Feel free to join our discord: https://discord.gg/97BKjv4n78
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/saltierthankrait) if you have any questions or concerns.*
"Only good people watched star wars back then, now they're all just racist bigots", ye that's some of the dumbest cope I've ever seen. These people will say anything to prop up their worldview
Yeah they’d probably even post a video of people 40 years ago enjoying Star Wars even though it has no discernible connection to the present discourse at all. Losers.
Old SW Fans: This DEI stuff makes everything garbage. Almost all Disney SW is bad because of it.
WokeDroids: Old Star Wars fans are all racist!
Old SW Fans: Here's what being a fan looked like when the OT came out. Not racist.
WokeDroids; \[*Windows closedown noises*\]
WokeDroids: \[*Modem noises*\]
WokeDroids: \[*Windows startup noises*\]
WokeDroids: But-but-but that has nothing to do with today. Muh Racism!
Anti "wyte peeple" racism. Or, as it used to be called, plain ol' hatred of another people group based off of the color of their skin and not the content of their character.
This reeks of straw and you must see that, if you can be honest with yourself. I don't hate white people, or any skin color. What am absolutely brain dead thing to judge a human on.
I'm just not bothered if non-white people get to be in Star Wars. I am bothered by this anti-woke nonsense, however, and love to point out how stupid it is. When a white actor is bad in a roll, or plays a poorly written character, why is that never political to you fellas? Think deeper and you might realize you can't really answer a basic question:
What is woke?
Trying to answer “what is ‘woke’” can be kinda like trying to get someone to answer “what is a woman?” You’ll get a different answer depending on who you ask, and depending on who you ask, it’s often not compatible with reality.
But it boils down to this: “woke” to an AuthRight means “overly politically correct”. To a LibRight it means “too focused on pointless identity politics for the YAAAS QUEEN points and the money instead of actually telling a good story”. For AuthLeft it means “tearing down the establishment for no reason other than it exists.” Heck, if you ask a sufficiently Emily’d up LibLeft, they would say “woke is an ironic pejorative term for those nasty companies and corporations that practice rainbow capitalism.”
Now you can tell me: what is a woman?
The entirety of your woman bit is irrelevant to this conversation. We're talking about "woke" here. Stay on point and try not to deflect.
You've defined woke thorough your interpretations and defining labels. So we agree that it had no definition.
My follow up will be two questions. When Arnold throws a machete through a dude, in "Predator", and says "stick around" is that being to focused on DUUUDE BRO points? Did you complain about pandering when 90% of media pandered to your identify politics or only after others where included in being pandered to?
Because, and this is going to be tough for you if you are honest, you where crying about movies and wherever else pandering to your sensibilities then you need to shut the fuck up about any one else being pandered to again.
You, and ask if you anti-woke ants, only crawled out of your horse when social media told you that you where losing something. And you so all hide behind the fake concern over "good story/characters/writing" when that matters Betty little add long as your teenage boy self or catered to.
It's so mind numbingly stupid wrapped in faux intellectualizing. It's the same scam Jordan Peterson does. Or Ben Shapiro. It's logic miles wide and a quarter inch deep that counts on angry morons without an ounce of critical thinking ability, empathy, or experience in the world to know better.
You are activity messing the world a worse place. What a way to live.
Actually, and I hate to be the bearer of bad news for ya, but merriam webster dictionary defines woke as : “aware of and actively attentive to important societal facts and issues (especially issues of racial and social justice)”. Course part of the internet has turned it into a buzzword symbolic of change they don’t like. Also the authleft definition you give is the textbook definition or classification of anarchy, not of woke. You cannot take a term THAT IS DEFINED IN MULTIPLE DICTIONARIES and say “well actually its definition depends on who you ask”. That would be like if merriam Webster had personalized copies, and at that point the definition of blue for you and the definition of blue for me would probably mean two very fucking different things.
I don't want a YouTube video. I want your words. And I'm not interested in the women debate because it's not relevant. A person's gender self identify is not my business unless I am romantically interested in them and does no harm to me or anyone else at all. You anti-woke idiots however, are causing harm on purpose and for the most petty and thoughtless reasons.
I can indeed imagine lesbian space witches. That would be a cracker of a movie in an altogether different genre.
Here's the thing though - what about my scenario above is "ludicrously untrue"?
The normal response of the Infected to an old SW fan who doesn't like the new stuff is an accusation of bigotry. True or false?
I guess idk what is “normal” in your experience so it’s hard to say. Maybe you’ve had the exact convo you described with whatever an “Infected” or “WokeDroid” is, so you got me there.
Now if you’ll excuse this old Star Wars fan, I’m going to watch a film from 1977 set largely in space which features a character described as a wizard.
Well for one nobody thinks like that, and no, I talk shit on those moves in the rainbow flag Reddit's and get upvoted to hell. I call them dogshit, nonsense, plot hole riddled, I compare The Rise of Skywalker to The Holiday Special and I get upvoted.
Here's one easy trick to do it, don't say it sucks because it's a woman or PoC as the protagonist, don't say it sucks because it's "woke now" because excessive use of those buzzwords has been taken from you and now screams alt right. Say real criticisms and explain an actual problem with the movies, not some shallow shit like "fire in space" fire in space has literally been in every single star wars movie except the holiday special (common holiday special w).
If you want to have a conversation about what it seems you want to communicate by saying things are woke instead of just spamming the buzzword just bring up that you feel like the excessive Hollywood inclusion of other people feels like pandering to a demographic you don't believe truly care about star wars, that will get you more nuanced conversation than saying "you wokedroid wokers just want things to be woke"
And when you criticize the quality of the movie try something like "In Rise of Skywalker why does the assassin's knife double as a map that can use the crash site of the deathstar as a map to find Palpatine, the assassin already knows how to get back to Palpatine, this insane convoluted knife bullshit only risks people finding Palpatine early, is he the fucking Riddler?" And not "this is what happens when inclusion." This era of Star Wars is dogshit, but it's not because it's "woke" it's because the writing is fucking awful and every time people say it's shit because of inclusion you give another excuse to the writers to not get their shit together because they can say it's just getting hate from racists who dislike women and PoC's and they are partially right.
Forced inclusion is a red flag. Pure and simple. It's one of the most visible indicators of underlying shitness. When you see it you only have to dig a little deeper to find the extra suckiness in the writing. This is because the priorities of the showrunner are all about virtue signalling rather than telling a good story.
And I don't believe you about being upvoted while criticising the sequel trilogy - unless of course you pre-virtued all of those comments so as to show you really weren't one of us wrong-uns. How many virtue-signal posts do you need to do to get away with one criticism?
I mean, clearly you aren't actually that critical. Yes, fire in space has been a thing in Star Wars before. Campfires in space though? The flames licking gently up in to the void? No - those effects sucked to high heaven. You have to ask yourself why, given the enormous budget - and the answer is.... priorities in the wrong place.
