Are you going to boycott "SOLO: A STAR WARS STORY" by whozit

Quote:
Originally posted by whozit:
I go to YOUTUBE everyday, the STAR WARS fandom is calling for a boycott of "SOLO: A STAR WARS Story" because "STAR WARS: Episode 9" sucked wind. The entertainment sites are writing that "SOLO" will have a strong opening, it may, but will tank the following weekend? If it does tank will the suits at Disney demand the suits at Lucas Film make changes...like firing Kathleen Kennedy? I remember when Disney bought the distribution rights and many said YES! Many thought Disney would do better than FOX after episodes 1,2 and 3, now the fandom is REALLY pissed at Disney and Lucas Film. So ya going to boycott? I am, but sometimes I can be an really asshole.

Why? What if it's the best SW film of the last decade?
I thought Rogue One is the best of the period, but Ron Howard could be better.
I practically never allow somebody else decide films for me, and I will not pass up Solo.

Not to mention "entertainment sites" have the least clue of all.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, May 5, 2018 1:30 PM

There's no place I can be since I found Serenity.

First of all, "Episode 9" hasn't happened yet. It won't be released until 19 Dec 2019. If you just mis-typed and meant Ep 8, there is still a wide range of opinion on that one. The "Star Wars fandom" on youtube is likely just a small, if vocal, part of the whole fandom. I've seen every film so far, some many times, others only once. In my opinion, SW peaked with The Empire Strikes Back, and has been going downhill since. One small uptick with Rogue One, but I felt both The Force Awakens and The Last Jedi were both too much of the same type of story being rehashed.

I may or may not see Solo in the theater, but if I do it might wait until it's at the discount house where I can see it for .50 on a Tuesday or a Saturday before noon. And the only reason I'd bother is because of Donald Glover...that and Ron Howard is a talented director. If I don't see it, it won't be because of someone else's call for a boycott. I can decide for myself what to watch and what to avoid.

Besides, those guys are probably the same type that called for a boycott of Black Panther, and you can see how effective that was. They're probably also the ones who created the furor around GamerGate, and the Sad/Rabid Puppy protests around the Hugo Awards. I'd never take their opinion of anything.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, May 5, 2018 2:14 PM

WHOZIT

Quote:
Originally posted by ecgordon:
First of all, "Episode 9" hasn't happened yet. It won't be released until 19 Dec 2019. If you just mis-typed and meant Ep 8, there is still a wide range of opinion on that one. The "Star Wars fandom" on youtube is likely just a small, if vocal, part of the whole fandom. I've seen every film so far, some many times, others only once. In my opinion, SW peaked with The Empire Strikes Back, and has been going downhill since. One small uptick with Rogue One, but I felt both The Force Awakens and The Last Jedi were both too much of the same type of story being rehashed.

I may or may not see Solo in the theater, but if I do it might wait until it's at the discount house where I can see it for .50 on a Tuesday or a Saturday before noon. And the only reason I'd bother is because of Donald Glover...that and Ron Howard is a talented director. If I don't see it, it won't be because of someone else's call for a boycott. I can decide for myself what to watch and what to avoid.

Besides, those guys are probably the same type that called for a boycott of Black Panther, and you can see how effective that was. They're probably also the ones who created the furor around GamerGate, and the Sad/Rabid Puppy protests around the Hugo Awards. I'd never take their opinion of anything.

You're correct, I meant episode 8, sorry. I'm going to correct that. I also agree that "The Empire Strikes Back" won't be topped. J.J. (King of the rehash reboot) Abrams will likely make episode 9 a rehash reboot of episode 5, he made episode 7 a rip off of episode 4. Jar Jar Abrams will likely make the big pay off for 9 to that we'll learn who are Rey's parent's. It would be great if C3PO says, "Rey, I am your father..OH MY!"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, May 5, 2018 2:29 PM

My raison d'être for going to 99% of the movies I go to is if I'm bored at the time.

If I have too much going on I catch it on de Netflix.

I never was invested in what would happen if FF came back, just that I wanted more.

I doubt anyone would care what a youtube group wants for a movie direction either. They know if they cave once they'll never hear the end of it on others.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, May 5, 2018 3:34 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Quote:
Originally posted by whozit:
I go to YOUTUBE everyday, the STAR WARS fandom is calling for a boycott of "SOLO: A STAR WARS Story" because "STAR WARS: Episode 9" sucked wind. The entertainment sites are writing that "SOLO" will have a strong opening, it may, but will tank the following weekend? If it does tank will the suits at Disney demand the suits at Lucas Film make changes...like firing Kathleen Kennedy? I remember when Disney bought the distribution rights and many said YES! Many thought Disney would do better than FOX after episodes 1,2 and 3, now the fandom is REALLY pissed at Disney and Lucas Film. So ya going to boycott? I am, but sometimes I can be an really asshole.
Why? What if it's the best SW film of the last decade?
I thought Rogue One is the best of the period, but Ron Howard could be better.
I practically never allow somebody else decide films for me, and I will not pass up Solo.

Not to mention "entertainment sites" have the least clue of all.

I forgot to mention: The SJW boycott of last year's best film, Wind River (IMHO), really ticked me off, and repels me from any talk of boycott. Unless somebody boycotts SJW - then I'm in.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, May 6, 2018 12:27 AM

Yanno, SJW's can be annoying, for instance... it isn't very hard to be discreet while breastfeeding. It is a natural thing and I'm happy you are doing it, but I don't want it in my face while I'm going about my day.

But, they also have made several good points and movements that I'm sure all reasonable people support, like not shaming people who have handicapped stickers even if they look to be walking fine or woman that have veterans plates or fat shaming anybody. They are all about disability awareness, and I am sure that we could all stand to learn a thing or two, even if their motivations tend to be about getting attention or sympathy. Say "whatever" and move on.

But I think the thing that you people don't like is the fight for equality. You don't want males to lose the special privilege of domination you have historically enjoyed, and in many, many ways still do. Your penisis and egos are threatened by having to treat women (and likely people of color) like PEOPLE instead of chattel. If that wasn't true, the military could be safely integrated without rape epidemics. If that wasn't true, then woman wouldn't have to file class action lawsuits just to be promoted at the same rate as men, or paid the same for the same job.

So it would be nice if you didn't say SJW and said Equalists instead, at least that would be an honest evaluation.

You HATE to treat people equally. If you don't have a ten foot head start in the race, you sit at the sidelines and heckle and pout like scared little kids.

That's why every time I see someone whining about SJW's I automatically think "micropenis". SCARED LITTLE KIDS.

"Some GIRL took over my fictional character in a TV show and now I have cooties"

"Some GIRL saved the world when that's a man job"

Do you even REMOTELY understand how childish that sounds???? It's WORSE than any SJW post EVER.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, May 6, 2018 12:01 PM

There's no place I can be since I found Serenity.

