reboots do.

Batman Begins doesn't "replace" Batman 89 for instance.

It does rather come up with it's own style and try to differentiate itself though

I thought it was obvious from the outset.

(Out of time, I may address the DW stuff later.)

No it was presented as it being the one and only future for the franchise.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

Accusing me of psychological abuse because I disagreed with you about Dr. Who.

Stay classy, Dwarven.

Well you did say my memory was bad.

Then you tried to slip in a blatant lie.

Yeh it may not be classy but nor is trying to do it so kindly stop trying to play the civility game against me and being upset by the fact you're not winning it.

Did you actually read the post on the other side of that link?

"References: Any mention - from a companion briefly talking about it (think Rose asking Gwyneth about boys in the Unquiet Dead) all the way up to romantic partners onscreen with them."

So: not references to her being a lesbian. Just references to romantic feelings in any form. So for instance, a guy says "my wife"-- that counts. And if Bill refers to a romantic interest in exactly the same way that a straight character would, with zero attention drawn to the fact that it's gay, then that counts too.

Notice how Bill has fewer such references than most Who companions.

Which in Bills case would be her regularly saying "I'm a lesbian".

Those were the states YOU chose to bring in here.

YOU chose them to support YOUR Claims.

YOU then tried to claim despite presenting that as your evidence that the minority of Bill's episodes made reference to it.

You then just tried to claim you hadn't done that.

That's gaslighting.

Now if you insist on playing the game of civility and trying to accuse me of being not classy for daring to call you out I shall do the same.

So are you going to do the classy thing now that your civility demands you should do having been caught out so obviously? Or will you just act to prove me right again?

 

[Trunkage]

Well you did say my memory was bad.

Then you tried to slip in a blatant lie.

Yeh it may not be classy but nor is trying to do it so kindly stop trying to play the civility game against me and being upset by the fact you're not winning it.




Which in Bills case would be her regularly saying "I'm a lesbian".

Those were the states YOU chose to bring in here.

YOU chose them to support YOUR Claims.

YOU then tried to claim despite presenting that as your evidence that the minority of Bill's episodes made reference to it.

You then just tried to claim you hadn't done that.

That's gaslighting.

Now if you insist on playing the game of civility and trying to accuse me of being not classy for daring to call you out I shall do the same.

So are you going to do the classy thing now that your civility demands you should do having been caught out so obviously? Or will you just act to prove me right again?

Just want to be clear about what you are saying here

Bill alludes to the fact that they are lesbian, so that means that are actually saying 'I'm a lesbian.'

 

[Silvanus]

Which in Bills case would be her regularly saying "I'm a lesbian".

Those were the states YOU chose to bring in here.

YOU chose them to support YOUR Claims.

YOU then tried to claim despite presenting that as your evidence that the minority of Bill's episodes made reference to it.

You then just tried to claim you hadn't done that.

Don't blame me if you failed to follow the argument.

I provided that link as evidence that references to romance/relationships come up less for Bill than they do for most Dr. Who companions. Which is true, and the link shows that.

At another point, I also said that references to sexuality are in a minority of episodes. That link was not used to support that claim. References to relationships/romance are not the same thing as references to sexuality.

Feel free to accuse me of psychological abuse for keeping up with what we were actually talking about if ya like.

 

[Hawki]

Not really only him just out of training really

And a Jedi knight who's at the end of his character arc.

I'm not saying Last Jedi couldn't/shouldn't show Luke flashbacks, but it wouldn't add all that much to the film. We already know that Luke's badass from Ep. 6, we don't need reminding by Ep. 8.

At a PR event she was invited to. Most likely as a representative of Lucas Films not as an individual.

Also is Chris Pratt really known to do that? I thought normally his religious beliefs were more of a personal thing to him?

Except she wasn't representing LucasFilms, she was there on her own time.

And Chris Pratt has preached on his own time. So claiming that a deity exists is pretty equivalent to saying the Force is gendered.

