Indiana Jones

1146147149151152201

Comments

  • Kennedy must have some serious dirt on other people at Disney. She is terrible at her job. Crap movies that lose money.
  • HildebrandRarityHildebrandRarity Centre international d'assistance aux personnes déplacées, Paris, France
    Posts: 488
    It's amazing to see how much Kennedy is blamed for everything that's gone wrong with Lucasfilm. Usually, when there are major creative issues, people don't single out one single figure. Outside of the Bond franchise, of course, where it's all Barbara Broccoli's fault…
    Most of us here have some interest about how the Bond sausage gets made and know that Michael Wilson has played a huge part in the franchise for nearly 40 years, and has something to do with some of the questionable creative choices such as Brofeld. But Wilson is never mentioned by this "thinkpieces" that blame it all on his half-sister. I suppose it's the same with Star Wars. So, if anybody wants to play the blame game, it could be interesting to see a few things first
    • Kennedy was put at the helm of Lucasfilm by George Lucas, as he wanted someone that he could trust after the sale to Disney. If you wonder why she's still in charge, she was put in charge by the same guy who wants the original version of the original trilogy never to surface again, and who appears to have succeeded so far in that regard, a decade after the sale
    • At the time of the sale, Lucasfilm had only three projects in active development – the Clone Wars CGI show, Star Wars Detours (a parodic animated show made by the Robot Chicken guys, which remains unaired so far) and Strange Magic. Other than that, there was the Star Wars Underworld prestige TV show which had been shelved due to budget constraints after spending five years in development hell, with around 50 scripts written. And there were the synopses written by Lucas for a new trilogy.
    • Bob Iger asked Lucasfilm for the same kind of ROI that Disney had made with Pixar and Marvel after the acquisition (it was also the same kind of contract, that granted the new divisions a lot of autonomy, based on what Steve Jobs had first asked for Pixar). He was the one (he admitted it later) who pushed for a short development cycle, with mainline entries being released every other year, alternating with spin-off movies (the "Star Wars Story" stuff). There are many clues that Kennedy fought against this schedule, due to the lack of existing source material and creative team to develop the new main episodes (the scripts for SW Underworld provided major plot points and concepts to Rogue One, Solo and to the Obi-Wan mini-series) while Marvel could rely on decades of plot lines from the comics to develop film versions, and Pixar had something like five or six feature films in development. But Iger prevailed over Kennedy on this question.
    • The synopses supplied by Lucas for episodes VII-IX were quickly discarded, even if some ideas made their way to VII and especially VIII. Given what Lucas had in mind for episode IX, where he planned to go full midichlorian (and involve microscopic creatures called the Whills, who were behind the Force), it may have been the right call.
    • Even before Abrams (a safe but unexciting choice) was announced as the director, the script to The Force Awakens was supposed to be written by Michael Arndt (Little Miss Sunshine, Toy Story), with treatments for the next two episodes to come in the same package. Except that Arndt didn't manage to crack a satisfying story for VII within the deadlines established by Disney (he still came up with the idea of making the plot about the disappearance of Luke), and Abrams and returning writer Lawrence Kasdan took this opportunity to get a bigger piece of the cake, writing the script themselves. Abrams also wrote drafts for the next two episodes.
    • Rian Johnson, who was put in charge of episode VIII, definitely discarded some of the creative choices Abrams had in mind, but so did Abrams with Arndt or Arndt with Lucas. And one of the glaring issues with Abrams, as seen in Star Trek Into Darkness (and The Rise of Skywalker), is that he's good at going back to the basics, to the excitement caused by the original movies, and at putting together a good cast, but has issues with pushing the story into new directions, which wasn't the case with Johnson. I'd say that killing off Snoke, a boring clone of Palpatine (so boring actually that TROS made him an half-assed clone of Palpatine) in favor of putting in charge Kylo Ren, who was much more complex and had much more potential) was the right call. And given how Mark Hamill, even after spending months in the gym, looks these days, it would have been even more jarring to go back to the wide-eyed Luke from the original trilogy than what Johnson did. But I can understand why some people can disagree with his choices.
    • Then you have the issues about episode IX, caused both by the unexpected death of Carrie Fisher, while Leia was supposed to take center stage for this episode, after Han in VII and Luke in VIII, and the lack of flexibility by Colin Trevorrow (who was bashed by a few critics due to his depiction of women in Jurassic World, something that should have put the theory of the "feminist agenda" by Kennedy at rest), causing Abrams to return to wrap the trilogy, without any realistic extension of the deadline by Disney to complete work on a script.