Thanks, Wishy, you said most of what I would have. Anyone who uses the term SJW, or the full words social justice warrior, as an epithet, has already lost the debate. If you are not for social justice, then I have to assume you are for social injustice?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, May 6, 2018 1:35 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Wishimay:
Yanno, SJW's can be annoying, for instance... it isn't very hard to be discreet while breastfeeding. It is a natural thing and I'm happy you are doing it, but I don't want it in my face while I'm going about my day.

But, they also have made several good points and movements that I'm sure all reasonable people support, like not shaming people who have handicapped stickers even if they look to be walking fine or woman that have veterans plates or fat shaming anybody. They are all about disability awareness, and I am sure that we could all stand to learn a thing or two, even if their motivations tend to be about getting attention or sympathy. Say "whatever" and move on.

But I think the thing that you people don't like is the fight for equality. You don't want males to lose the special privilege of domination you have historically enjoyed, and in many, many ways still do. Your penisis and egos are threatened by having to treat women (and likely people of color) like PEOPLE instead of chattel. If that wasn't true, the military could be safely integrated without rape epidemics. If that wasn't true, then woman wouldn't have to file class action lawsuits just to be promoted at the same rate as men, or paid the same for the same job.

So it would be nice if you didn't say SJW and said Equalists instead, at least that would be an honest evaluation.

You HATE to treat people equally. If you don't have a ten foot head start in the race, you sit at the sidelines and heckle and pout like scared little kids.

That's why every time I see someone whining about SJW's I automatically think "micropenis". SCARED LITTLE KIDS.

"Some GIRL took over my fictional character in a TV show and now I have cooties"

"Some GIRL saved the world when that's a man job"

Do you even REMOTELY understand how childish that sounds???? It's WORSE than any SJW post EVER.

I had never heard the term Equalists and would not intuitively inferred it meant retards of the Snowflake movement.

How is the denial of beauty, quality, excellence of a script, direction, multiple portrayals, and editing in any way relating to the goals of anyone claiming Equalist status? Just because after all post-production was completed, one person who assisted in distribution was somebody who later became disliked.
If you think of a film production as a person, then after they become adult and cure worldwide Cancer, somebody then finds out that another person who later helps distribute the cure and is even later found to be objectionable, so your feverish lemmings denigrate and heap scorn upon the Cancer Curer and her parents, banishing and exiling them.
How does this, diametrically opposed to anything resembling Equality or Fairness, qualify as "Equalist" in any way?

P.s. you seem to have a one-track mind lately. Off your meds?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, May 6, 2018 1:36 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by ecgordon:
Thanks, Wishy, you said most of what I would have. Anyone who uses the term SJW, or the full words social justice warrior, as an epithet, has already lost the debate. If you are not for social justice, then I have to assume you are for social injustice?

You disappoint me.
Supporting unfairness and unfetterred inequality does not become you.
Pretending Social Justice has any relation to Justice, or ever did, is purely disingenuous.
Your proclamation that recognizing truth and Fact is "losing the debate" is beneath you.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, May 6, 2018 11:53 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

Supporting unfairness and unfetterred inequality does not become you.

Really? Sitting around and whining about what online groups do "became" what you and Jack and Rappy are about a long time ago.

Just what is it you see as "unfettered inequality"? Specifically.
Not relating to whatever happened to Wind River, I could care less. It's just a movie.

What about SJW's do you see as promoting "inequality"???

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, May 7, 2018 11:24 AM

Soooo.... anyway....

I'm not going to be boycotting SOLO because I think it's generally silly to boycott a movie in most cases.

I get that some folks feel that "new" Star Wars is not "their" Star Wars, and that's just fine. No need to make a thing of it; just don't see it, and shut up.

Personally, I consider the Original Trilogy "my" Star Wars, so I imagine I may well share some features with the folks calling for the boycott, but that doesn't stop me from enjoying (at least somewhat) later movies.

Heck, I LIKE the Prequel Trilogy! Sure, it's not as good as the Original Trilogy, but it's still Star Wars and it's still lots of fun. Jar Jar Binks annoyed me, but I'm grown-up enough to understand that Jar Jar (and some of the other ridiculousness) isn't supposed to be there for me. That's for the kiddies. I remember seeing Episode I on opening day and you could feel the shoulders of all the adults tense whenever Jar Jar was onscreen. But the children laughed out loud. The children, and my friend, Dan... whatever that says about Dan. Different strokes, right?

I'm not a fan of the Sequel Trilogy but a lot of that has to do with J.J. Abrams. I love is TV work, but his movies generally leave me cold, and Episode 7 was no different. Episode 8 feels like it was Rian Johnson saying he didn't like Episode 7 either and doing everything he could to undercut it. That left me with really, really mixed feelings about the movie - but those mixed feelings didn't prevent me from seeing it three time (and, ultimately, enjoying some parts of it more each time, even if I think the movie as a whole is a bit of a miss).

Rogue One stands on it's own (so far) as an amazing piece of work post-OT, simultaneously both the best Star Wars movie in decades and the worst Star Wars movie ever to be made (the latter in that it's actually, empirically, not a good movie at all if you haven't seen the other movies: it's SO dependent on A New Hope that it cannot stand on it's own as a separate work).

And, regardless of what I think of recent Star Wars movies, as a Firefly fan, how can I possibly NOT give this movie a chance? Looks to me a lot like Han, Lando and the rest aim to misbehave.

So, yeah, I'll be there for SOLO opening night, and likely later in the weekend, too.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, May 7, 2018 4:23 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by GWEK:

And, regardless of what I think of recent Star Wars movies, as a Firefly fan, how can I possibly NOT give this movie a chance? Looks to me a lot like Han, Lando and the rest aim to misbehave.

That's the only part that has my attention. Firefly was basically Han Solo: The Early Years. I want to like it, but I'm going to wait and see what the second or third groups of reviewers say, yanno, the ones NOT paid for it.
And it's already going to be a letdown for me, just because Ford was so good at the part, I don't see how anyone could really sell it for me.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 8, 2018 8:35 AM

My level of respect for Ford has dropped through the years, so, much as I love his Solo, I'm open to giving someone else a shot.

Having said that, I do expect Solo to be the weakest link in SOLO - which wouldn't really be a surprise.

It's not uncommon in sci fi or action movies for the main character to be among the weakest. Luke Skywalker in the Original Trilogy, Anakin Skywalker in the Prequels, Rey and Finn in the Sequels, even Jyn Erso in ROGUE ONE... these are among the most bland characters in their respective movies. The "right hand man," however, is often the most entertaining, because they get to be close to the heart of the story without having to carry the narrative weight of it on their shoulders. Among my friends, I call it the Han Solo effect - and live in fear of a Black Widow movie (Black Widow being the Han Solo of the MCU).

So, I think Han Solo himself will fall to The Han Solo effect, and that the best parts of SOLO may center around Lando, Chewie, or even Beckett and Qi'ra.

I'll let you know a few Fridays from now. :)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 8, 2018 3:55 PM

It has been a while since I was available for a midnight showing of a Star Wars opening. And now they show at 7pm instead of midnight.