It's stifling conceptually but in reality shows the kind of dumb trend to one upsmanship that seemingly gets played out that a character can't be seen as a strong female one without a male character having to be lowered.

Captain America didn't punch Hitler, America Chavez did.

Jane Foster as Thor was more powerful than regular Thor.

America Chavez's girlfriend became the smartest person in the MCU before Moongirl then took that title.

As you pointed out Supergirl being stated as stronger then Clark

Well first, one-upmanship is a potential problem in fiction, period. Take DBZ as an example - each villain is more powerful than the last, and each is defeated through the same premise of brute force. On the flipside, there was no rule saying that Gohan couldn't outdo Goku, even if the show reversed that.

To you actual examples:

-I agree that the punch thing is silly.

-That sounds silly.

-I don't think that's an issue, because the smartest person in Marvel has alternated over time, and it's fairly arbitrary at that. It doesn't suddenly become a problem when female characters get the moniker.

-Yes, it was stated, I didn't have a problem with it, I think it was handled fine.

Welcome to the screwed up paradigm of the modern culture war where characters can't be equals.

That statement can apply both to SJWs and SQWs though.

Either could be true. For years we didn't know the actress who played Cho Chang got a ton of abuse.

The problem with the burden of proof is what happens when you know if there was proof it has long since been wiped from the internet?

Yes, but the difference is that Cho Chang's actress DID state it, Katana's actress HASN'T.

Again, you're conflating hypotheticals with confirmations.

If I'd not seen the origins of #Notmyaerial happen I wouldn't believe it could happen myself but then I saw it go down. I saw bots being used to push it to try and create a narrative. I've seen and heard about other similar tings happening. At this stage I'm far more open to it being a false flag that got played out or similar.

First, even if the hashtag was done by bots, I don't know of any bot sophisticated enough to make a detailed argument as to why dark-skinned mermaids can't exist (apparently they forgot about Gabriella).

Second, it's a bizzare setup you've got. You accept Katie Leung at her word that she was harassed, but are entertaining the idea that the attacks on Tran were false flags, which, if so, would mean that she'd still be lying as of 2022.

 

[Hawki]

The Alt-right never stormed the whitehouse.
It was Capital Hill and Congress that was stormed.

Semantics.

Thing is the culture war and tactics in it hit everywhere. Snowbarry Shippers regularly get called racists.

Maybe because some of them are?

That Candice Patton has received racial abuse is confirmed. To my knowledge, Danielle Panabaker hasn't.

The shipping wars are just another screwed up front to a greater or lesser degree.

Shipping wars haven't really spilled out into a wider cultural war though.

I'm sure here's some ReyFinn shippers out there too. It doesn't have to be the most popular ship out there I mean there's always shipping fights between different groups and it doesn't matter which is the dominant ship because all shipping is considered fine as such.

First, Reylo is much more common than FinnxRey. I ran the numbers on FFN, character tags with Rey and Kylo Ren are at 4,800, while Rey and Finn are at 1,200. That isn't definitive, but it's an indication as to who's more popular.

Second, it's academic, because of all the attacks on Tran (and you can look them up), not one of them went along the lines of "how dare your character kiss Finn, I wanted him with Rey!" What we did get, however, was your usual sexist and/or racist diatribes.

Shippers aren't the problem. Not in the way you're suggesting.

No we know what articles say. Most of them very light on actual examples.

You can look at the culture war article I linked to for one such example.

Yet to this day if you say TLJ was bad there's still a fair chance you'll have some-one coming in to tell you how you're an awful person on social media.

Yes, that's a risk, and as I've said, I don't think disliking TLJ makes you an awful person.

But why do you think that impression exists? Could it be that awful people who dislike TLJ acted like awful people?