    Kennedy has definitely made mistakes, especially when it comes to picking creatives (in addition to Gareth Evans stepping down from the Rogue One reshoots, Lord & Miller getting fired from Solo and Colin Trevorrow leaving episode IX, Josh Trank was hired as a director to an unnamed "Star Wars Story", then fired in the middle of the Fantastic Four fiasco), but she isn't responsible for everything. The main issues with "modern" Star Wars come from Bob Iger having unreasonable expectations about the release calendar and rushing projects into production (while merchandising would have largely compensated the box-office), and the death of Carrie Fisher, which threw a huge wrench over the story for episode IX.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,231
    Great post @HildebrandRarity.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,220
    To add to what HildebrandRarity has said, there’s been no conflict with Lucas and Kennedy. The only person he has resentment towards is Bob Iger, and why? Because he’s been micromanaging LucasFilm in a way he doesn’t really do to Marvel. So many creative and production choices are attributed to what he had been demanding of LucasFilm. If he would have laid off of that and let LucasFilm run their own show, it might be a different story.

    That doesn’t mean Kennedy doesn’t deserve some blame. I think she’s been pretty open about how SOLO didn’t work out. And that’s the only film that actually lost money. All other films made over a billion dollars, including the disappointing TROS. So if you wonder how she still has a job, it’s because the successes outweigh the failings.

    But now we’re onto DIAL OF DESTINY. Critics aren’t too thrilled about it, but we’ve yet to see the bigger picture when it comes to how audiences react. I do think the possibility of a flop is real, because the thing is does anyone outside of GenXers wanna see a 80 year old Harrison Ford play Indiana jones? Does Indy even appeal to younger audiences? This movie feels like a personal pet project for Harrison Ford that Kennedy was obliged to give him.
  • Posts: 1,394
    AstonLotus wrote: »
    I'm not sure why people find Top Gun: Maverick overrated, to be honest. Most of the things it received praise for (simple story, good characters, fantastic flying sequences) seem pretty fair to me. It perhaps would not have received a Best Picture nomination in a pre-Covid world but that's not really a reflection of the film itself considering it was intended for release before then.
    AstonLotus wrote: »
    I genuinely believe DOD will be the first Indy movie to flop and lose money.The reviews are poor,the last movie fifteen years ago left a bad taste in people’s mouths,young people today would see an eighty year old Harrison Ford Led movie as unappealing and go for stuff like Spiderverse,and Transformers instead.

    The films budget is about 300 million which means it needs to make about a billion to break even.I don’t see that happening.

    Also,it’s a Kathleen Kennedy production with Phoebe Waller Bridge as the real Star of the film apparently ( which means you just know it’s going to be a complete wokefest and humiliate Indy just as The Force Awakens did to Han Solo ).

    I don't know why people bother making predictions about box-office success, leaving yourself open for easy ridicule later on.

    However, at the same time, welcome back @AstonLotus - I weirdly missed laughing at your posts.

    Good to be back and glad to see that some people here are still so hostile to alternative opinions than their own,they resort to petty insults.

    Hostile is too strong a word. I enjoy comedy! :)

    Did you take issue with Marion talking to Indy like a small man in Raiders, too? Or Willie Scott? Or Elsa playing him like a fiddle in Crusade, just like his father?

    If you don't like Waller-Bridge (I'm pretty indifferent to her, myself) then that's fine. But by having a strong opinioned female counter-part, the demon-Kennedy is just continuing something that has been part of Indiana Jones since the beginning. The film may or may not do a decent job of it - I'll wait and see for myself whether that's the case - but people seem to take issue with the concept even though it's nothing new!