But I might be available on midnight the 23rd if there is a showing then.
I recall the midnight opening of Episode II, in the largest cinema theater in the State (they were required to upgrade their sound system before being allowed to show it), only one balcony. Absolutely packed, and most were in costume. The place went wild with Yoda's lightsaber duel.

And I did appreciate the casting of Urban and Pegg in Trek reboot.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, May 14, 2018 8:25 AM

I didn't hear of any Boycott against Wind River. Was it supposed to be a controversial film? What reason was given for a called Boycott?, and What group made the call to Boycott Wind River? Any articles on the matter?

SGG

Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Quote:
Originally posted by whozit:
I go to YOUTUBE everyday, the STAR WARS fandom is calling for a boycott of "SOLO: A STAR WARS Story" because "STAR WARS: Episode 9" sucked wind. The entertainment sites are writing that "SOLO" will have a strong opening, it may, but will tank the following weekend? If it does tank will the suits at Disney demand the suits at Lucas Film make changes...like firing Kathleen Kennedy? I remember when Disney bought the distribution rights and many said YES! Many thought Disney would do better than FOX after episodes 1,2 and 3, now the fandom is REALLY pissed at Disney and Lucas Film. So ya going to boycott? I am, but sometimes I can be an really asshole.
Why? What if it's the best SW film of the last decade?
I thought Rogue One is the best of the period, but Ron Howard could be better.
I practically never allow somebody else decide films for me, and I will not pass up Solo.

Not to mention "entertainment sites" have the least clue of all.
I forgot to mention: The SJW boycott of last year's best film, Wind River (IMHO), really ticked me off, and repels me from any talk of boycott. Unless somebody boycotts SJW - then I'm in.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, May 14, 2018 10:07 AM

Ahhhh, the Boycott! The rabid Star Wars fans calling to boycott Solo and, as I understand it, affect the box office expectations of $170M domestic take for the 4-day weekend. The idea being that if it's a flop at the box office, that somehow Disney will fire Kathleen Kennedy (one of the two-headed monster behind the somewhat less than stellar treatment of our hero Luke Skywalker. Rian Johnson being the other).

I get it. Death by association. Horrible box office, that would be followed by a Hollywood beheading. Of course this after Kennedy is called before the Disney-Jedi Council for the ceremonial guillotine party. Don't think it would work, but I get the misguided logic behind the thought. I get that fans are angry that their hero was ceremoniously kick in the balls for the sake of introducing new characters. At least that's what Kennedy, Disney and Johnson would have you believe. After watching Episode 8, The Last Jedi, I left the theater somewhat in a daze. What the fuck did I just see?

Luke Skywalker, my hero, the man who brought back his father from the brink of doom, gloom and despair (otherwise known as the Dark Side) and redeemed him. He brought his father "Vader" back to the light. The biblical meaning of Luke or Lucas means "bringer of light." That this man, who, as a teenaged boy, risked his life to save his father, would then contemplate "cold-blooded murder" - no matter what he saw in his vision - is beyond ludicrous. Darth Vader was an iconic baddie and a major protagonist of evil in the history of film. Kylo Ren, as episode 8 would show, desperately wanted to be like him. Fat Chance! As MC Hammer would say, "You can't touch this!"

Granted, there were some truly inspired moments in TLJ, but too few and far in between. My favorite was R2-D2 replaying the Leia Hologram message to Obi Wan, when Luke entered the cockpit of the Falcon. It is THE iconic beginning of the "hero's journey" in THE iconic movie that started it all. A powerful movie image of a true Hollywood hero in the grand scope of sci-fi fantasy epics.

"Help me Obi Wan Kenobi, you're my only hope." Classic.

But then missing was Luke mourning the loss of his friend Han. The story of TLJ was uneven, inspired in some scenes and flat out dumb in other scenes. Luke drinking green milk from that "sea cow" was uninspired and fell flat on it's face.

So, to get back to the boycott. You have this uneven story and rather misguided treatment of an iconic hero, throw in some dead end scenes to a gambler's planet, and viola.....instant hate from die-hard fans of the franchise. So, how do "we" get back at these brainless meat popsicles? Many have said that Johnson and Kennedy created a giant "fuck you" to Abrams and the fans, so they thought..."Why not boycott?" They thought, "let's give that 'fuck you' right back to them."

Now, I'm of the mind - much like you EC - I like Ron Howard as a filmmaker. I'm an Star Wars O.G. from 1977 (when the phrase "blockbuster" meant something). In that summer, I waited on a line outside the movie theater to purchase my ticket. Then I waited on a ticket holders line to get into the theater (man I feel old, but that was a special time back then). What a rush! I want to see the origin story of one of the heroes of Star Wars. I especially want to see Glover as Lando, the Falcon and the chemistry between Han and Chewie. Doesn't hurt that the Mother of Dragons will be on hand as well. Harrelson, Newton, etc. Not a bad cast.

I really thought that Johnson was the right call to helm The Last Jedi. I was impressed with Looper (an inventive sci-fi thriller with a good story). But even the great Christopher Nolan could have a "bad day" at the movies. No one is immune to the "box office bomb." But my question is: What does Solo have to do with the failure of TLJ? Would I like to see Kennedy get the "boot" or, at the very least, a demotion, from calling the shots at Lucasfilm? Yes. As Palpatine would say, for her "lack of vision."

My take on the Boycott. Sit out the first weekend (I was never one of those die-hard fans that would camp out in front of the theater to be first in line). I actually saw THE Star Wars on it's second or third weekend out. All I want is a good story (as always) and a good time at the theater. But, if my son calls me and says, Pop let's go opening night.....I'm there!

SGG

Quote:
Originally posted by ecgordon:
First of all, "Episode 9" hasn't happened yet. It won't be released until 19 Dec 2019. If you just mis-typed and meant Ep 8, there is still a wide range of opinion on that one. The "Star Wars fandom" on youtube is likely just a small, if vocal, part of the whole fandom. I've seen every film so far, some many times, others only once. In my opinion, SW peaked with The Empire Strikes Back, and has been going downhill since. One small uptick with Rogue One, but I felt both The Force Awakens and The Last Jedi were both too much of the same type of story being rehashed.

I may or may not see Solo in the theater, but if I do it might wait until it's at the discount house where I can see it for .50 on a Tuesday or a Saturday before noon. And the only reason I'd bother is because of Donald Glover...that and Ron Howard is a talented director. If I don't see it, it won't be because of someone else's call for a boycott. I can decide for myself what to watch and what to avoid.

Besides, those guys are probably the same type that called for a boycott of Black Panther, and you can see how effective that was. They're probably also the ones who created the furor around GamerGate, and the Sad/Rabid Puppy protests around the Hugo Awards. I'd never take their opinion of anything.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, May 14, 2018 2:13 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
I didn't hear of any Boycott against Wind River. Was it supposed to be a controversial film? What reason was given for a called Boycott?, and What group made the call to Boycott Wind River? Any articles on the matter?