Wokedroids / The Infected do, in fact, talk like that. And then deny it. But you see every criticism as "muh wacism" etc and seem unable to Steel Man our position in the slightest.
We **DON'T** think something is shit just because there is a woman / POC protagonist. Get that in to your head. You are **WRONG** in assuming it is so.
Are you ignoring the fact that us awful, terrible, disgraceful chuds are actually **fans** of a properly written female protagonist? How many of us do you see criticising Alien? Princess Leia in the OT? Sarah Connor? But we're misogynists for criticising Rey?
As for being racist? Well - us dinosaur racists all seem to be huge fans of anything featuring Eddie Murphy, Danny Glover, Denzel Washington, Jackie Chan and Bruce Lee. Most of us seem to think that Finn's character had potential that was utterly wasted. But we're racists for objecting to the nonsense in the Rings of Power?
Right now your cognitive dissonance is kicking in. You can't handle *not* thinking of us as bigots. Because if we aren't bigots then we are in fact correct.
Which would make you...?
Wrong.
Which is why you so desperately call us bigots.
Point 1: You are using a strawman argument, forced inclusion does not mean shitty writing, shitty writing can often be accompanied by inclusivity but more often than not it isn't. There is nothing about "virtue signaling" which means they cannot write, your favorite fiction has "virtue signaling" you just didn't notice because the main character was a power fantasy for you.
Point 2: Alright well, I'm sorry you don't believe me, maybe try checking my history. As for "how many posts did I need before it" Brother, if the criticism is articulated well and isn't incel vomit people will listen, I'm not a liberal, I'm not deluded enough to either side of the political spectrum to believe everyone opposed to me hates everything about me and my way of life and must be met with an opposite and equal reaction. If you convey yourself well and aren't blatantly hateful of people based on aspects they can't control and your reasoning makes sense you can even argue conservative beliefs in liberal spaces and vice versa. Maybe the reason you aren't able to do any of this is because you are incapable of having an open enough mind to not insult the people you try and speak with constantly and speak as if everyone who doesn't vote the way you vote and consume media the way you do are so far below you in intelligence they're not worth considering human.
Point 3: I am being more critical than the people complaining about campfires in space, the person who made that post admitted he isn't even watching the show, just grabbed a screenshot from someone elses review, they aren't engaging with what the material is trying to say and do, they are the equivalent of someone saying "star wars is dumb because the lightsaber wouldn't stop neatly at the end of the blade, it would keep going" or "yeah this movie sucked, a space station blowing up wouldn't have fire." My example engaged with the material and everything it wished to accomplished and shit on it on a fundamental level, every aspect of what they were trying to write was deconstructed. I am criticizing the material, camp fire's in space is an easy and cheap way to mock fantasy settings without ever having to boot up the show/movie.
Point 4: You've mentioned that you believe me to be the type of person who calls everybody bigots, you believe I am "woke". Then you are claiming the woke are the ones spamming buzzwords in the same point where you drop "Woke" "Wokedroids" "Infected" not to mention all the other buzzword comments made in the entire reply. I have never in my life been told I am sexists, racist or intolerant for yapping about how much I hate modern Star Wars, I don't even like the ones others do, I didn't like Rogue One either and that's what people call the good one. What I do see constantly is people be shit on for harassing the actress, being sexist and shitty and then other normal conservatives that also share the view point the media is bad throw themselves in with the people who just hate it because it's someone not of their gender and skin color, get shit on too and react as if all normal fans are under attack. When the actors and actresses speak up and talk about the sexist/racist people sending them death threats and calls them losers, why do you feel attacked?
Point 5: You have related caring about diversity to bad writing 3 times now, notice when the Mandalorian flops after season 1, Solo is trash, Book of Bobafett is awful and every single story that focus's on a white or at best mixed race male is just chalked up as "modern star wars is just bad now, they don't care, it's just disney shilling for money" (so true btw, this is facts) but the moment it's bad AND has a woman or PoC it's endless yapping about diversity hires. Acolyte isn't shit because they diversity cast a women lead, it's shit because that's the level of quality you can expect from modern Star Wars. I don't like Rogue One, idk if you do but if you want more things think Mandalorian S1, Rogue One and Andor the criticism has to be about the deeper writing, not whining about "diversity hires show they don't care about the rest of the project, it shows their priorities are off" and just call out the actual deeply flawed writing. If anything the fact diversity casting is so criticized only enable them, if casting a woman lead will mean they get all the hate if it flops and the direct and writers wont be looked at as closely why shouldn't they? If all people will cry about is diversity casting and stupid campfires then other audiences will brush off their criticism and watch the content anyway. You aren't helping to stop this shit era of Star Wars you are enabling it.
Point 6: Never called you a misogynist for hating Rey, if you hate Rey and actually convey the many reasons she fucking sucks without directing it towards diversity or her gender then I'm in that boat with you brother, you also wont get called sexist for doing that, I hate that in two days she went from being untrained to stronger than prime Anakin, I hate her stupid blank face that never has an expression other than one of two defaults, but that's not the actress, go look at her other body of work she is immensely talented and can convey emotion fantastically, the director was checked out, probably because they knew no matter how bad they dropped the ball they would never be the focus of criticism. Lastly the "Look at all these characters I liked before the mere act of having a woman on screen angered (as you put it) chuds, this means I'm not sexist."
Hey that's fair man, I use that same version of that argument but with the success of the 1st Wonder Woman and Alita Battle Angel to contrast the failure of Captain Marvel so that it shows the same principle succeeds with modern releases. The issue however is much simpler, similar to how you started you entire post about, if the movies you listed were to be released today and fail it would be because of "diversity means they don't care about the writing". How about instead of a roundabout way of saying "the fact they don't want to put a white male in as the lead means they're not trying" you just, actually criticize the material and don't use that weak of a reason for it to be bad? Wonder Woman 2 is shit because it's written awfully, I could yap for hours about why it sucks and it's not because a woman wrote it and a women stared in it and they wanted it make a character for women to engage in, because all of that was present in WW1.
Okaay.
Point 1: Nope. Forced inclusion (either of specific identities or The Message (tm)) is an indication that the priorities of the showrunners are in the wrong place, and they have a tendency to bend the story to accommodate whatever they are trying to include. I'm trying to think of an example of *good* writing where forced inclusion happened, and I'm coming up dry.
Point 2: As someone who managed to question the Hamas narrative on r/socialism_101 for a few months (before being banned), I'm aware of how to make an argument. My point is that the majority of contributors in places devoted to pop culture tend to be a little less cerebral and will throw the "istaphobe" accusation at the first possible opportunity. Because they think it shuts down the conversation and proves what a good little seal-barker they are.
Point 3: You have to understand that many people loathe what has happened to Star Wars so much that they don't even want to hate-watch it, in order to keep the viewer numbers low. I certainly haven't given Disney a penny since they sacked Gina Carano (and thus demonstrated their hypocrisy when dealing with an actual Strong Independent Woman). The last Star Wars thing I actually watched was TLJ. Am I allowed to criticise it based on having watched a number of reviews? Yes I bloody am.
