This kind of feels like the Dred Scott case.
Up to and including the writing of summary verdict. Foolishly thinking that this is going to end the debate once and for all. America feels like a powder keg at this point
Funny Events of the "Woke" world
- Thread starter CriticalGaming
- Start date
Up to and including the writing of summary verdict. Foolishly thinking that this is going to end the debate once and for all. America feels like a powder keg at this point
Well, that was the point of stacking the supreme court with anti-abortionists.
Yep. This is going to send polarisations skyrocketing, and potentially cause a lot of civil discontent.
Still, it could be a huge boon to the Democrats come election time.
The only place this would end the debate is in the Supreme Court itself. It allows more debate everywhere else.
I've seen a lot of conjecture for why China made that demand ranging from them simply not wanting an overt symbol of America, to the Statue of Liberty looking too much like the Goddess of Democracy that was erected during the Tiananmen Square protests, to No Way Home releasing around the same time as a big nationalist movie and they were worried No Way Home would divert attention from their homebrew propaganda fluff.
Whatever the reason tho, China did not "try" to censor the movie. They succeeded. Whether Sony relented and made the changes for the Chinese market, or stood its ground and not show the movie in China, from China's perspective, the end result is effectively the same. Which was probably the entire purpose of that silly demand.
Also, how is this woke?
Do you actually know the difference between a reference to sexuality and a reference to romance/relationships?
The former did not come up in a majority of episodes. That's literally a fact. I provided a link that concerns the latter, and you seem bizarrely convinced that that somehow also proves the former.
This is overblown but also I've been trying not to say Karen anymore because it's unfair on real Karens
I mean, it's only important if you have a uterus
But they are supposedly coming out with the male pill soon
Eh, the problem is that while the basic premise works ("Oh yeah, you need to seek out this crotchety old space wizard to train you"), it doesn't work for Luke Skywalker because the Luke of the timeskip is almost antithetical to the Luke we saw at the end of the original trilogy. Fuck, by all accounts the odds were worse for turning his father than his nephew. Anakin had done far worse than Ben did (and for far longer) and yet Luke had risked not only his life, future, and morality, but the entire Rebellion because he felt that Anakin could still be redeemed despite both his mentors telling him that it was literally impossible.
But when his nephew falls and he has a moment of panic before Ben destroys the budding Jedi order (like Anakin did!), Luke decides it's pointless and opts for suicide the long way around rather than trying to make amends and fix what he perceives to be his own greatest failing and feels personally responsible for? That is shamefully out of character and not adequately explainable by the events the story touches on. And no, him being scared into inaction because he almost indulged in his dark impulses doesn't make sense considering how he got goaded into the same in the Emperor's throne room. Nor does him being scared by a near lapse in judgement, considering how a lapse in judgement had him fell into Vader's trap in Empire Strikes Back even as his mentors warned him that it was obviously a trap. Luke was not a character who is unfamiliar with temptations or mistakes, so him deciding to pack up his ball and leave because he thought that falling short of an immaculate ideal meant he should just go find a ditch to die in does not make sense for him. That's a story beat for a character that has never been adequately challenged before and is therefore unused to struggling.
Bluntly? The sequels are a cavalcade of poor writing decisions. The hand of the author is all too evident in Luke, and in Han doing a complete 180 on his character development between RotJ and TFA. Anakin's lightsaber suddenly being a Harry Potter wand that chooses his successor is completely out of left field. The Resistance desperately trying to find Luke then contenting themselves with just sending Rey (who was not part of the Resistance) does not make sense. Finn (also not a member of the Resistance) waking up after Starkiller Base to find himself already deferred to as a famous war hero...is just bizarre. "Not by destroying what we hate, but saving what we love" doesn't work as a chastisement for Finn whose arc had focused on him learning that the First Order wasn't something that he could just hide from and pretend didn't exist, much less when he had - to that point - only ever opted for fight rather than flight when someone he cared about (usually Rey) was threatened!