SGG

Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Quote:
Originally posted by whozit:
I go to YOUTUBE everyday, the STAR WARS fandom is calling for a boycott of "SOLO: A STAR WARS Story" because "STAR WARS: Episode 9" sucked wind. The entertainment sites are writing that "SOLO" will have a strong opening, it may, but will tank the following weekend? If it does tank will the suits at Disney demand the suits at Lucas Film make changes...like firing Kathleen Kennedy? I remember when Disney bought the distribution rights and many said YES! Many thought Disney would do better than FOX after episodes 1,2 and 3, now the fandom is REALLY pissed at Disney and Lucas Film. So ya going to boycott? I am, but sometimes I can be an really asshole.
Why? What if it's the best SW film of the last decade?
I thought Rogue One is the best of the period, but Ron Howard could be better.
I practically never allow somebody else decide films for me, and I will not pass up Solo.

Not to mention "entertainment sites" have the least clue of all.
I forgot to mention: The SJW boycott of last year's best film, Wind River (IMHO), really ticked me off, and repels me from any talk of boycott. Unless somebody boycotts SJW - then I'm in.

After the film was completed, it was shown, I think at Sundance. Distributors lobbied to help get it theaters. One of them was a guy named Weinstein.
Come Awards season, it seemed almost universally lamented that WR would not be nominated because of ME TOO.

I had hoped that sense and integrity would prevail, but that is a different crowd.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 15, 2018 2:07 AM

"Equalists"?

I think the word you're struggling for is Egalitarian, Princess.

Today's Feminism is not about Egalitarianism. It's about subjugation. Read a book.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 16, 2018 1:59 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
It's about subjugation. Read a book.

That's hilarious coming from someone who probably hasn't picked up anything in print since Jr High and thinks Youtube is high philosophy.

And even more ridiculous from an idiot who thinks women didn't have it all that bad for the whole of humanity and that there isn't a pay gap based on your extremely limited life experience on the subject.

Truly hope your niece grows up and calls you out on your stupidity. Maybe it'll make sense when it's personal. Until then, there's nothing can be done for you.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 16, 2018 2:05 AM

It looks like nothing can be done for the movie either...

https://slate.com/culture/2018/05/solo-the-new-star-wars-movie-reviewe
d.html

...Howard and the Kasdans chew up screen time explaining incidental details and laying the groundwork for future movies.

It’s the last bit that really grates and takes Solo from forgettably modest to mildly infuriating. It’s galling for a movie that costs so much and takes up so much cultural space to try to do so little, but it’s a familiar disappointment, like the dull ache of a tooth that only bothers you when you bite down on it wrong. But to get to the end of Solo and learn you’ve been watching what amounts to a two-hour TV pilot, well, that goes down rough. The Last Jedi took chances, and Rian Johnson’s willingness to interrogate the franchise’s history rather than just add onto it was a gamble that paid off handsomely. Solo’s playing for pennies, and even when it finally wins a hand, you feel cheated.

If they aren't adding anything to the story, Fuck it. I'm not paying for a rehash.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 16, 2018 3:14 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Wishimay:
It looks like nothing can be done for the movie either...

https://slate.com/culture/2018/05/solo-the-new-star-wars-movie-reviewe
d.html

...Howard and the Kasdans chew up screen time explaining incidental details and laying the groundwork for future movies.

It’s the last bit that really grates and takes Solo from forgettably modest to mildly infuriating. It’s galling for a movie that costs so much and takes up so much cultural space to try to do so little, but it’s a familiar disappointment, like the dull ache of a tooth that only bothers you when you bite down on it wrong. But to get to the end of Solo and learn you’ve been watching what amounts to a two-hour TV pilot, well, that goes down rough. The Last Jedi took chances, and Rian Johnson’s willingness to interrogate the franchise’s history rather than just add onto it was a gamble that paid off handsomely. Solo’s playing for pennies, and even when it finally wins a hand, you feel cheated.

If they aren't adding anything to the story, Fuck it. I'm not paying for a rehash.

The Last Jedi paid off handsomely? This is not a reviewer I can follow.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 16, 2018 3:49 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Wishimay:
Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
It's about subjugation. Read a book.

That's hilarious coming from someone who probably hasn't picked up anything in print since Jr High and thinks Youtube is high philosophy.

And even more ridiculous from an idiot who thinks women didn't have it all that bad for the whole of humanity and that there isn't a pay gap based on your extremely limited life experience on the subject.

Truly hope your niece grows up and calls you out on your stupidity. Maybe it'll make sense when it's personal. Until then, there's nothing can be done for you.

As always Princess, you're always good for a laugh.

Keep on mouth breathing, and thanks for the lolz

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 16, 2018 4:51 AM

Someone has been watching 6ix, JSF, and Rappy.

https://slate.com/technology/2018/05/the-intellectual-dark-web-and-the
-alt-right-dont-blame-the-social-justice-internet-for-these-bigots.html

It's a truly perfect article. She doesn't come out and say it, but it's entirely about cultural narcissism. Just like the people at a wedding couldn't fathom that calling the Asian girl exotic wasn't a compliment, and that it fetishizes and segregates her humanity when it's completely unnecessary (why not say she looks especially lovely??) , 6ix, JSF, and Rappy cannot fathom that minorities speaking about issues of importance to them is not a subtle dig at white male power. That anyone who isn't white male is allowed a say MUST mean it's about THEM, because they perceive themselves as the magnanimous creators of American culture that is permanent and perfect FOR THEM.

It's the "hyper reactive you" problem. Sometimes when I use the word "you" in context about any group of people that my husband feels he belongs (even if it was a group from 20 years ago like, say band members or college kids) he will take offence, even if what I'm talking about in no way relates to him NOW.

For instance, the theoretical question where I am speaking broadly "How can ...you... do that?" he picks up on the "you" part and not that it wasn't intended for him, but pointed to the group of people I am referring to.

The alt-right come into contact with "social justice" articles and immediately think they are pointed at THEM, because the "you" is the implied readers, not white male people specifically. They can't HELP but take it personally because they are too thick to understand what the terms "general public" or "for whom it concerns" entails.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 16, 2018 5:03 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
quote]The Last Jedi paid off handsomely? This is not a reviewer I can follow.

That WOULD be the only thing you got from that article. Because YOU disagree with what is said about another movie, they must not have any other points about this one.

Some people really liked TLJ. Some people juggle geese. *Shrug.

The POINT is that they only kept to a narrow script for this one. You probably should go see it, you like narrow-mindedness.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 16, 2018 5:12 AM

lol. Everyone is an alt-right Nazi according to self-hating troglodytes like Wishy.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 16, 2018 5:44 AM

I don't know but,

I found this....in Indiewire - Aug. 6, 2017
http://www.indiewire.com/2017/08/box-office-wind-river-step-columbus-s
pecialty-limited-release-1201863937/

Opening
Wind River (Weinstein) – Metacritic: 73; Festivals include: Sundance, Cannes, Seattle 2017

Quote:
$164,187 in 4 theaters; PTA (per screen average): $41,042
Taylor Sheridan’s well-received rural thriller debuted with the strongest limited debut since late June’s “The Big Sick” and “The Beguiled.” Since then an array of festival successes with similarly upbeat reviews have opened. It’s The Weinstein Company’s best limited opening since “Carol” in late 2015 (better than “Lion,” which went on with an Oscar boost to over $50 million), so this is a return to form for the once-dominant player in the specialized world. Saturday increased a healthy 23 per cent from Friday, suggesting good initial audience response.
Quote:

And there's this..............