    From the sounds of it, you're equating "humiliation" with the notion of Indy being older and struggling with his own mortality. Mortality has been a theme of previous films, too.

    And they are throwbacks to 1930s films, which were filled to the brim with female characters throwing a bunch of sass at male protagonists. It feels like the MRA dorks that are so sensitive to seeing women talking back to men would have a heart attack if RAIDERS came out today. “OH MY GOD A WOMAN PUNCHES A MAN! MISANDRY! WAH WAH!!!”

    Raiders-Punch.gif

    You know that scene where Marion outdrinks a man twice her size? Ridiculous! :)

    Marion didn’t take over the movie from Indy though..

  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,231
    AstonLotus wrote: »
    AstonLotus wrote: »
    I'm not sure why people find Top Gun: Maverick overrated, to be honest. Most of the things it received praise for (simple story, good characters, fantastic flying sequences) seem pretty fair to me. It perhaps would not have received a Best Picture nomination in a pre-Covid world but that's not really a reflection of the film itself considering it was intended for release before then.
    AstonLotus wrote: »
    I genuinely believe DOD will be the first Indy movie to flop and lose money.The reviews are poor,the last movie fifteen years ago left a bad taste in people’s mouths,young people today would see an eighty year old Harrison Ford Led movie as unappealing and go for stuff like Spiderverse,and Transformers instead.

    The films budget is about 300 million which means it needs to make about a billion to break even.I don’t see that happening.

    Also,it’s a Kathleen Kennedy production with Phoebe Waller Bridge as the real Star of the film apparently ( which means you just know it’s going to be a complete wokefest and humiliate Indy just as The Force Awakens did to Han Solo ).

    I don't know why people bother making predictions about box-office success, leaving yourself open for easy ridicule later on.

    However, at the same time, welcome back @AstonLotus - I weirdly missed laughing at your posts.

    Good to be back and glad to see that some people here are still so hostile to alternative opinions than their own,they resort to petty insults.

    Hostile is too strong a word. I enjoy comedy! :)

    Did you take issue with Marion talking to Indy like a small man in Raiders, too? Or Willie Scott? Or Elsa playing him like a fiddle in Crusade, just like his father?

    If you don't like Waller-Bridge (I'm pretty indifferent to her, myself) then that's fine. But by having a strong opinioned female counter-part, the demon-Kennedy is just continuing something that has been part of Indiana Jones since the beginning. The film may or may not do a decent job of it - I'll wait and see for myself whether that's the case - but people seem to take issue with the concept even though it's nothing new!

    From the sounds of it, you're equating "humiliation" with the notion of Indy being older and struggling with his own mortality. Mortality has been a theme of previous films, too.

    And they are throwbacks to 1930s films, which were filled to the brim with female characters throwing a bunch of sass at male protagonists. It feels like the MRA dorks that are so sensitive to seeing women talking back to men would have a heart attack if RAIDERS came out today. “OH MY GOD A WOMAN PUNCHES A MAN! MISANDRY! WAH WAH!!!”

    Raiders-Punch.gif

    You know that scene where Marion outdrinks a man twice her size? Ridiculous! :)

    Marion didn’t take over the movie from Indy though..

    Define "take over the movie"?
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,220
    Definitely feels like the same fears of Nomi in NTTD because a trailer featured her throwing jabs at Bond.

    “OH NO A WOMAN IS GONNA GIRLBOSS BOND!”

    Hey, nobody girlbosses Bond, unless they’re Judi Dench.

    But then again, I’d let Eva Green girlboss me to the point I’ll lay down on the floor and tell her that I’m her floor mat.

    Oh wait, we’re talking about Indy right? Back on topic…
  • Indy 5 is gonna be fun. ive not seen a bad film by Jim Mangold yet and im confident that run isnt about to end.
  • Posts: 1,394
    AstonLotus wrote: »
    AstonLotus wrote: »
    I'm not sure why people find Top Gun: Maverick overrated, to be honest. Most of the things it received praise for (simple story, good characters, fantastic flying sequences) seem pretty fair to me. It perhaps would not have received a Best Picture nomination in a pre-Covid world but that's not really a reflection of the film itself considering it was intended for release before then.
    AstonLotus wrote: »
    I genuinely believe DOD will be the first Indy movie to flop and lose money.The reviews are poor,the last movie fifteen years ago left a bad taste in people’s mouths,young people today would see an eighty year old Harrison Ford Led movie as unappealing and go for stuff like Spiderverse,and Transformers instead.