And for that matter, the First Order itself makes very little sense when you start actually looking at it. Remnants of the Empire? Sure, why not. Remnants of the Empire with 'impossible' tech, that the New Republic couldn't be arsed to take seriously even as those remnants took important Core Worlds, directly worked to undermine the Republic, built enormous military bases for the express purpose of waging war on the Republic, routinely raided Republic worlds to abduct their children so as to indoctrinate them and turn them into a loyal slave population of disposable soldiers...and had been doing so for decades as of TFA? Not so much. Never mind how it was still (somehow) supposed to be an underdog force...that then managed to steamroll the entire Galactic Republic in less than a week during the timeskip between TFA and TLJ, or the clusterfuck which was Rise of Skywalker straight up ripping off SWTOR's Knights of the Fallen Empire expansion.
Not to put too fine a point on it, the sequel trilogy read like bad fanfiction. Point of fact, I think the best way I heard it described was that each of the movies was treated by its director as a vehicle to try and "fix" Star Wars (you know, classic Fix Fic). TFA was basically a big "remember when Star Wars was good (before the prequels)?" reference overdose which retreaded so much of A New Hope and Empire Strikes Back as to practically be a soft reboot.
TLJ on the other hand was trying to course correct on TFA and, rather tellingly, spent a lot of time telling the audience through the characters to just move on to something new because the stuff you're nostalgic for wasn't that great to begin with (heck, Luke's a self-deprecating filibuster for that). Combined with Johnson systematically torpedoing the story hooks that Abrams had left in the water...it's not difficult to see it as a shot across the bow at Abrams, if not the franchise itself. At minimum, if TFA was anti-prequel, then TLJ was anti-TFA.
Then we get Rise of Skywalker which tries to course correct by ignoring or retconning Johnson's course correction (Anti-TLJ, if you will). At the same time, the writing mistakes hit a fever pitch. Weird shit happens and is steamrolled over with nary a token explanation, and they're trying so desperately to make the original plan work that it feels like a railroading DM is intervening.
I've said it before, Abrams thinks more in terms of emotional beats rather than narrative coherence. Eg. everyone sees the Hosnian system explode despite all logic because he thought that would be a cool visual that would get the characters on the same page as the audience in real time. And RoS is no different. Chewie gets a medal to make up for him not getting a medal in A New Hope. Palpatine's back because the audience recognizes him as a threat (see also his use of Khan in Star Trek: Into Darkness). Threepio has programming to prevent him from translating Sith purely because Abrams wanted an 'oh no' moment from putting an iconic character in jeopardy (see also the bait and switch with Chewie's death). The kiss of life is a contrivance to create a tragic romance moment that the story never earned. Rey takes the name Skywalker (despite her only proper mentor being Leia Organa) just because that's the big Star Wars name. The list goes on.
The Prequels and OT have their issues, but the Sequel Trilogy just took it to another level. But with all that said, the idea that its bad writing stems from some sociopolitical agenda is nothing short of laughable. Closest they ever get is TLJ's Canto Bight, and even that goes no deeper than "yeah, your suppliers are mercenary". These were not films that were designed to push a message. They can hardly decide on a direction, much less a theme. They were half-assed scripts from people so excited to make a Star Wars movie to their tastes that they forgot the collaborative storytelling rule of "yes, and..."
To anyone who thinks the sequels were trying to push a message? I invite you to check out some actual message-based stories, like Tartuffe (focused on charlatans feigning piety for personal gain), Inherit the Wind (utilizing the Scopes Monkey Trial as an allegory criticizing McCarthyist fervor), There Will Come Soft Rains (anti-nuclear war), the Great Dictator (anti-Nazi), or even Der Fuehrer's Face (also anti-Nazi). Those are stories built to push a message, and they wear it on their sleeve. That's kinda an important component of pushing a message: the message is brazen. It's the raison d'etre of the story which it takes pains to showcase, usually as a central component of both the conflict and its resolution. And no matter how hard you squint, that is simply not the case with the Sequel Trilogy.