Quote:
The Weinstein Company acquired the distribution rights on May 13, 2016, during the 2016 Cannes Film Festival.[7] In January 2017, it was announced that the company would no longer distribute the film,[8] but the distribution deal was later finalized.[9] It had a limited release on August 4, 2017, before going wide on August 18.[10]
In October 2017, it was announced the film would be distributed on home media and streaming services through Lionsgate with the Weinstein Company name and logo omitted from the credits, trailer and packaging, because of the Harvey Weinstein sexual abuse scandal. As a result, The Weinstein Company finally stopped distributing the film.[11] All money Weinstein would have made was donated to charity.
Quote:

Critical Response

It got mainly positive reviews: Rotten Tomatoes - the film has an approval rating of 87% based on 213 reviews, with an average rating of 7.8/10.

"Wind River lures viewers into a character-driven mystery with smart writing, a strong cast, and a skillfully rendered setting that delivers the bitter chill promised by its title."

Definitely not negative. And......

Quote:
Writing for Rolling Stone, Peter Travers praised Sheridan's direction and the cast, giving the film 3/4 stars. He wrote: "[It's] the set-up for what could have been a conventional whodunit – thankfully, Sheridan is allergic to all things conventional. To him, the action is character, and he's lucked out by finding actors who not only understand his approach but thrive on it."[24] David Ehrlich of IndieWire gave the film a B, writing: "[If] Wind River shares Sheridan’s self-evident weaknesses, it also makes the most of his signature strengths. [...] Wind River may not blow you away, but this bitter, visceral, and almost paradoxically intense thriller knows what it takes to survive."
Quote:

Perhaps you're talking about this.....

Quote:
In October 2017, it was announced the film would be distributed on home media and streaming services through Lionsgate with the Weinstein Company name and logo omitted from the credits, trailer and packaging, because of the Harvey Weinstein sexual abuse scandal. As a result, The Weinstein Company finally stopped distributing the film.[11] All money Weinstein would have made was donated to charity.
Quote:

Although it did win a directing award at Cannes.
http://www.indiewire.com/2017/05/cannes-wind-river-un-certain-regard-s
creenplay-award-1201833255/

Still though, the cast was so good it was considered for an Oscar nom.
https://hiddenremote.com/2017/08/31/wind-river-a-cast-in-consideration
-for-multiple-oscars/

But, I get it...Hollywood and politics, Am I right!?

SGG

Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Quote:
Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
I didn't hear of any Boycott against Wind River. Was it supposed to be a controversial film? What reason was given for a called Boycott?, and What group made the call to Boycott Wind River? Any articles on the matter?

SGG

Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Quote:
Originally posted by whozit:
I go to YOUTUBE everyday, the STAR WARS fandom is calling for a boycott of "SOLO: A STAR WARS Story" because "STAR WARS: Episode 9" sucked wind. The entertainment sites are writing that "SOLO" will have a strong opening, it may, but will tank the following weekend? If it does tank will the suits at Disney demand the suits at Lucas Film make changes...like firing Kathleen Kennedy? I remember when Disney bought the distribution rights and many said YES! Many thought Disney would do better than FOX after episodes 1,2 and 3, now the fandom is REALLY pissed at Disney and Lucas Film. So ya going to boycott? I am, but sometimes I can be an really asshole.
Why? What if it's the best SW film of the last decade?
I thought Rogue One is the best of the period, but Ron Howard could be better.
I practically never allow somebody else decide films for me, and I will not pass up Solo.

Not to mention "entertainment sites" have the least clue of all.
I forgot to mention: The SJW boycott of last year's best film, Wind River (IMHO), really ticked me off, and repels me from any talk of boycott. Unless somebody boycotts SJW - then I'm in.
After the film was completed, it was shown, I think at Sundance. Distributors lobbied to help get it theaters. One of them was a guy named Weinstein.
Come Awards season, it seemed almost universally lamented that WR would not be nominated because of ME TOO.

I had hoped that sense and integrity would prevail, but that is a different crowd.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 16, 2018 7:10 AM

CAPTAINCRUNCH

... stay crunchy...

Quote:
Originally posted by GWEK:
Soooo.... anyway....

I'm not going to be boycotting SOLO because I think it's generally silly to boycott a movie in most cases.

I get that some folks feel that "new" Star Wars is not "their" Star Wars, and that's just fine. No need to make a thing of it; just don't see it, and shut up.

Personally, I consider the Original Trilogy "my" Star Wars, so I imagine I may well share some features with the folks calling for the boycott, but that doesn't stop me from enjoying (at least somewhat) later movies.

Heck, I LIKE the Prequel Trilogy! Sure, it's not as good as the Original Trilogy, but it's still Star Wars and it's still lots of fun. Jar Jar Binks annoyed me, but I'm grown-up enough to understand that Jar Jar (and some of the other ridiculousness) isn't supposed to be there for me. That's for the kiddies. I remember seeing Episode I on opening day and you could feel the shoulders of all the adults tense whenever Jar Jar was onscreen. But the children laughed out loud. The children, and my friend, Dan... whatever that says about Dan. Different strokes, right?

I'm not a fan of the Sequel Trilogy but a lot of that has to do with J.J. Abrams. I love is TV work, but his movies generally leave me cold, and Episode 7 was no different. Episode 8 feels like it was Rian Johnson saying he didn't like Episode 7 either and doing everything he could to undercut it. That left me with really, really mixed feelings about the movie - but those mixed feelings didn't prevent me from seeing it three time (and, ultimately, enjoying some parts of it more each time, even if I think the movie as a whole is a bit of a miss).

Rogue One stands on it's own (so far) as an amazing piece of work post-OT, simultaneously both the best Star Wars movie in decades and the worst Star Wars movie ever to be made (the latter in that it's actually, empirically, not a good movie at all if you haven't seen the other movies: it's SO dependent on A New Hope that it cannot stand on it's own as a separate work).

And, regardless of what I think of recent Star Wars movies, as a Firefly fan, how can I possibly NOT give this movie a chance? Looks to me a lot like Han, Lando and the rest aim to misbehave.

So, yeah, I'll be there for SOLO opening night, and likely later in the weekend, too.

Hi Gwek! "pizmobeach" here - so nice to see you posting and as always, your thoughtful, mature review of issues. (Same to you Wish). How's the writing going?