    The films budget is about 300 million which means it needs to make about a billion to break even.I don’t see that happening.

    Also,it’s a Kathleen Kennedy production with Phoebe Waller Bridge as the real Star of the film apparently ( which means you just know it’s going to be a complete wokefest and humiliate Indy just as The Force Awakens did to Han Solo ).

    I don't know why people bother making predictions about box-office success, leaving yourself open for easy ridicule later on.

    However, at the same time, welcome back @AstonLotus - I weirdly missed laughing at your posts.

    Good to be back and glad to see that some people here are still so hostile to alternative opinions than their own,they resort to petty insults.

    Hostile is too strong a word. I enjoy comedy! :)

    Did you take issue with Marion talking to Indy like a small man in Raiders, too? Or Willie Scott? Or Elsa playing him like a fiddle in Crusade, just like his father?

    If you don't like Waller-Bridge (I'm pretty indifferent to her, myself) then that's fine. But by having a strong opinioned female counter-part, the demon-Kennedy is just continuing something that has been part of Indiana Jones since the beginning. The film may or may not do a decent job of it - I'll wait and see for myself whether that's the case - but people seem to take issue with the concept even though it's nothing new!

    From the sounds of it, you're equating "humiliation" with the notion of Indy being older and struggling with his own mortality. Mortality has been a theme of previous films, too.

    And they are throwbacks to 1930s films, which were filled to the brim with female characters throwing a bunch of sass at male protagonists. It feels like the MRA dorks that are so sensitive to seeing women talking back to men would have a heart attack if RAIDERS came out today. “OH MY GOD A WOMAN PUNCHES A MAN! MISANDRY! WAH WAH!!!”

    Raiders-Punch.gif

    You know that scene where Marion outdrinks a man twice her size? Ridiculous! :)

    Marion didn’t take over the movie from Indy though..

    Define "take over the movie"?





  • JustJamesJustJames London
    edited May 2023 Posts: 220
    AstonLotus wrote: »
    AstonLotus wrote: »
    I'm not sure why people find Top Gun: Maverick overrated, to be honest. Most of the things it received praise for (simple story, good characters, fantastic flying sequences) seem pretty fair to me. It perhaps would not have received a Best Picture nomination in a pre-Covid world but that's not really a reflection of the film itself considering it was intended for release before then.
    AstonLotus wrote: »
    I genuinely believe DOD will be the first Indy movie to flop and lose money.The reviews are poor,the last movie fifteen years ago left a bad taste in people’s mouths,young people today would see an eighty year old Harrison Ford Led movie as unappealing and go for stuff like Spiderverse,and Transformers instead.

    The films budget is about 300 million which means it needs to make about a billion to break even.I don’t see that happening.

    Also,it’s a Kathleen Kennedy production with Phoebe Waller Bridge as the real Star of the film apparently ( which means you just know it’s going to be a complete wokefest and humiliate Indy just as The Force Awakens did to Han Solo ).

    I don't know why people bother making predictions about box-office success, leaving yourself open for easy ridicule later on.

    However, at the same time, welcome back @AstonLotus - I weirdly missed laughing at your posts.

    Good to be back and glad to see that some people here are still so hostile to alternative opinions than their own,they resort to petty insults.

    Hostile is too strong a word. I enjoy comedy! :)

    Did you take issue with Marion talking to Indy like a small man in Raiders, too? Or Willie Scott? Or Elsa playing him like a fiddle in Crusade, just like his father?

    If you don't like Waller-Bridge (I'm pretty indifferent to her, myself) then that's fine. But by having a strong opinioned female counter-part, the demon-Kennedy is just continuing something that has been part of Indiana Jones since the beginning. The film may or may not do a decent job of it - I'll wait and see for myself whether that's the case - but people seem to take issue with the concept even though it's nothing new!