Rey's parentage wasn't known by the cast but there seemingly was a possible plan of sorts

J.J. Abrams' Initial Plan For Rey's Parentage Was Far Different Than What We Saw In 'The Last Jedi' - SlashFilm

Actor Simon Pegg has revealed that writer/director J.J. Abrams initially had a different plan for Rey's parents in the new Star Wars movies. Read more about the J.J. Abrams Rey's parents revelation here.

www.slashfilm.com

Even if they had a plan, the point still stands.

That Vader was Luke's father wasn't decided until Empire. Return didn't retcon it back like Rise did.

Plans change in multi-stage fiction.

 

[Hawki]

Plenty of convicts seem to be able to get fairly jacked when they have all the time inside.

Also Abby doesn't have free run of the place as such she has the lunch selection just like everyone else and additional jobs for the group etc etc.

How's Marcus going to stay jacked? Where does the meat come from after the COG loses Jacinto?

Ok easy explanation with Gears.

It's another planet.
They're not technically Terran Humans.

And your evidence that Serans are biologically different from Terrans is...?

Human

"The humans of Sera built a glorious civilization. But humans were not destined to create. They inevitably did what they do best: destroy. But this was nothing compared to a new threat from below. An enemy that will force humanity to take their last inevitable steps toward extinction." —Queen...

gearsofwar.fandom.com

I'll wait.

And that seems to be part of the focus of it and reason given to watch it. Not that it's good or fun or whatever else.

Except Vagrant Queen is fun. You may disagree (I'm assuming you've watched it), but AlitaxAmae isn't the focus. It's about as prominent as JohnxAeryn in Farscape. Present, somewhat important, but not the focus. And even if it was, how does that automatically mean the show is weaker for it? Plenty of romances add to stories.

I think the mess Star Wars became is more reason to consider firing her. I mean come on at some point she OKed a Star Wars comic where one of the main characters is a rock. As in just a rock.

First, I disagree Star Wars is a mess. This may sound strange, considering that I dislike the sequel trilogy, but by any reasonable metric, Star Wars is in a solid position, when you consider the volume of material that's being pumped out for it, and the critical successes a lot of it has had under Disney.

Second, you mean Geode? What's wrong with Geode? He appears in the novel Into the Dark, he's quietly (silently) hilarious. Did something go wrong in the comic?

Except it's kind of fucking stupid when we don't actually ask about additional context for the stats.

What s considered a top critic? Just those who are with papers / publications of do independents count too?

It doesn't matter what criteria you use, the stats would likely remain the same.

If they do then we're arguing what that Black women aren't what? As capable of setting up a computer and recording their thoughts to dump on youtube now?

YouTube dumps is irrelevant to the premise. Anyone can go onto YouTube. It's in the actual industry that the issue (if you see it as an issue) is.

Also it's rather short sighted to suggest a 40 year old White dude possibly would be too white and dudeish not to be able to talk about a film in a way that their own personal bias is minimised and they try to understand or showcase why the thing is great and may be loved even if it didn't fully work for them. It's the rather silly idea that people can't try to see any possible position other than their own. I mean then again Brie is part of Hollywood the home of narcissism but still.

I partly agree - I don't think there's inherent worth in one's POV based on inherent traits - but there's nothing objectionable about getting as many viewpoints as possible.

And there's plenty of evidence that shows how people react to seeing themselves portrayed. Look at Afro-Americans' reaction to Black Panther for example.

Oh and Brie Larsons speech was 4:35 long so yeh that "Her Full words" is an edited version lol.

And your point is...?

WHere, in any of it, did Larson say something so horrendous that it triggered pile-ons?

They never existed.

The Hashtag was set trending by Indian own bot farms lol

Even if that's true, it doesn't change the fact that the sentiment exists. Bots don't have the ability to do in-length essays and responses on mermaid science.

And the Poop Swastikas?
The Nascar Noose?
The KKK on Kampus?
The Nooses on Campus?
The girl who had her Hijab pulled off?
The Gay Influencer beaten up outside a night club in a claimed homophobic attack?
How about the racial abuse letters?
The woman who accused an MP in the UK of sexual abuse?
The Rolling Stones campus rape thing?