Hell, I'll happily admit by the end of TFA Rey read like a paint-by-numbers bad fanfic protagonist because of all the things she 'inherits' (Chewbacca and the Falcon, Anakin's lightsaber, 2/3 of the old guard taking a mentor-like interest in her as she went off to apprentice herself to the third (again: Resistance's goal, not hers), never mind the mysterious circumstances of her parents leaving reading as "secret prince(ess) in exile" origins...), but to look at that and say "aha! Feminism!" or whatnot is just...insultingly stupid and superficial. That she is written like a fanfic character in a story that reads like a fanfic does not evidence some kind of agenda, just run-of-the-mill bad writing.
And while that's worth criticizing as a deficiency in the writer's craftsmanship, if someone looks at that and goes "woke agenda!" that says much more about the chip they have on their shoulder than it does the object of their criticism. To conclude that the story having a female protagonist and a few female authority figures overseeing the male tritagonist means that the work must have been pushing a feminist agenda, and therefore said agenda is indirectly responsible for all the rest of the problems...that's just a scapegoat born of tortured logic.
Last edited:
Those are reasonable points, but I really disagree. In that:
-The idea that Vader did worse is fairly academic here. Yes, Vader did do worse than Kylo, but Luke isn't responsible for his father's actions, while he WAS responsible for his nephew, to at least some extent.
-Minor point, but Luke was told that he had to face the emperor, so even if he did believe Obi-Wan, he's arguably have carried out similar actions.
-Concerning the out of character stuff, I get it, it's reasonable, but I think it's missing out on the context, and the film's wider themes:
a) Luke was reluctant to train Ben from the outset. He references, scathingly, the "mighty Skywalker blood" that flowed through him and his nephew. It's got to hit Luke bad that history has repeated itself. The Jedi are destroyed (again), a Skywalker has done it (again), and joined the Empire/First Order (again), seduced by a dark lord (again). This isn't a failure like any other, this is a failure at Luke's feet, and a repetition of history that indicates that the Skywalkers and Jedi are forever cursed.
c) Luke, and by extension, the Last Jedi, are very aware of the nature of mythologies, simultaniously inditing them, while also reinforcing the need for them. The thing is, everything you write can be said to be evidence of that. This is Luke Skywalker, the greatest Jedi in the history of ever, the one who's perfect, the one who would never fail, and would never give up, the one who has this one, fleating moment of dark thoughts...and that's all it takes to push Ben over the edge. Luke doesn't only fail Ben, he fails the legend that's built up around him. Yet by the end of the film, Luke does come back and provide hope for the galaxy at large (well, technically he doesn't, but that's on Rise of Skywalker).
-Even casting the themes aside, there's still the implicit expectation that Luke, at the end of Return, is meant to be infalliable. That his character can never be blemished, that his 'power level' can never go anywhere but up. Thirty years is a long time - people change, and not always for the better. This is subjective, but if Luke HADN'T changed in thirty years, I don't think that would make an interesting character. And Luke does learn from his mistakes. Yoda straight out tells this. You can lament that it took Luke years, but the destination is ultimately the same. The idea that Luke should have just shrugged off his failure and got straight back to work indicates a view about Luke that he's infalliable, at least emotionally.
(Out of time, I may respond to your words on the sequels later - I actually agree with a lot of it.)
I appreciate the desire to overanalyze and rationalize fictional characters, but the people who made the sequels did not give them the consideration you are right now. Imma dive into a tangent just cause I like to.
One of my favorite things in pop culture to nerd over is the Dies Irae. It is an old part of Catholic funeral mass celebrations sufficiently dark and negative enough that Vatican II told people to stop using it. Subsequently, pop culture has embraced the melody of the Dies Irae as a musical indicator of death and despair. Here are examples:
The very first example they have in that video is Luke discovering the death and incineration of his aunt and uncle. It is a musical touch that takes the generally uplifting score of Star Wars, and turns it to sorrow and rage. Those like 8 notes, even if you don't realize it, are signaling to your brain that people have died, because tv and movies have used that same theme for that message dozens and dozens of times.