    From the sounds of it, you're equating "humiliation" with the notion of Indy being older and struggling with his own mortality. Mortality has been a theme of previous films, too.

    And they are throwbacks to 1930s films, which were filled to the brim with female characters throwing a bunch of sass at male protagonists. It feels like the MRA dorks that are so sensitive to seeing women talking back to men would have a heart attack if RAIDERS came out today. “OH MY GOD A WOMAN PUNCHES A MAN! MISANDRY! WAH WAH!!!”

    Raiders-Punch.gif

    You know that scene where Marion outdrinks a man twice her size? Ridiculous! :)

    Marion didn’t take over the movie from Indy though..

    Have you seen the film then?

    Besides, Indy was younger then. Besides which, we don’t *know* Helena takes over the movie,
    so much as acts as a surrogate kid (goddaughter in this case) getting the parents back together/on the right track. Which absolutely would have been Mutt, if Shia hadn’t LeBoefed his way out of his career.
    PWB is *not* the woke bogeywoman, far far far from it.
    She probably could steal the film though, as on balance, she’s probably a better actress than Ford is an actor. I don’t think she will, if for no other reason than I don’t think she as a performer and person of her generation would even *want* to.
    Hilariously, at least one of the YouTube videos complaining about this has (or had, I assume someone caught it) Eva Green as Vesper for the thumbnail instead of PWB because they couldn’t tell the difference lol.
  • Posts: 1,394
    Kathleen Kennedy IS a disaster.She was handed the keys to some of the greatest franchises and she’s ruined them all.

    Star Wars - Yes, Force Awakens was huge but couldn’t fail due to playing it safe and remaking A New Hope.Although how stupid was she not to have Ford,Hamill,and Fisher not share the screen and depict them all as failures?

    The Last Jedi lost 50% of its audience from the previous film and was so bad that it truly broke the fan base and lore to the point that the following spin off,Solo,actually LOST money.

    Rogue One.Ok that actually turned out to be pretty good.

    The Rise Of Skywalker.What should have been the Avengers:Endgame of the saga was the lowest grossing film of the trilogy.

    Star Wars Galsctic cruise.A ridiculously overpriced “ pleasure cruise “ had just announced its shut down after less than two years open.

    Rian Johnson being handed a trilogy before TLJ came out.Hmm.. I wonder why it hasn’t happened.

    Rogue Squadron announced with Patty Kenkins as director.Cancelled.

    Rangers Of the new Republic.Cancelled because they fired Gina Carano for speaking her mind.

    A SW trilogy from the writers of Game Of Thrones.Cancelled as they preferred to go work for Netflix instead.

    Willow tv series.Woke garbage that NOBODY watched.It’s so bad that it’s been pulled from Disney+.

    And now Indy 5.300 million dollars wasted after being delayed a year due to reshoots and unveiled at Cannes to poor reviews A MONTH before the film opens.Starring an unfunny feminist who couldn’t have been bothered to watch any Bond movies before writing for a BOND movie.

    Seriously,KK must know where bodies are buried for her to still have a job
  • Some of this forum is like Donald Trump. Nasty, vindictive and full of hot air.
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou, but I now hear a new dog barkin'
    Posts: 9,085
    Let's not get political, but this forum, even at its worst (right now it isn't), does not deserve that comparison.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,231
    AstonLotus wrote: »
    AstonLotus wrote: »
    AstonLotus wrote: »
    I'm not sure why people find Top Gun: Maverick overrated, to be honest. Most of the things it received praise for (simple story, good characters, fantastic flying sequences) seem pretty fair to me. It perhaps would not have received a Best Picture nomination in a pre-Covid world but that's not really a reflection of the film itself considering it was intended for release before then.
    AstonLotus wrote: »
    I genuinely believe DOD will be the first Indy movie to flop and lose money.The reviews are poor,the last movie fifteen years ago left a bad taste in people’s mouths,young people today would see an eighty year old Harrison Ford Led movie as unappealing and go for stuff like Spiderverse,and Transformers instead.