If there's a Youtube boycott proposed (hard to type that without smiling) that alone would make me want to go. But I don't need that - I'll see it out of basic curiosity. I love Science Fiction, and the art and craft of filmmaking and have witnessed the Star Wars series from it's first frame. So why not? I'm long passed the drays of "they owe me" when I go to a movie, in fact I don't think I ever felt that way. It's a beast to get it right, and when you do, sometimes it's just a lucky thing.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 16, 2018 10:59 AM

ZEEK

I'm not boycotting, but I don't plan to see it either. The new Star Wars is just so disappointing. I mean they threw out the entire expanded universe to replace it with poorly written dribble. They don't even seem to care if the dribble connects together. I mean The Force Awakens clearly was not the movie The Last Jedi wanted it to be. So, the director just threw out stuff left and right that he didn't like. Can we hire adults to make these movies please?

They had all the potential in the world and they've squandered it. I think I'm just going to have to say I'm not a Star Wars fan anymore and move on. There's so much good entertainment these days that there's no point in wasting my time on bad movies.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 16, 2018 2:34 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Zeek:
I'm not boycotting, but I don't plan to see it either. The new Star Wars is just so disappointing. I mean they threw out the entire expanded universe to replace it with poorly written dribble. They don't even seem to care if the dribble connects together. I mean The Force Awakens clearly was not the movie The Last Jedi wanted it to be. So, the director just threw out stuff left and right that he didn't like. Can we hire adults to make these movies please?

They had all the potential in the world and they've squandered it. I think I'm just going to have to say I'm not a Star Wars fan anymore and move on. There's so much good entertainment these days that there's no point in wasting my time on bad movies.

As long as you don't have Superhero movies in mind, this is a post that I can stand behind.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 16, 2018 3:39 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Zeek:
I'm not boycotting, but I don't plan to see it either. The new Star Wars is just so disappointing. I mean they threw out the entire expanded universe to replace it with poorly written dribble. They don't even seem to care if the dribble connects together. I mean The Force Awakens clearly was not the movie The Last Jedi wanted it to be. So, the director just threw out stuff left and right that he didn't like. Can we hire adults to make these movies please?

They had all the potential in the world and they've squandered it. I think I'm just going to have to say I'm not a Star Wars fan anymore and move on. There's so much good entertainment these days that there's no point in wasting my time on bad movies.

If not for Rogue One, I could agree with you.
But I strongly disagree regarding R1. One of the best films of the past decade.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 16, 2018 3:44 PM

Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Quote:
Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Quote:
Originally posted by whozit:
I go to YOUTUBE everyday, the STAR WARS fandom is calling for a boycott of "SOLO: A STAR WARS Story" because "STAR WARS: Episode 9" sucked wind. The entertainment sites are writing that "SOLO" will have a strong opening, it may, but will tank the following weekend? If it does tank will the suits at Disney demand the suits at Lucas Film make changes...like firing Kathleen Kennedy? I remember when Disney bought the distribution rights and many said YES! Many thought Disney would do better than FOX after episodes 1,2 and 3, now the fandom is REALLY pissed at Disney and Lucas Film. So ya going to boycott? I am, but sometimes I can be an really asshole.
Why? What if it's the best SW film of the last decade?
I thought Rogue One is the best of the period, but Ron Howard could be better.
I practically never allow somebody else decide films for me, and I will not pass up Solo.

Not to mention "entertainment sites" have the least clue of all.
I forgot to mention: The SJW boycott of last year's best film, Wind River (IMHO), really ticked me off, and repels me from any talk of boycott. Unless somebody boycotts SJW - then I'm in.
I didn't hear of any Boycott against Wind River. Was it supposed to be a controversial film? What reason was given for a called Boycott?, and What group made the call to Boycott Wind River? Any articles on the matter?

SGG
After the film was completed, it was shown, I think at Sundance. Distributors lobbied to help get it theaters. One of them was a guy named Weinstein.
Come Awards season, it seemed almost universally lamented that WR would not be nominated because of ME TOO.

I had hoped that sense and integrity would prevail, but that is a different crowd.
I don't know but,

I found this....in Indiewire - Aug. 6, 2017
http://www.indiewire.com/2017/08/box-office-wind-river-step-columbus-s
pecialty-limited-release-1201863937/

Opening
Wind River (Weinstein) – Metacritic: 73; Festivals include: Sundance, Cannes, Seattle 2017
Quote:
$164,187 in 4 theaters; PTA (per screen average): $41,042
Taylor Sheridan’s well-received rural thriller debuted with the strongest limited debut since late June’s “The Big Sick” and “The Beguiled.” Since then an array of festival successes with similarly upbeat reviews have opened. It’s The Weinstein Company’s best limited opening since “Carol” in late 2015 (better than “Lion,” which went on with an Oscar boost to over $50 million), so this is a return to form for the once-dominant player in the specialized world. Saturday increased a healthy 23 per cent from Friday, suggesting good initial audience response.
And there's this..............
Quote:
The Weinstein Company acquired the distribution rights on May 13, 2016, during the 2016 Cannes Film Festival.[7] In January 2017, it was announced that the company would no longer distribute the film,[8] but the distribution deal was later finalized.[9] It had a limited release on August 4, 2017, before going wide on August 18.[10]
In October 2017, it was announced the film would be distributed on home media and streaming services through Lionsgate with the Weinstein Company name and logo omitted from the credits, trailer and packaging, because of the Harvey Weinstein sexual abuse scandal. As a result, The Weinstein Company finally stopped distributing the film.[11] All money Weinstein would have made was donated to charity.
Critical Response

It got mainly positive reviews: Rotten Tomatoes - the film has an approval rating of 87% based on 213 reviews, with an average rating of 7.8/10.

"Wind River lures viewers into a character-driven mystery with smart writing, a strong cast, and a skillfully rendered setting that delivers the bitter chill promised by its title."

Definitely not negative. And......
Quote:
Writing for Rolling Stone, Peter Travers praised Sheridan's direction and the cast, giving the film 3/4 stars. He wrote: "[It's] the set-up for what could have been a conventional whodunit – thankfully, Sheridan is allergic to all things conventional. To him, the action is character, and he's lucked out by finding actors who not only understand his approach but thrive on it."[24] David Ehrlich of IndieWire gave the film a B, writing: "[If] Wind River shares Sheridan’s self-evident weaknesses, it also makes the most of his signature strengths. [...] Wind River may not blow you away, but this bitter, visceral, and almost paradoxically intense thriller knows what it takes to survive."
Perhaps you're talking about this.....
Quote:
In October 2017, it was announced the film would be distributed on home media and streaming services through Lionsgate with the Weinstein Company name and logo omitted from the credits, trailer and packaging, because of the Harvey Weinstein sexual abuse scandal. As a result, The Weinstein Company finally stopped distributing the film.[11] All money Weinstein would have made was donated to charity.
Although it did win a directing award at Cannes.
http://www.indiewire.com/2017/05/cannes-wind-river-un-certain-regard-s
creenplay-award-1201833255/

Still though, the cast was so good it was considered for an Oscar nom.
https://hiddenremote.com/2017/08/31/wind-river-a-cast-in-consideration
-for-multiple-oscars/

But, I get it...Hollywood and politics, Am I right!?