It's not just Smollett it's been a worrying pattern of high profile events that keep turning out to be fake.

Some of them I'm familiar with, some of them I'm not. It's irrelevant. Hate crime hoaxes are very, VERY much the exception, not the rule.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/are-hate-crime-hoaxes-on-the-rise-along-with-real-hate-crimes/2019/12/05/de339302-0a44-11ea-97ac-a7ccc8dd1ebc_story.html

Second, the fact that Smollett lied is not in any way relevant to people actually discussed here. The abuse against Tran, for instance, is well documented, and so far your alternative theory is that it's all false flags.

Tran may not have lied. Some troll or tool may have said something and she saw it.

Or maybe she didn't and her publicist told her it was happening and shut down the channels.

Who knows.

Two words. Occam's Razor.

So we waiting until they unfreeze Walt then?

Disney's grown beyond Walt, any opinions he might have are academic, especially on something as esoteric as Star Wars lore.

Because of the comments about how Sarah Conner was only the mother of the saviour as though that wasn't a big thing or important to helping John grow into the person to save humanity.

I'm not sure what you're responding to there.

Other Generals.
Hell we don't know where the plot was going but who knows maybe the 3rd faction were leading the resistance now posing as humans.

Other generals or not, it betrays its own premise, that John is the only person that can lead humanity. If other generals can just step-in, then it doesn't matter if Skynet kills John Connor or not.

Except the idea is John is killed at some point in the future war likely just before the end and sending Terminators back in time. So He was implicitly still there for the majority of it. Hell a better argument would be arguing about Salvation which actually reduced the role / importance of John Connor in the future quite a bit initially.

Salvation doesn't reduce John's role in a narrative sense. John makes the transition from grunt/foot soldier to Resistance commander.

Depends how much extended lore people read at the time beyond the films.

Well if they're not reading EU material, then there's nothing to suggest that stormtroopers are clone bar an assumption that clone troopers became stormtroopers with nothing changing.

Second: was it?

Leslie Jones Calls Out Racist ‘Ghostbusters’ Haters on Twitter

"Ghostbusters" star Leslie Jones spent the day retweeting her internet haters.

variety.com

‘Ghostbusters’ star Leslie Jones stands up to racist, sexist trolls

Can Leslie Jones please be the reason we retire, once and for all, the nonsense notion that harassment is the price you pay for a ticket to fame? All too often, for far too long, we have shushed pu…

www.chicagotribune.com

Leslie Jones was compared to a gorilla. You can't get more racist than that.

If you seriously think that there was no sexism involved in the backlash to the film, you're delusional.

I mean was the awful whipping and vilification in the press for James Rolfe's statement justified?

No. Nor was vilification of the cast and crew.

Harassment is shitty no matter who's doing it, and who's receiving it. It isn't just some conspiracy. I could just as easily make the argument that the attacks on Rolfe were false flags, but I'm not, because it would be stupid at best, repugnant at worst for me to do so.

 

[Hawki]

A Fair few places actually

First female Ghostbusters action figures revealed | Lyles Movie Files

lylesmoviefiles.com

I'm sure there's a few more

That link makes no such statement. It says "first female Ghostbusters action figures revealed." As in, the first figures based on the cast of the film.

I also checked the links in that post. None of them state that there were no female Ghostbusters beforehand.

Like how Black Panther was the first every black lead superhero film

How Captain Marvel was framed some places as the first every female lead superhero film.

Okay, but again, are these statements that came from Disney, or the tabloids? Because both statements are objectively wrong, but there's a clear difference between the creators saying something, and the tabloids saying something.

It does rather come up with it's own style and try to differentiate itself though

Which the remake does?

Sorry, are you saying its own style is bad by its merits, or bad ipso facto?

No it was presented as it being the one and only future for the franchise.

WHERE?

And again, it's beside the point. By the time the 2016 film was announced, Ghostbusters had already split into two, mutually exclusive continuities. Why is a third one so terrible?