    The films budget is about 300 million which means it needs to make about a billion to break even.I don’t see that happening.

    Also,it’s a Kathleen Kennedy production with Phoebe Waller Bridge as the real Star of the film apparently ( which means you just know it’s going to be a complete wokefest and humiliate Indy just as The Force Awakens did to Han Solo ).

    I don't know why people bother making predictions about box-office success, leaving yourself open for easy ridicule later on.

    However, at the same time, welcome back @AstonLotus - I weirdly missed laughing at your posts.

    Good to be back and glad to see that some people here are still so hostile to alternative opinions than their own,they resort to petty insults.

    Hostile is too strong a word. I enjoy comedy! :)

    Did you take issue with Marion talking to Indy like a small man in Raiders, too? Or Willie Scott? Or Elsa playing him like a fiddle in Crusade, just like his father?

    If you don't like Waller-Bridge (I'm pretty indifferent to her, myself) then that's fine. But by having a strong opinioned female counter-part, the demon-Kennedy is just continuing something that has been part of Indiana Jones since the beginning. The film may or may not do a decent job of it - I'll wait and see for myself whether that's the case - but people seem to take issue with the concept even though it's nothing new!

    From the sounds of it, you're equating "humiliation" with the notion of Indy being older and struggling with his own mortality. Mortality has been a theme of previous films, too.

    And they are throwbacks to 1930s films, which were filled to the brim with female characters throwing a bunch of sass at male protagonists. It feels like the MRA dorks that are so sensitive to seeing women talking back to men would have a heart attack if RAIDERS came out today. “OH MY GOD A WOMAN PUNCHES A MAN! MISANDRY! WAH WAH!!!”

    Raiders-Punch.gif

    You know that scene where Marion outdrinks a man twice her size? Ridiculous! :)

    Marion didn’t take over the movie from Indy though..

    Define "take over the movie"?





    I'd rather you gave me an answer from your own thoughts considering you made a point of saying I didn't value them previously.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,220
    I doubt he saw the movie himself to give any thoughts on the matter.
  • Posts: 12,523
    There are reasons for optimism, and there are reasons for pessimism. But I just don't understand expending such strong positive or negative energy until one has seen the movie personally and can assess it without biases. At this point personally I feel equally excited and concerned about the movie. If nothing else I'll be happy about having my own curiosity satisfied when I see it for myself.
  • Posts: 1,165
    AstonLotus wrote: »
    Kathleen Kennedy IS a disaster.She was handed the keys to some of the greatest franchises and she’s ruined them all.

    Star Wars - Yes, Force Awakens was huge but couldn’t fail due to playing it safe and remaking A New Hope.Although how stupid was she not to have Ford,Hamill,and Fisher not share the screen and depict them all as failures?

    The Last Jedi lost 50% of its audience from the previous film and was so bad that it truly broke the fan base and lore to the point that the following spin off,Solo,actually LOST money.

    Rogue One.Ok that actually turned out to be pretty good.

    The Rise Of Skywalker.What should have been the Avengers:Endgame of the saga was the lowest grossing film of the trilogy.

    Star Wars Galsctic cruise.A ridiculously overpriced “ pleasure cruise “ had just announced its shut down after less than two years open.

    Rian Johnson being handed a trilogy before TLJ came out.Hmm.. I wonder why it hasn’t happened.

    Rogue Squadron announced with Patty Kenkins as director.Cancelled.

    Rangers Of the new Republic.Cancelled because they fired Gina Carano for speaking her mind.

    A SW trilogy from the writers of Game Of Thrones.Cancelled as they preferred to go work for Netflix instead.

    Willow tv series.Woke garbage that NOBODY watched.It’s so bad that it’s been pulled from Disney+.

    And now Indy 5.300 million dollars wasted after being delayed a year due to reshoots and unveiled at Cannes to poor reviews A MONTH before the film opens.Starring an unfunny feminist who couldn’t have been bothered to watch any Bond movies before writing for a BOND movie.