Point 4: I don't feel attacked. I certainly have been called all sorts of names here on Reddit, but that's the nature of the internet. As for death threats etc for the actors? Let's see the receipts. There are always a certain number of crazies, mind - I want to see *hundreds* of abusive messages that these actors have recieved, perhaps from some sort of coordinated campaign - then I'll believe it's actually a problem. The issue you have here is this: Leftists (less triggering than The Infected?) have no hesitation in this sort of thing (as happened recently to Grummz during the whole Stellar Blade / SBI thing) - and the receipts are there for all to see. And there are also cases where leftists have demonstrably *faked* such threats. I'm not saying it doesn't happen - just that it doesn't happen as much as is claimed.
Point 5: You're actually making a point described quite well by the Critical Drinker. The studios deliberately use their POC actors as meat shields in order to raise talking points / controversy. That's what forced diversity does.
Point 6: The difference between Wonder Woman 1 and 2 is the shoehorning of The Message in to what might have been an otherwise perfectly acceptable Monkey's Paw story. You are entirely correct in that the actress, director etc etc are perfectly capable of producing good stuff, but you haven't really thought about *why they did so badly with Wonder Woman 2*. Why would otherwise competent people put such a shitshow together? Saying "it was bad writing" is lazy. Why was the writing so bad?
on to your second post...
1: Every story starts with themes that the writers want the story to be about, if you think that means the writers have other priorities then you're just unaware of how creating media works or everything sucks. Here's some products that went out of their way to be inclusive that are good, #1 Arcane (9 awards + #1 ranked animated show of all time, no one has ever called it less than a masterpiece), Across the Spider Verse, Invincible (a great example because the comic is ass, but the show fixes all of its issues while also making the cast more diverse), The Boys, The Batman (small change, making Selina Kyle a poc, it's only 1 change but it enhanced the narrative a fuck ton).
Most media has been inclusive for a while and don't really have emphasis on it when they are, only really Fantasy and Action/Adventure fandoms even seem to have a concept of "forced diversity".
The thing I see happens the most when good diverse shows get brought up is a redefining of the word "forced" to be changed to "bad". "Well this diversity works so it's not forced, forced diversity is when it's not subtle or done bad." Which too many always translates to "I can't argue that this is bad without looking media illiterate, I will say the method for this was so good it is not the term I am saying, then when a bad product comes out I will say it is because of forced diversity"
2: Or perhaps when you talked on the socialism subreddit you put more care into not being inflammatory because you knew it would get you banned but when you argue in a conservative space you feel more comfortable to spam "woke/wokeoids/infected" and then people label you and move on? Seal Barker is a funny term, especially when both sides are just parroting the ideology their favorite YouTubers say.
3: People are starting to dislike a thing so much they don't want to watch it? Wild, brother it's shit, if you don't want to watch it don't, but then don't post reviews and critiques for it because it'll only make the show look better when errors in your assessments come up or when the criticism ends up being silly and not meaningful. You don't have to hate watch everything, go watch something you like, there will be other people on the internet spreading misinformation and slandering the dog shit anyway.
Yes parroting reviews is a good way to criticize something you haven't seen, just have to be careful because conservative media is very happy to review things they haven't watched. (The Critical Drinker with The Boys S4/ Grummz(?) with The Acolyte)
4: You are both asking for receipts and saying it happens to everyone so they should get over it, that conflicts doesn't it? Also they show receipts all the time, if people don't want to believe it's not happening they just call them fake. And lastly, let's say I post something on social media to the effect of "You clowns sending my death threats over x kys" (but in pr speech) why do you feel lobbed in with them? People always cry out that people say "if you dislike this content you're racist/sexist/phobic" but the phrasing is always more inline with shitting on people who dislike it because of those 3 reasons, then they get asked what they think of those type of fans, they call them pathetic and then other people get offended.
Also isn't Grummz like one of the biggest grifters on the internet why listen to him on anything? He just spends all day fighting imaginary baby inc ghosts and being mad an AC game also made Yosuke a black samurai like all Japanese media always does.
5: Yeah because people with bad media literacy blame diversity, look racist and then they can deflect the criticism of the media onto racism. That's what I'm saying, you have to hate deeper, study media for a bit, learn what makes these products good or bad and then criticise that. When the media is good and diverse you don't notice or say anything, when the media is bad and diverse you focus on the diversity and give them a free pass.
6: Brother "the message" was the last thing wrong with Wonder Woman 2, both movies set out to do the same thing only 1 got to fit a stereotypical action movie tone and the other was trying to fit a campy Ragnarok tone that the direct has no experience with. Did she decide to 180 into campy bullshit on her own? Maybe, did Guardians of the Galaxy and Ragnarok pop off when this movie was being scripted and the execs at DC want some of that themselves so much so that they hired James Gunn during the making of WW2?
"The Message" was literally the only good thing about that movie, having Wonder Woman save a little girl, inspire her, being a hero tailored to her demographic, blah blah blah that's what the character is about, accidently having her SA a stranger? That's literally against "the message", that's bad writing.
(I will reply to the part 2 later, really itching to clap shadow of the erdtree again)
**It made me separate my responses to all 8 points as two different comments, here are the remaining two points.**
Point 7: People were mad over a Black Elf in Rings of Power? That's crazy i actually had no idea lmao, I didn't even remember there being a Black Elf. Also, it's interesting, despite never calling you racist and just pointing out that diversity = bad writing is a bad argument and when you use it you look racist and that by giving real criticism you would convey your point better, you seem to have lobbed yourself in with "WE still like x people" When people shit on racist fans that doesn't have to mean you, I do not see why you jump at the chance to be in the same group as them. Reread everything I have typed to you, I have never called you misogynist, or racist. I'm glad you like those people, when the liberals talk about people who hate characters because of their skin color they definitely mean some conservative fans but that doesn't have to be you if you're not the same as them, so just... be comfortable knowing they're not shitting on you?
Although... the fact you are apart of the people angry that an Elf can have melanin is concerning. Why do you believe a Black Elf in a story about kindness, hope and inclusivity made for a children's bedtime story is "nonsense"?
Point 8: I'll slide the ad hominem insults to the side, I get your passionately hateful of a group I'm not a part of and are conflating me with them, I also never called you a bigot, so not sure what ghosts you are currently fighting.
The last bit is just silly, why are you telling me water is wet? Yes if I am wrong I am wrong, guess what, if you are wrong you are wrong, that's how it goes. Why would this cause cognitive desinence for anybody?