Now, let's look at the climax of The Force Awakens:
The bad guy is about to slaughter the protagonists, but one of them gains the power to fight back, and the audience is supposed to be thinking "yes! The lightsaber! The classic Star Wars music! Let's Gooooooo!" But they so carelessly transferred the elements of A New Hope into the Force Awakens that they put the Dies Irae over the point where the protagonist takes control. They subconsciously signaled that Rey turning on a lightsaber = death and despair. I don't think the people making these movies thought very deeply about Luke's character consistency.
Sorry, how did Han do a 180? I mean, he's different, but age and loss can change a person.
Wait, does the lightsaber "choose" Rey? I get that she has the vision quest thing when she picks it up, but I never saw that as the lightsaber acting per se.
Disagree, sending Rey makes the most sense. She's Force-sensitive, so if you're sending someone after a Jedi, why not someone who has the Force? She's the one who owns his lightsaber after all.
Isn't it only Rose who does that?
I agree, the moment is awkward.
I mostly agree with this. It's a flaw that can be laid at Last Jedi's feet rather than TFA's for once, in that the First Order seems to go from an isolated military junta in the first film, to a massively powerful force in the second. That said, I can buy the Republic being impotent. Even ignoring EU material, the Republic being useless is a common theme in these films.
I've seen this argument presented, and I'm largely sympathetic to it. However, I don't hold Last Jedi as being 'guilty' like the other two.
TFA is New Hope 2.0. Even for people who like the film (which to be fair, seems to be more common than not) will probably admit that TFA is riffing off Episode IV hard. I've always disliked TFA for this reason, among others. However, thoughts on TFA aside, what actual story hooks does it present that Last Jedi "torpedoes?" You can argue Luke, but I disagree that's "torpedoing" anything - nothing that Luke does in Last Jedi is really incongruent with TFA. Yes, maybe the map, but the map doesn't even make sense in TFA (why would Luke leave a treasure hunt for anyone?) Apart from that, what actual plot hooks does TFA present the viewer that Last Jedi retcons? Because I really can't think of any. You can say that there's a leap between TFA (nice, save, unchallenging, Star Wars vanilla) and Last Jedi (subversive, goes in unexpected directions), but that's already the relationship between A New Hope and Empire, and no-one questions Empire for its hard left turns.
(Well, I do, but I've never been that fond of Empire - go figure.)
I fully agree here though - Rise of Skywalker tries to reverse course on every direction Last Jedi set. Only difference is that I disagree that Last Jedi is culpable in regards to TFA in the same manner.
True, dis.
Well, I sort of agree. I certainly agree that Star Wars isn't "message films," though there are still themes in them. In the prequels, you get to see democracy replaced by totalitarianism, in the last days of a dying republic. I've made my case for Last Jedi, which, for me, is the most thematically rich Star Wars film (not the best, that's a different matter). Heck, even Rise of Skywalker's theme is that we aren't bound by our bloodlines, that the sins of the parent dont' pass down to us, but it unfortunately comes at Last Jedi's expense.
Also, if we're talking about "people" forgetting storytelling, again, I lay it mostly at Abrams. Rise of Skywalker is guilty in a way that Last Jedi isn't, because again, there's nothing in Last Jedi that really contradicts TFA.
Agree.
Abrams, no, Johnson, yes.
There's some cases where I'm wary of reading too much into things, but I don't think I'm reading too much into Last Jedi. This is a film that has Yoda basically sit the viewer (sorry, Luke) down and say "THIS IS THE THEME, LISTEN, MUPPET!" We can disagree as to how well that theme is executed, but I think it's a stretch to say that Last Jedi isn't trying to convey the ideas I've discussed above. People have conveyed them far more eloquently than I could, but I think it's a stretch to say it isn't there.
Well, okay, but that's a sin for TFA, not Last Jedi. And if we're talking about Luke's character consistency across the sequels...sorry, where does it lack consistency? He has no character in TFA, he has a full character in Last Jedi, and there's not really anything in Rise that contradicts it. Maybe his moment where he stops Rey throwing the lightsaber away, and admits that he was wrong to hide himself away, but that's also congruent with his character development in Last Jedi.
You can argue that Luke's character isn't consistent with the OT, but in the sequel trilogy as a whole? Not really.
It doesn't say people of all biological sexes need abortions, which is how you must be reading it to have this take.