    Seriously,KK must know where bodies are buried for her to still have a job

    Gosh. You’re quite a silly person, aren’t you?
  • slide_99slide_99 USA
    Posts: 699
    I didn't watch the sequels due to Kennedy declaring the EU non-canon. That's an awfully cynical thing to do to four decades' worth of books, comics, and games, much of which is very good, and it's why I don't consider Disney's Star Wars content as canon. The whole thing strikes me as cultural vandalism.
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    edited May 2023 Posts: 4,078
    slide_99 wrote: »
    I didn't watch the sequels due to Kennedy declaring the EU non-canon. That's an awfully cynical thing to do to four decades' worth of books, comics, and games, much of which is very good, and it's why I don't consider Disney's Star Wars content as canon. The whole thing strikes me as cultural vandalism.

    I'm not sure how much blame lies at the feet of Kathleen (the force is female!) Kennedy, but I left the The Force Awakens feeling very underwhelmed and disappointed with such a Mary-Sue for a main character. So I'm sure like a lot of viewers, according to the box office figures, I didn't bother with the other sequels.

    I'm in no hurry but I'll catch up with Dial of Destiny at some point. But the general consensus seems to be 'unnecessary'

    Which reminds me of a quote from Jurassic Park, "Just because we could, doesn't mean that we should..."
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,220
    slide_99 wrote: »
    I didn't watch the sequels due to Kennedy declaring the EU non-canon. That's an awfully cynical thing to do to four decades' worth of books, comics, and games, much of which is very good, and it's why I don't consider Disney's Star Wars content as canon. The whole thing strikes me as cultural vandalism.

    They were never canon, and Lucas was gonna have it struck himself had he proceeded with the sequel trilogy and not sold it to Disney.
  • Posts: 1,394
    They’re piling up guys..
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited May 2023 Posts: 16,609
    Definitely feels like the same fears of Nomi in NTTD because a trailer featured her throwing jabs at Bond.

    “OH NO A WOMAN IS GONNA GIRLBOSS BOND!”

    Yes I remember a poster on here telling me that Nomi absolutely definitely would get the better of Bond and make him look silly repeatedly, because that's how films and 'woke' (yawn) are nowadays. Then the film came out... and she got the better of him precisely 0 times.
    If you watch TSWLM you'll see Anya making Bond look silly many more times than Nomi manages.

    What is the source of the fear these men on YouTube etc. have of Waller-Bridge? I don't get what it is which started it for them: it's not like she's done a lot of big movies, and there's nothing hugely overly feminist about Fleabag- it just happens to be about a woman. Was it just because she briefly played a robot in Star Wars?
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    edited May 2023 Posts: 8,231
    I don't really get it either. I'll reserve judgement on her performance, because I am not 100% sure on her acting skills yet. But that's not what a lot of these guys seem to take issue with - it's almost like they have an issue with her existence. Nobody has ever spoken in any detail about why they don't like her without using those lazy criticisms of her being "woke" and "feminist".

    She's never really spearheaded anything large enough, Hollywood-wise at least, for anyone to seriously claim that she would ruin something without having seen it. I find it all a tad bizzare.

    I'd love to hear something genuine and well thought out, if such a thing exists.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,609
    Yeah I saw someone on Twitter say the other day that she’s ruined lots of franchises, and I genuinely didn’t know what they meant by that.
  • mattjoesmattjoes Pay more attention to your chef
    Posts: 7,057
    AstonLotus wrote: »
    They’re piling up guys..

    I haven't seen that video (it's enough to read about these complaints, why bother getting into them in depth if I haven't seen the film yet) but I was wondering if the person in the video saw the film or is just reporting other people's comments.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited May 2023 Posts: 16,609
    The movie seems to have fairly average reviews: sounds like it’ll be fun enough if not outstanding stuff. My excitement is tempered but hopefully it’ll entertain me enough.
  • BennyBenny Shaken not stirredAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 15,169
    I think most of these reviewers do it for clickbait. They get off on seeing their videos gain the most views. Or they have nothing better to do with their lives. Maybe they're just sad little men, who want to drag other people down to their level. Who knows.
    But I'm not going to let some random jackass tell me if a movie is good or not. After all these years, I think I can decide that for myself.
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,482
    As a famous media mogul once said "there's no news like bad news".