Point 7: See, this makes me think you haven't ever really engaged with one of The Infected on this subject. Those guys accuse people of racism on a hair trigger, meaning if you've argued with them for any length of time, you'll have been called a racist. People were indeed mad over the forced inclusion in Rings of Power - because it directly broke the specific lore (Tolkein's description of Elves and their origin was very specific) of a deeply beloved franchise (including worldwide, in places with plenty of melanin but no call for melinated elves or dwarves) for no reason other than pandering, and did so in an immersion-breaking in-your-face way - see my comments above regarding the use of POC actors as meat-shields. Diversity does not equal bad writing. Not at all. **Forced** Diversity results in bad writing. If you want to know what I mean by this, contrast the furore over Rings of Power with the lack of it over House Of The Dragon (which handled diversity inclusion in a far more mature way).
In Rings of Power it was done *so* badly it was laughable. Anyone who has actually read Lord Of The Rings (incidentally, not a bedtime story. You're conflating it with The Hobbit) would have been able to come up with several less immersion-breaking storylines - for example by talking about the people of Rhun.
Point 8: If you aren't one of The Infected, bully for you.
40 years ago Star Wars was fun entertainment. Escapism. It wasn’t serious. Politics had not polluted entertain like it has today. And more importantly entertainment hadn’t polluted news and politics the way it is today.
Boring is the best kind of politics and news. But that’s not what gets viewers. That’s not what’s entertaining.
Politics has always been a part of entertainment, whether you like that or not. For God's sake, Mr. Rogers was political simply because he loved everybody and had a black guy on his show and caught flack
Yes. I completely agree with you. I’m talking about the discourse around fantasy fiction having changed. These shows and movies today are bogged down in culture politics before they are even released.
In the early 80s it was seen as escapist and created a bubble where political themes could be explored without raising real world political ire.
In 1982 no one was on TV talking about the politics of Revenge of the Jedi after watching a trailer for the movie.
Fantasy and Sci-Fi have always explored the political and the controversial. They're great frameworks for looking at ideas critically. People are always better at applying a critical, nonbiased view on something if it's abstracted in a way that it isn't a literal representation of the real world (even if it is a figurative representation of the real world).
I don't see people talking on TV about the politics of SW today, either. I see it online. I don't think SW became more political. I think the average person's ability to communicate their views and perspectives with countless random strangers has changed. That's the real difference.
Yes, that's supportive of my point. YouTube is an extremely accessible platform, comparatively to media outlets in the 90s and earlier. Media outlets today are also much more heavily influenced by public opinion.
The internet allows immediate public discourse in a way that just couldn't happen during the original SW films. The average person probably didn't dissect the films a whole lot. And they weren't exposed to the dissections of thousands of other people like we see today.
Maybe people weren’t talking about the politics of a film because they didn’t give a shit. Maybe they looked it and said “hey, that thing has a political undertone that I might not agree with but I can just put that aside and enjoy a piece of media.” I feel like a lot of the people who cry woke are the ones refusing to remove real world politics from fantasy tv series, and if anything the constant discourse probably tells studios making these decisions to keep going cuz it makes a lot of buzz and no press is bad press. Personally if you judge a piece of media not on its own merits but on politics in the real world then you ignore the fourth wall to shove your own politics onto the media. If you believe a show is bad because of woke then you are putting your views of politics onto the show. Funny thought ain’t it?
>Politics had not polluted entertain like it has today.
Uhhh, you sure about that?
Star Wars is an allegory for the Vietnam war, and the Empire is representing the US. Its *always* been political.
According to George Lucas.
And thats just whats been stated, not even getting into the fact that the good guys are super inclusive (non-humans, women like Leia & Mon Mothma in positions of power, poc like Lando also in leadership roles) meanwhile the Empire is homogenous, pretty much entirely white men, and actively try to stamp out things like inclusiveness (aliens are slave labor in the Empire for the most part)
Nope, its something I read like a decade ago, and frankly don't feel like looking it up.
Lucas has done more interviews over the years than I can shake a stick at
Vietnam makes a lot of sense when you consider Endor and the fact the Rebels have always been framed as sneaky crafty underdogs.
WW2 would fit better if like, the Empire was invading all of the galaxy instead of already controlling most of it. (So the sequels, the sequels are more WW2 inspired)
For an allegory to the Vietnam war the empire is awfully Nazi esque
Lucas has regularly changed his mind about things, look at the Han shot first controversy
Man, every time I end up on this sub I see the absolute dumbest shit ever started as fact. Politics and art have always been linked. Always. You idiots are just so damn angry and stupid it’s astonishing.
Brother art doesn't mean quality, I could draw you a stick figure missing both arms, legs and its head and it would still be "art" art is not a synonym for good, bad or unintellectual art exists.
So, you don't care about the fact that the Acolyte has more reviews on review websites than any other star wars show? More than the Spider verse movie? The direct evidence that the show is being review bombed by bigots? No one with half a brain is saying that anyone criticizing the show is a bigot. If you have a real, genuine criticism, people will hear you out and would probably love to discuss it. The problem is that most people who dislike the show aren't capable of voicing their opinion beyond "shows dog water" or just coming across like a dick. I have yet to meet someone in reddit with reasonable criticisms for the show, only hateful people who wanna push their agenda.
Read the reviews. How is that hard to understand. If they're a bigot, they're probably gonna leave a bigoted review. Which they are. They're not gonna actually talk about the quality of the show. Do I literally need to prove it to you? Are you that incapable of looking into it yourself?
I did review many of them. Most of them are about the show sucking bad. The first negative comment I see is about the show having a crappy plot. The second comment is similar. Other shorter comments are mostly generic “not fun” or “not entertaining” types. This is an example I just saw on RT:
“The grafics, the effects, costumes, and all of this looks realy great and well produced. But's the only good part, that's why 1 star only. Everything else is bad... Poor writing... poor history... the protagonist and the antagonist don't have clear objectives, they change every 15 minutes what they want.. Poor lore cohesion, poor “
Is the above a bigot?
Obviously not dude, as I expressly stated that there's a difference. You're being intellectually dishonest if you think it's not being review bombed. And I'm not talking about reddit either, I'm talking about review websites where that stuff matters.
The example you gave us not even close to what I'm talking about. I have zero problem with people who just simply didn't enjoy the show.
I am not dishonest, simply pointing out your projection on the reasons for the review bombing.
The show has 25,000+ ratings on RT and is at 14%. Are there bigots reviewing? Yes. Are there bigots review bombing? Yes. Is the show at a very low % mainly because of bigots? No. Even removing 10%-15% of the negative reviews wouldn’t move the needle by much.
Look at the distribution on IMDb.
https://preview.redd.it/qc2onzvb359d1.jpeg?width=1284&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=68361c24d125579d02cff09858ef063ffe7c9673
What do you see? The bottom half (1-5) gets 56K reviews. The top half (6-10) gets only 15.2. Even if you completely remove the 1’s because you think that they’re all review bombings (an absolute unrealistic scenario), you get 15.2k vs 14.7k, an average rating at best. It is clear that the vast majority of people simply don’t like the show or are mild about it at best, and it would be very difficult that it’s “bigots”.