SGG

Whatever you posted, I had to quote just to be able it read it.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 16, 2018 9:43 PM

SPOILER ALERT: Plenty of sarcasm in the video. I know that's lost on some people here, so wanted to point that out ahead of time.

There are absolutely no spoilers to the movie in this video.

These guys probably live right down the street from you, JSF.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 16, 2018 10:02 PM

What did Kathleen Kennedy say to Ron Howard when he took over as director?

"You're all clear kid. Now let's blow this thing and go home."

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, May 17, 2018 2:20 AM

I'm goinfg to watch it.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, May 17, 2018 3:38 AM

Well... I'm not boycotting it or anything. The last Star Wars movie I ever saw was Episode II. I gave up on star wars way before it was cool.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, May 17, 2018 5:11 AM

I don't know what happened. It was normal when I responded, then once I submitted it went all crazy, like you........wwaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyy over to the right.

Ha, Ha!

SGG

Why? What if it's the best SW film of the last decade?
I thought Rogue One is the best of the period, but Ron Howard could be better.
I practically never allow somebody else decide films for me, and I will not pass up Solo.

Not to mention "entertainment sites" have the least clue of all.

I forgot to mention: The SJW boycott of last year's best film, Wind River (IMHO), really ticked me off, and repels me from any talk of boycott. Unless somebody boycotts SJW - then I'm in.

After the film was completed, it was shown, I think at Sundance. Distributors lobbied to help get it theaters. One of them was a guy named Weinstein.
Come Awards season, it seemed almost universally lamented that WR would not be nominated because of ME TOO.

I had hoped that sense and integrity would prevail, but that is a different crowd.

Whatever you posted, I had to quote just to be able

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, May 17, 2018 5:20 AM

Ha, ha, ha..........good one.
Every once in a while, you come up with a good one.

But, don't cocky kid!

Ha! I kill me!

SGG

P.S. This was fun!

Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
What did Kathleen Kennedy say to Ron Howard when he took over as director?

"You're all clear kid. Now let's blow this thing and go home."

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, May 17, 2018 6:10 AM

I'm with you Zeek, mostly.

I've always said that writing a good story is more than half the battle. The writing is key, but then you have to have a good director to translate that onto the screen. JJ bringing back the OGs for one last hurrah was, as I see it, paying homage but also, bringing back the die-hard fans. He knew this going in, so I kind of expected a walk down memory lane. Some hated it, while others basked in the glow of hero-worship.

But I agree that TFA was poorly written. My pet peeve was how did Rey know of the Jedi Mind Trick, much less how to use it. The theory on the internet is that Luke's light sabre, infused with the Force, transmitted that infusion to Rey when she touched it. Hence The Awakening. It sensed that she was Force sensitive and passed on it's "knowledge" from it's experience with Anakin and then Luke. Interesting, but unless JJ covers that in Episode 9, it would completely unravel the entire story arc for the new SW generation.
A point that Kennedy made clear she was pursuing. Understandable in light of the billions Disney spent to continue the saga of a time in a galaxy far, far away.

Then Kennedy anoints the next "brilliant mind" to helm the good ship Star Wars, only one small problem, neither he nor she haven't a clue how to proceed. I argue that there is a way to pay homage to the original joy and delight that started in 1977, and pass the torch onto the next generation of Star Wars nerds. For those who love sci-fi, adventure and the wonder of a well-written fable.

But unlike Kevin Feige, of the MCU, Kennedy does not have the wherewithall to guide this beloved franchise onto the next phase. He has a plan, a purpose and the balls to see it through (no pun intended). She needs to buy a clue. Rian Johnson utterly and completely gave both the fans and JJ, the middle finger. And whether it was an error of commission or omission, so did Kathleen Kennedy. If the intention was to blow up the franchise, well, they succeeded, miserably so, but succeed they did. Now, I've heard that JJ and company did provide an over-arcing story to cover this trilogy, but Kennedy allowed Johnson free reign to write and direct as he saw fit.

Now, I'm all for innovation and progress in a series. Hell, this is what sci-fi is all about -- innovation, daring, adventure and, most of all, imagination. But it has to follow a logical path. It must be well written.
That's first and foremost. It is first, last and always.......the story.
What Kennedy and company failed to see was that you must serve the story.
Sure, pass on the torch, but serve the story. One that makes sense. For actors, there's the audition, to see if the actor can interpret the character's essence within the story. For directors, it's their body of work. For producers, it's picking the right people and stories to put up on the screen. But, as I have learned, you can't serve two masters.

So, you're right, picking adults who know what they're doing is key. Kennedy failed twice in that regard. Johnson for The Last Jedi, and those two guys (I forget their names) for the Solo movie. I wonder if she ever bothered to read the script for either of these two movies. Wasn't there an overall story arc that they should have followed? Give me Feige or those guys from Game of Thrones. Hand the franchise over to them and see what happens. I dare say that they would kick ass.

Now, the latest is reviews for Solo are not good. It's clear to me Disney needs to make a decision. Oh, I don't think they would fire her, but she needs help, and pronto. They have squandered a golden opportunity to advance the franchise, and possibly surpass the original trilogy. I don't envy JJ Abrams, he has a monumental task. Fixing a juggernaut. It's going to take a Herculean effort. I'm rooting for him to pull it off, but right now it doesn't look good.

Boycott!? I don't think it would work, but I also think it's not needed.
The bottom line will be the final judge, and right now it looks like it's going to be a bloody mess.

Good Luck JJ, may the Force be with you.

SGG

(Sorry for the long-winded answer).

Quote:
Originally posted by Zeek:
I'm not boycotting, but I don't plan to see it either. The new Star Wars is just so disappointing. I mean they threw out the entire expanded universe to replace it with poorly written dribble. They don't even seem to care if the dribble connects together. I mean The Force Awakens clearly was not the movie The Last Jedi wanted it to be. So, the director just threw out stuff left and right that he didn't like. Can we hire adults to make these movies please?

They had all the potential in the world and they've squandered it. I think I'm just going to have to say I'm not a Star Wars fan anymore and move on. There's so much good entertainment these days that there's no point in wasting my time on bad movies.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, May 17, 2018 8:35 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by captaincrunch:
Quote:
Originally posted by GWEK:
Soooo.... anyway....

I'm not going to be boycotting SOLO because I think it's generally silly to boycott a movie in most cases.

I get that some folks feel that "new" Star Wars is not "their" Star Wars, and that's just fine. No need to make a thing of it; just don't see it, and shut up.

Personally, I consider the Original Trilogy "my" Star Wars, so I imagine I may well share some features with the folks calling for the boycott, but that doesn't stop me from enjoying (at least somewhat) later movies.