    It's funny how entrenched people get on this issue. I would say it's a reflection of the power of these character and these franchises. Willow, which was brought out as a TV series isn't even available on the Disney streaming now it was so bad, didn't get nearly as heated as this debate.

    Kathleen set herself up as the "face" of Lucasfilm, or as some have indicated George Lucas set her up as the face. A role she has embraced and owned. Funny how some indicate that she has not played a role in where Lucas Film finds itself today. My question would be where does the buck stop?

    Her choices in the creative talent behind the camera have undermined and brought damage to the brand. Any trilogy that has less attendance with each passing film is showing problems. Are they all her problems? No, obviously the blame can be spread, but I ask again where does the buck stop?

    Lucasfilm has tarnished the Star Wars brand, the three trilogy films earned less with each passing film. The TV shows have gotten progressively worse. I would love someone to explain the character motivations in Obi-Wan.

    They had a chance to get a hit on the board with this Indy movie. Have they landed it? I suppose time will tell. Some will go out of curiosity, others to return to a childhood hero. Will either audience be satisfied? Guess we will find out when the movie releases.

    Clearly they were playing up the Ford factor and as such have given a large runway and marketing to this factor.

    To those that think the Marion character is the same as Rey in Star Wars. Please think carefully. Marion was a strong character, but she didn't lecture Indy. She didn't rescue Indy. She didn't need to, she was a fully fleshed out character. With Rey we have a character that can immediately fly a spaceship and figure out how it runs and operates. How did she get such knowledge? Don't know. She is able to pull the Jedi mind trick without any instruction, how? Don't know. She is able to battle a Sith and beat him without any formal training? How? We don't know. Does she fail? Nope. Unlike Luke's character arc, she doesn't fail, nor do any of her decisions result in negative consequences for anyone else. There is no satisfying arc for her character. Marion was fleshed out as a tough cookie. Who after being ditched by her lover and without her father was able to carve out an existence in a tough land. She saw this offer of Indy has a ticket out. She became a partner, but she still needed rescuing. There was a character development. The only thing Rey had was an unknown parent, and being abandoned on a planet. But none of this was developed nor was this at all a bump in her road.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    edited May 2023 Posts: 8,220
    mattjoes wrote: »
    AstonLotus wrote: »
    They’re piling up guys..

    I haven't seen that video (it's enough to read about these complaints, why bother getting into them in depth if I haven't seen the film yet) but I was wondering if the person in the video saw the film or is just reporting other people's comments.

    It’s the Matt Walsh from the Daily Wire, just another stooge of the “anti-woke” brigade, I wouldn’t give him the time of day.
    mtm wrote: »
    Definitely feels like the same fears of Nomi in NTTD because a trailer featured her throwing jabs at Bond.

    “OH NO A WOMAN IS GONNA GIRLBOSS BOND!”

    Yes I remember a poster on here telling me that Nomi absolutely definitely would get the better of Bond and make him look silly repeatedly, because that's how films and 'woke' (yawn) are nowadays. Then the film came out... and she got the better of him precisely 0 times.
    If you watch TSWLM you'll see Anya making Bond look silly many more times than Nomi manages.

    What is the source of the fear these men on YouTube etc. have of Waller-Bridge? I don't get what it is which started it for them: it's not like she's done a lot of big movies, and there's nothing hugely overly feminist about Fleabag- it just happens to be about a woman. Was it just because she briefly played a robot in Star Wars?

    A lot of boys were upset because the robot she played was a “woke droid”, basically a droid demanding the liberation of her kind from slavery.
  • edited May 2023 Posts: 618
    AstonLotus wrote: »
    They’re piling up guys..

    The video host/presenter is a well known right-wing extremist in the U.S.

    Wouldn't movie critiques by people who, you know, have movie-themed channels on YouTube be preferable to political agitators?
Sign In or Register to comment.