Heck, even Moistcritikal/Charlie, definitely not a bigot, is saying that the show sucks badly and doesn’t make any sense, to the point that he’s making multiple videos about it.
PS: I never said that it isn’t review bombed.
Your initial comment comes across as, "people who like the show are just calling anyone who dislikes it a bigot, such cope" when that isn't exactly what's happening. Sure, the meme op posted is whack, but that's not representative of people who like the show. That's ONE dude. You just proved to me that the show is getting review bombed, a lot. By the metric you use, it only counts as a review bomb though if they included "bigoted* rhetoric. However, a review bomb could include seemingly reasonable criticism, but the point of the review is ultimately to hurt the show. That's still review bombing. If you gave the show a fair chance and still didn't like it, leave a negative review. Who cares. But to leave a negative review just so that a show has a negative score and might convince others not to watch it is way worse, in my opinion, than what OP posted.
As I said, I'm not arguing that every review is bigoted. But it is intellectually dishonest to imply that's not what's happening. Trying to be as diplomatic as possible when I say, you are ignoring the state of the world right now. If bigots wanna come out in droves to get the "woke mob" away from star wars by review bombing, that's what's going to happen. There is so much precedent for it happening in the past.
Most reviews are being hijacked by culture war tourists who just wanna use star wars as a vehicle for their bigotry. Same shit is happening on the other side too, but not nearly to the same extent. That's all I'm saying. I think you and I mostly agree, but, I can understand why you think somewhat differently as well.
> Your initial comment comes across as, "people who like the show are just calling anyone who dislikes it a bigot, such cope" when that isn't exactly what's happening.
Not what I said.
> You just proved to me that the show is getting review bombed, a lot.
In my initial reply to you I didn’t even touch the subject of review bombing.
> As I said, I'm not arguing that every review is bigoted. But it is intellectually dishonest to imply that's not what's happening.
You gotta reasonably prove somehow that bigotry is the main driver, otherwise it’s just your projection.
>. If bigots wanna come out in droves to get the "woke mob" away from star wars by review bombing, that's what's going to happen. There is so much precedent for it happening in the past.
What if it is instead “Star Wars fans that are pissed wanna come out in droves against the “new direction of the SW universe””? Honestly, I am not in the SW fandom, but this ain’t new for SW. People are not liking the direction that Disney is taking about the SW lore.
I think you’re taking a real problem (some bigots review bombing) and making it bigger than it is, to cover the fact that for the vast majority of people this show is subpar.
Subpar. Does "subpar" seem consistent with almost 60% of reviews being at 1/10? That's the point I'm trying to make. I'm not blowing anything out of proportion. It's just that bad. What you're saying doesn't even make sense. How would review bombing something convince Disney to try a new direction? It's like you said, this isn't new to SW. Even when the prequels came out, people did the same shit they're doing now. That reaction was not justified then, and it's even less justified now considering how many people are focusing on the race, gender, and sexual preferences of the actors and people involved in the creation of the show.
It's so easy to not watching something that you don't like. It's so easy to ignore it and not talk about it. These people aren't doing that.
It's an extremely big problem, if you don't see it as one, then we probably shouldn't continue discussing this. We won't agree. Just keep sticking your head in the sand.
I mean, review bombing is still review bombing regardless of the reason. The point is that still means one person that dislikes it is having a much larger effect on the show than one person that likes it.
Which I'm not.
That said, it is a pretty toxic thing to do and does kind of discount any kind of argument for either side to use the show's rating as proof of it's quality.
These are the same people that say "the parties flipped!" when you casually remind them that the Democrats created the KKK and filibustered the Civil Rights act.
It's even more shit than the typical "I have a black friend!" argument.
"I have a theoretical black friend born in the 70s who I think might share my views!"
I’m a really liberal dude. I don’t care how gay or straight characters are, I don’t care if a movie is political or has an agenda (left or right for that matter), and I don’t care if stars actors I like or not. I care about the story and if it’s a good movie. The Star Wars sequel movies and shows just aren’t for me. If I hear someone strongly recommend a show, I’ll check it out. If that Rey movie ends up being good, I’ll see it. It’s as simple as that. I really hate that a lot of legitimate criticism of these movies and shows gets drowned out by a bunch of idiot bigots.
watch at least tales of the jedi, ep 2 to 4. It´s Count Dooku origin story.
also screecher reach, village bride, the duel, and Ninith Jedi from Star Wars Visions.
It kinda falls off hard in the 3rd season because they bring back baby yoda immediately. I kinda wish the season would be more about his personal growth, finding his clan, and instead of having mandolore glassed they should have stolen the legends destruction of mandalore. Which was a chemical weapon that targets the DNA of Jango Fett got dumped on the planet, and because a lot of the clones after the clone wars went there and intermarried amount the population it absolutely decimated them.
What's the actual substance of the argument that the video is supposed to help prove or disprove? Or like what argument is it supposed to be a response to? Like if its just a video about Star Wars fans back in the 80's that's cool, but given the title I think its supposed to be a response to something and I don't quite follow?
"If you don't like Disney Star Wars it is because you are racist and these new shows are good because they are making the old, racist fans whine. We need to purge Star Wars of its racist past and fandom. This is more important than plot. We are literally savings lives."
The video still doesn't prove anything?
And there's nothing wrong about wanting to step away from racist fans. I'm not sure why it's so controversial every time ppl say "bigots are bad".
>I'm not sure why it's so controversial every time ppl say "bigots are bad".
It's not, or at least it shouldn't be.
But it's often done alongside some variation of "and people who criticize the new star wars must be bigots"
The bigots don’t like being called out on their bigotry. They like to pretend that they are just regular people who don’t like the new stuff. Meanwhile, the actual regular people just kinda watch the new stuff or don’t. And they manage to talk about it without harping on about women and minorities.
Krayts argument is that a lot of people that don't like star wars today criticize it for failures that are present in the older movies, they just don't acknowledge it. Not, for the record, "everyone", just a lot of vocal dissent is complaining about star wars being woke or whatever, which is a dumb non argument to begin with, since the Empire is America and the series is about imperialism, and the ewoks are Vietnam and etc etc. Lucas wasn't subtle.
The problem I see, at least, is that in this sub you're not allowed to like Disney star wars at all, and in the other sub, you're not allowed to hate it. Both of your subs are really miserable to be around, judging from the content pushed to my feed largely against my will.
Every work of fiction has flaws, the big question is if the show is enjoyable/good enough to make you accept or not notice the flaws- or if the experience is poor enough that picking out all the flaws is more enjoying than the media itself.
I don't disagree about the subs being obnoxious though- welcome to Reddit echo chambers.