Heck, I LIKE the Prequel Trilogy! Sure, it's not as good as the Original Trilogy, but it's still Star Wars and it's still lots of fun. Jar Jar Binks annoyed me, but I'm grown-up enough to understand that Jar Jar (and some of the other ridiculousness) isn't supposed to be there for me. That's for the kiddies. I remember seeing Episode I on opening day and you could feel the shoulders of all the adults tense whenever Jar Jar was onscreen. But the children laughed out loud. The children, and my friend, Dan... whatever that says about Dan. Different strokes, right?

I'm not a fan of the Sequel Trilogy but a lot of that has to do with J.J. Abrams. I love is TV work, but his movies generally leave me cold, and Episode 7 was no different. Episode 8 feels like it was Rian Johnson saying he didn't like Episode 7 either and doing everything he could to undercut it. That left me with really, really mixed feelings about the movie - but those mixed feelings didn't prevent me from seeing it three time (and, ultimately, enjoying some parts of it more each time, even if I think the movie as a whole is a bit of a miss).

Rogue One stands on it's own (so far) as an amazing piece of work post-OT, simultaneously both the best Star Wars movie in decades and the worst Star Wars movie ever to be made (the latter in that it's actually, empirically, not a good movie at all if you haven't seen the other movies: it's SO dependent on A New Hope that it cannot stand on it's own as a separate work).

And, regardless of what I think of recent Star Wars movies, as a Firefly fan, how can I possibly NOT give this movie a chance? Looks to me a lot like Han, Lando and the rest aim to misbehave.

So, yeah, I'll be there for SOLO opening night, and likely later in the weekend, too.

Hi Gwek! "pizmobeach" here - so nice to see you posting and as always, your thoughtful, mature review of issues. (Same to you Wish). How's the writing going?

If there's a Youtube boycott proposed (hard to type that without smiling) that alone would make me want to go. But I don't need that - I'll see it out of basic curiosity. I love Science Fiction, and the art and craft of filmmaking and have witnessed the Star Wars series from it's first frame. So why not? I'm long passed the drays of "they owe me" when I go to a movie, in fact I don't think I ever felt that way. It's a beast to get it right, and when you do, sometimes it's just a lucky thing.

Pizmo! Good to see you!

To sidestep for a minute, have you played the Firefly boardgame? If so, swing on by Boardgamegeek. I've been doing a lot of stuff there. Not quite Virtual Firefly, but it keeps me busy.

As for trying to remain thoughtful and mature, I wanna, I really wanna... but I can help but post this, which is what I hear whenever someone tries to win an online argument (or worse, thinks they've already won) by saying "read a book":

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, May 17, 2018 8:48 AM

REAVERFAN

Quote:
Originally posted by ecgordon:
Thanks, Wishy, you said most of what I would have. Anyone who uses the term SJW, or the full words social justice warrior, as an epithet, has already lost the debate. If you are not for social justice, then I have to assume you are for social injustice?

This.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, May 17, 2018 6:16 PM

WHOZIT

Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

SPOILER ALERT: Plenty of sarcasm in the video. I know that's lost on some people here, so wanted to point that out ahead of time.

There are absolutely no spoilers to the movie in this video.

These guys probably live right down the street from you, JSF.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

Well that was 15:11 of my life I'll never get back.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, May 17, 2018 9:01 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by reaverfan:
Quote:
Originally posted by ecgordon:
Thanks, Wishy, you said most of what I would have. Anyone who uses the term SJW, or the full words social justice warrior, as an epithet, has already lost the debate. If you are not for social justice, then I have to assume you are for social injustice?

This.

Social Justice Warrior

A person who uses the fight for civil rights as an excuse to be rude, condescending, and sometimes violent for the purpose of relieving their frustrations or validating their sense of unwarranted moral superiority. The behaviors of Social justice warriors usually have a negative impact on the civil rights movement, turning away potential allies and fueling the resurgence of bigoted groups that scoop up people who have been burned or turned off by social justice warriors.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, May 17, 2018 10:10 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Quote:
Originally posted by reaverfan:
Quote:
Originally posted by ecgordon:
Thanks, Wishy, you said most of what I would have. Anyone who uses the term SJW, or the full words social justice warrior, as an epithet, has already lost the debate. If you are not for social justice, then I have to assume you are for social injustice?

This.
Social Justice Warrior

A person who uses the fight for civil rights as an excuse to be rude, condescending, and sometimes violent for the purpose of relieving their frustrations or validating their sense of unwarranted moral superiority. The behaviors of Social justice warriors usually have a negative impact on the civil rights movement, turning away potential allies and fueling the resurgence of bigoted groups that scoop up people who have been burned or turned off by social justice warriors.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

So then, in accordance with ecg, anybody who actually and honestly supports Civil Rights is for Social Injustice?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, May 17, 2018 11:21 PM

There's no place I can be since I found Serenity.

Hey guys, are your brains shaped like pretzels? Cause your logic is sure twisted out of shape. Just because you define something a particular way does not mean that is the only way it can be defined, nor that I have to agree with you. A person who fights for social justice does so for everyone's civil rights, even those people that hate them for doing so. Yes, there are extremists on both sides that would like to shut down the other's opinion, but they do not define the whole of either side of the argument.

If you call for a boycott of anything because you say it is controlled by SJWs, aren't you as guilty as those you condemn?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, May 17, 2018 11:27 PM

There's no place I can be since I found Serenity.

Had to share something I just saw on Twitter.

What's the opposite of a Social Justice Warrior?

A Status Quosader.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 18, 2018 12:01 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by ecgordon:
Hey guys, are your brains shaped like pretzels?

That would assume a brain structure

I think the whole SJW hate is just another offshoot of the "I don't wanna have ta be politically correct" crowd.

While I agree that sometimes people are too quick to take offence these days (although most of the "offence" articles are just clickbait) I've never understood the people who sit around whining for their right to insult strangers and groups of people with antiquated terminology. It's like learning new adjectives is painfully abhorrent. What happened in Jr High that they had to vow to never update their behaviors or learn new facts??

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 18, 2018 8:00 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Wishimay:
Quote:
Originally posted by ecgordon:
Hey guys, are your brains shaped like pretzels?

That would assume a brain structure

I think the whole SJW hate is just another offshoot of the "I don't wanna have ta be politically correct" crowd.

While I agree that sometimes people are too quick to take offence these days (although most of the "offence" articles are just clickbait) I've never understood the people who sit around whining for their right to insult strangers and groups of people with antiquated terminology. It's like learning new adjectives is painfully abhorrent. What happened in Jr High that they had to vow to never update their behaviors or learn new facts??

At least some of us graduated Jr. High.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 18, 2018 8:53 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by ecgordon:
Had to share something I just saw on Twitter.

What's the opposite of a Social Justice Warrior?

A Status Quosader.

Ha!

I think it's equally valid (and definitely not mutually exclusive) to say that the opposite of a Social Justice Warrior is... a Social Justice Warrior! Similar approach, similar tactics, just fighting for the rights of different people.

Same tricks, different agenda... and if you feel that others don't deserve an enhancement of their rights, then, yes, Status Quosader - if not Status Degrader - indeed.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 18, 2018 9:06 PM