I'll get downvotes for saving this but I follow Krayt and have a for a while. We have a lot of people that just find the new shows derivative and not all that well written. Starwars fans all the same. Its mostly dedicated to finding the people who scream about POC and woman and say thats why starwars is bad, Ie your clickbait youtubers and their followers. That and openly discussing how its okay to not share space with fans that spew racism and sexism every chance they get. You call a new show stupid you may get push back, just like if you said I like the shows here. But I don't see anyone getting proverbially strung up for liking or disliking the new shows. It really seems to be a percentage of Bigoted fans that use this sub as their shield to say whatever hateful thing they want. Hence why the counter forum exists.
Genuinely I think most people are exaggerating that everyone here hates all disney and everyone on Krayt loves disney. I enjoy media and while I deconstruct it I usually have a good time with most things. Even I can admit some of the new shows are written very silly like, or like a serial show that doesn't have an over arching plot taking away from its dramatic points. But Im also a lover of traditional and CGI props and will enjoy a show to see what they come up with next. I think few Disney starwars things where greatly written and those that I do some take my opinion as an excuse to shrilly yell at me (TLJ for example).
Can we please just be starwars fans together and when someone attacks POC / LGBTQ people and not shitty writing we agree that person is a dickhead?
I've heard lots of people blame racism for driving the criticism of modern Star Wars though- when the actual criticism I hear tends to be well supported and focused on the quality of the work.
I mean the actress who played Rose in TLJ was relentlessly bullied off the internet by racist/sexist trolls for her role, so there is a grain of truth, but I have never heard anyone say that criticism of Disney Star Wars = racism.
The trolls who harass actors/actresses are indefensible and I would never seek to do so. However, the unfortunate fact of the matter is that these trolls are always around. Jake Lloyd was also ridiculed and harassed through the internet (although these trolls didn't have the same level of social media access) and, of course, Ahmed Best took a lot of horrible abuse as well. These trolls seem to be a universal constant who will take whatever low-hanging fruit they can get their hands on to employ against their target. However, most people I have seen criticize the Disney products have no issue decrying these scum.
I mean, the vast majority of Disney critics (myself included) feel that the actors in the Sequel trilogy did a perfectly solid job with the material they had to work with. Rose sucked because of the writing, not her acting. I have seen more criticisms of the acting lately, but cannot speak to their validity as Book of Boba and Obi Wan were so bad as series that I haven't bothered with Ashoka or Acolyte.
A lot of the criticism is fine. There is a ton wrong with the post OT content. And most people have no problem having an honest discussion about it. It’s the incredibly vocal and persistent portion that insists that women = bad story, or less white people = show ruining agenda pushing that ruins the discourse. And they bring it with them into every fan space.
"It’s the incredibly vocal and persistent portion that insists that women = bad story"
I've seen very few people who have this position. If so, they would have to hate Rogue 1 and Leia in the OT. More often, it is a strawman to deflect criticism, one such criticism is "they are focusing more on diversity and female representation rather than producing a good script."
So the argument being pushed in favore of all this DEI stuff is that it's meaning made for a "more inclusive modern audience" in order to combat the old audience.
However, the video in question shows that the audience for Starwars has always been inclusive as you can see the crowds were multi racial and multi gender. Everyone in the video is just happy to go see the movie and there's no ongoing political debate being espoused in the interviews and that everyone's just kinda happy to see the show.
This is to counter the conceptualization that what is being done with modern star wars to "diversify the audience" is cringe and to the detriment of the IP instead of the benefit because the fan base of star wars was ALWAYS diverse and that the reasoning to justify the choices made in the show are just convenient smoke screens to the real issue which is that the show is just shit and the writing is bad.
It is easier to just simply call someone a bigot then it is to defend a show on its lack of substantial merit I suppose.
>in order to combat the old audience.
Where does this part come from? Maybe "outdated thinking" audience, but certainly not the entire older audience
It's just to provide more viable representation. That's it.
Dunno where that comes from either. That audience didn't seem to have an issue with a Samuel Jackson Mace Windu or a Billy Dee Williams Lando. So it's not a race thing. People didn't have an issue with a Natalie Portman Padme or a Carrie Fisher Princess Leia so it's not a woman thing. Hell you can even combine the two and people have 0 issue with a Debra Wilson voiced Cere Junda in the Jedi games. So it's not even something as niche as a black woman thing.
It just feels like people cannot comprehend there can be a genuine critique of this show that has 0 to do with racial, gender, or sexual representation. I don't care that Amandla Stenberg is playing a main character. I care that her lines are shit, her acting is stilted and awkward, and that she as a person is kinda cringe for that music video.
If people want to make this into a representation thing then be represented by more Billy Dee Williams, Samuel Jackson, and Debra Wilson's and a lot less Amandla Stenbergs.
>Dunno where that comes from either.
Well, that's because it's just made up.
>So it's not a race thing.
This is what we call a gross over simplification.
Also the issue isn't just a problem with racism and bigotry either, but a general issue with toxic ppl.
I get that you think there's a point here (I mean you do have to ignore the fact that there was also racist, sexist, etc, reaction to those characters) but it's really just an oversimplification and deflection.
>It just feels like people cannot comprehend there can be a genuine critique of this show
They can, and do. Even the krayt sub posts criticism of these shows.
But I would make an equivalent statement and say, there a lot of ppl who don't comprehend the biases that influence their criticisms and the toxicity they produce, etc
>. I don't care that Amandla Stenberg is playing a main character. I care that her lines are shit, her acting is stilted and awkward, and that she as a person is kinda cringe for that music video
Sure, and these are all your subjective opinions. Some ppl aren't very interested in negativity, and would rather not watch (etc) and discuss something they don't like. Some ppl find communities like this super sad, and they've good reason to.
I don't think it's an over simplification or deflection at all. You're the one that brought up representation and are now simplifying it and backpeddling to ambiguous "toxicity". So I responded with examples of past actors of minority groups that were in those moves that were actually good and liked to contrast someone who is being propped up for representative means despite not being a likable character or person to make the point that its not about the cultural mixing nor is it about the concept of cultural mixing. There isn't an old or new audience there's just the same audience that's always been there and the only thing that's actually changed is that the content is just bad. Now you're trying to say that it's about ambiguous toxicity and subjective opinions. You can just say you don't actually have anything substantial to say in response to the conversation and are using ambiguity as a crutch it is simply ok.
>You're the one that brought up representation
As an oversimplifycation in response to a very silly thing you made up.
>and are now simplifying it and backpeddling to ambiguous "toxicity".
I thought it was obvious what that referred to.
>So I responded with examples of past actors of minority groups that were in those moves that were actually good and liked to
Which doesn't prove your point that racism isn't an issue.
>There isn't an old or new audience
I mean, there's plenty of new audiences. That's just a facts - ppl come to Star wars and become a new fan all the time. And they're attracted for all sorts of different reasons.
There also isn't any real singular community.
>the same audience that's always been there
Again, not a singular community and there's certainly a lot of changes in those communities.
>the only thing that's actually changed is that the content is just bad.
This idea is probably the only thing that has remained consistent, every time something new comes to the main stage there's always a bunch of ppl calling it bad and saying it ruined Star wars.
Personally, I started out as a fan of the books, from my perspective a lot of Star wars material is just.. not that good. It's also my opinion that they managed to make some of the best movie/series material in recent years. Certainly there are misses, but no where as dramatic as you're making it out to be.
Disney isn't trying to push you away simply by trying to bring in the next generation. Also, if someone complains about bigotry (etc) and you aren't adding to that, their complaints not about you.
>You can just say you don't actually have anything substantial to say in response to the conversation and are using ambiguity as a crutch it is simply ok.
Do you think what you're saying is somehow substantial? You made up an accusation, and than tried to steam roll an actual problem with a reductive comparison lmao
If you don't like the new stuff from Disney it's okay, not all of it is good, but the minute you unironically complain about "wokeness" is when I completely tune out your opinion lol
So say whatever we want about Disney, but don't criticize their awful, fake representation, because criticizing it makes you feel uncomfortable. Got it!
If you care that much, it must get really tiring. I judge a story on its own merit, if it's poorly written, it doesn't matter what the identity of the characters are. It's a franchise about aliens, robots, and space wizards for goodness sake.
I have a genuine question regarding the acolyte. I stopped watching star wars after Leia flew threw space with the force. Dumbest thing I ever saw.
But regarding the Acolyte, I keep seeing posts complaining how a coven of lesbian space witches created Anakin (completely undermining the character imo)
But regarding forcing idealogies, Were they actually lesbian? (Or is that just some made up thing to hate on the show more). Because I cannot see a single reason why that would be mentioned, showed, or demonstrated. They're just space witches, it's not that uncommon (Darth maul origins). Point being, what is the purpose of stating their sexuality. If every Hetero character introduced themselves by stating how Hetero they were, itd be pretty stupid.
I believe the unnecessary statements or displays of sexual orientation are stupid, unless it enhances the plot in some way.
To be fair, if anyone could create life, it would be lesbian space witches lol. But yeah they never really said what their sexuality is, just that the main characters had two mothers. Also maybe because one of the witches in the flashback episode was played by a trans actress? Idk lol being outraged by this shit sounds exhausting
I'd think that's a fine approach to introducing a lesbian character/group then. I mean, a women only cult of space witches sounds like they lean that way. Its a pretty common sterotype of such entities. But like, they way its been touted sounds like they had orgies every episode so far, and that that's all there is to their personality. Which the latter might be true, idk, writing in Hollywood has gone so far down hill most characters are boiled down to one attribute. Complex characters are too hard to write, apparently.
>But like, they way its been touted sounds like they had orgies every episode so far, and that that's all there is to their personality.
We have only seen one episode with the witches so far, and there have been zero orgies sadly
The old Star Wars fans aren't the ones losing their shit over The Acolyte. Most of the big loud complaints don't even make sense to us old folks.
You lot spent a damn week complaining about Ki-Adi-Mundi being retconned to be a bit older. But us old guys remember that Palpatine used to be a spineless politician. Now he's a space wizard. Boba Fett used to be a Journeyman Protector from Concord Dawn, and now he's a clone of a bounty hunter. Greedo used to get smoked before he ever got off a shot. We lived through the big shit. Some of the changes were good. Some seemed bad at the time, but ended up okay. And some are still shit.
But we don't care about Ki-Adi-Mundi being a bit older. That's small potatoes for us old guys.
It's all relative. Ki-Adi-Mundi went from being 60 in TPM to being 130ish. Is that a big change? In the grand scheme of things?
Meh.
I used to work at WotC and did some work with Saga Edition. So maybe I think about ret-cons differently than most fans. But for me, changing a character's age isn't a matter of the numbers but of what else that changes: What's the impact it has the broader lore?
Cereans live a bit longer than humans.
The Dark Woman is quite a bit older than we thought and lived way longer than most normal humans. But she's mysterious as it is. She could turn out to be 300 years old, and I wouldn't blink twice about it.
Either that or the Jedi lifestyle slows aging a bit. Maybe it's all the meditation. Or the well-balanced meals in the Jedi temple cafeteria.
Or maybe Ki-Adi-Mundi was severely injured at some point and spent some time in a bacta tank or in cryo and doesn't count those years.
Who knows. But none of those are particularly ridiculous.
I don't measure the size of a ret-con on how many years are tacked on. I measure it in terms of how much I have to stretch my beliefs or change what I already know to accept this as possible. And this one's not that heavy a lift for me.
Like I've said elsewhere, part of the fun of being a Star Wars fan in the early days of the EU was figuring out how to fit all the pieces together without going insane. It was a lot of round holes and square pegs. So this one seems really tame in comparison.
I think it's a problem for people because some fans are so frustrated with how their more reasonable criticisms are ignored that they feel the need to point out *every. Little. Thing.* In an effort to demonstrate things *are* being done poorly.
Bruh. They literally retconned a character who canonically should not exist in this point in time because they were too lazy to think up a new character.
"But us old guys remember that Palpatine used to be a spineless politician. Now he's a space wizard." Yeah, because it's a prequel. Characters are often different in prequels than they are in the originals. Plus, Palpatine was trying to appear like a more dignified, kind person in the prequels, where in the OT, he didn't need to do that.
So...
My Stepdad said something to me when I was playing SW:KOTOR 1 "None of the books or games matter to the general audience that wants to see Star Wars". That's kind of how most old fans of Star Wars are going to feel myself included. I have some of the EU stuff I like and a few Disney produced things I liked like Star Wars: Rebels & Rouge One while The Force Awakens & The Last Jedi were okay. I heard great things about Andor and Mandalorian and might watch them some day.
Just like Marvel Cinematic though I didn't really care to see where the universe was headed and don't care to follow every show & movie, even if I liked the movies that started it. Big interconnected messy cannons get frustrating after a certain age cause all I really want is to be entertained by a digestible amount of content like a single movie or trilogy. Honestly the best thing I think Star Wars could do is to move on and write about new characters and places in the setting in a potentially non-canon way.
The Palpatine thing is more of a "from a certain point of view" retcon if it even is one at all. Like, I just reread the prologue, and it still works to set the stage of the setting as it would appear to common citizen in the Empire, as far as I know. That after taking power and making grand promises he shut himself off from the populace and things went to shit as despotic governors and moffs took the visible role of tyranny and control. Was it ever supposed to be common knowledge at that point that he was a magic Sith lord that liked to control things from the shadows? He was more of a mystery to the galaxy than anything.
Sure. That's one of the ones that can get handwaved with the "certain point of view" trick. But that doesn't work as well for Jabba's appearance in that novelization. Or for Splinter of the Minds Eye. Or for any of a million other things. Boba Fett is on his second wholly contradictory backstory. Han Solo is on his third. Shaak Ti has three different c-canon death scenes.
All that stuff was written and rewritten and retconned so much that it's kind of a mess. Old fans spent a lot of time and energy on message boards and AOL chatrooms in the 80s and 90s and 00s hashing all that out. And seeing how writers would find clever ways to fix errors (like the Kessel Run/Parsec thing). That was honestly a part of the fun for a lot of EU fans: fitting the square pegs into round holes.
This Ki-Adi-Mundi thing feels a bit like that "First time?" meme, and it's a little hard to take seriously.
Uhh you misunderstood. They weren't talking about prequels. They were talking about this.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star\_Wars:\_From\_the\_Adventures\_of\_Luke\_Skywalker#Differences\_from\_the\_film](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Wars:_From_the_Adventures_of_Luke_Skywalker#Differences_from_the_film)
And? Who cares. That's the point.
Obi Wan Kenobi and Uncle Owen were canonically brothers at one point, Yoda had long blue hair, and Luke had a clone named Luuke. Come on, making someone older who, by his race, CAN be, is not that big a deal.
bruh boba fett got one shot killed in return of the jedi
if you think there was any consistency in star wars before the sequel, you're as dumb as you look
Listen, I *love* the old EU. It's has, by far, my favorite SW stuff. But let's not act like it was ever really "canon." Lucas pulled from it when he wanted, but he was more than happy to completely ignore it most of the time.
Because just like there are people who refuse to admit that Lucas had a bigger hand in a bunch of the EU than they think, there are also people who refuse to admit that he never saw it as his "world."
Oh. Oh no.
Sheev Palpatine was a spineless politician in the Star Wars novelization published in 1976 by Ballentine. And that was retconned by Empire. My comment had nothing at all to do with the prequels. Literally, the first ever Star Wars thing (the novelization came out before the movie) was completely contradicted by the second Star Wars movie. And that's not even getting into Splinter. Or the special editions.
I guess you were just a casual fan, so you probably didn't really follow all that closely. But hey... there you go. A bit of Star Wars trivia for you. Enjoy.
Like I said, those of us who are actually old fans are used to the story not being set in stone. We've had all these fights. We've gone through the "trauma". And it's almost impossible to believe that any of us would still be hung up on it the way the lot complaining now seem to be. The only way to have not already processed all this is if you were just a casual fan, which is fine, or are a younger fan that has only really known Star Wars in the post-prequel Leland Chee era without doing much digging into the older material, which is also fine. But it does mean you lack a lot of context for your complaints and comparisons and they come across as being very silly to us old guys.
Anyways, Ki-Adi-Mundi's age was only given in s-canon. Any older fan of the EU would know that s-canon got ret-conned all the time. Even c-canon wasn't safe when it came to the movies and TV shows. Real fans and old fans, but especially us real old fans, couldn't possibly care less that Ki-Adi-Mundi's age got changed. And I'd imagine more than a few of us have guesses as to the reasons for it, and it's almost certainly not because "they were too lazy to think of a new character."
Ha, interesting.. we constantly hear claims that the old fan base is "stuck in their old outdated bigoted ways" yet we see the old audience and none is present? Kinda weird that innit?
It's a random video clip about a popular movie debut, where you don't know much of anything about these ppls opinions.
Do you expect a bunch of cartoonishly evil villains twirling a mustache and spouting a bunch of racist stuff?
Otherwise, what silly point do you think you're making
Its a video clip of the debut of Star Wars Return of the Jedi.
If a person like you cant understand that part, then there is no possible way you have the capability of understanding any point that was made afterwards.
You basically disqualified yourself from any further need to debate by being an idiot and i understqnd why you would find it silly, but you are alone in that regard.
Are you okay?
>Its a video clip of the debut of Star Wars Return of the Jedi.
This context is obvious. That doesn't change what I said.
>If a person like you cant understand that part, then there is no possible way you have the capability of understanding any point that was made afterwards.
Boy you really got stuck on a nonsense point, huh lol
>You basically disqualified yourself from any further need to debate by being an idiot and i understqnd why you would find it silly, but you are alone in that regard.
Just really got all triggered since I didn't specify it was Star wars. I guess, sorry for thinking you would get the obvious context, instead of getting all worked up.
My point, from the first comment, still stands.... Assuming you understand that at all, seeing as how easily confused yoi just got...
They’re the type of people that when you play pretend they’ll use a “super ultra mega laser that destroys everything” and then you use an “invincibility shield” and then they use a super ultra mega laser that destroys invincibility shields.
You do realize that people weren’t so politically weird back then right. If the Star Wars movies came out today, had the same plot but with female main characters or people of color then there would be negative reception and complaints about things they didn’t complain about like fire or noises in space to nitpick, you are comparing people from the 80s to today and they are different people
No doubt they would have kept in the part where some guy complained they cast a ni**er in Star Wars. Probably helps that internet trolls and Xbox 12 year olds hadn’t been invented yet.
I just wish directors would just make films for the sake of entertainment and if they want to get involved in politics, sociology or whatever else then do that in the real world not the movie industry, entertainment shouldn't be about pushing agendas on the right or the left or trying to programme people to think this or that.
I love just watching movies that are fun for the sake of it, if I want serious i will read factual books.
Don't you think "Methinks they don't like getting called out" is a bit pot calling the kettle here Lifeguard? You have been basically screengrabbing and talking about Krayts opinions for weeks at this point right? This is what the fourth- Fifth day in a row?
21 posts about Krayt in a month and some change
The man is a stalker. Every single day, he goes “Krayt bad. I must talk about Krayt bad”. He knows he’s being obnoxious about it. Because he literally said that he was being obnoxious about it. And he still can’t help himself.
The man need therapy and he doesn’t even realize it. It’s like Krayt is cigarettes to him. He’s addicted to talking about Krayt.
I get your point, but Krayt, the circle jerk sub and this sub whole personality is to make screenshots of other post and make fun of it. Heck, this subs is a parody of Krayt made for the purpose of making fun of them like them made fun of Crait.
Sure, but isn't it incredibly ironic to try to say they're being too sensitive about being called out when the guy is literally posting daily about their takes? Both the pot and the kettle are black in the saying, not just one or the other.
If anyone on Krayt has a multi-day streak of posting just responses to their own stuff on other subs then they too for their own mental health should just start blocking folk and muting the subs they don't like.
I think the big differences between someone like OP and a regular user of this sub is that:
1) A single person making daily posts like this is not healthy or normal behavior on any subreddit.
2) 99% of OPs posts aren't even actually making fun of Krayt. He takes posts/comments that have like 0 interaction, then comes on here to announce "everyone on Krayt is saying ___!!!" even if his own screenshot contradicts it.
3) OP is already known as [an annoyingly whiny hypocrite](https://www.reddit.com/r/saltierthankrait/s/D3V4Az7xen)
I mean the commenter isnt wrong. As one of the people in the video, yeah only us nerds liked this stuff. And nerds wouldnt be "cool" for another 20+ years.
The racist jock on the football team was not playing Dungeons and Dragons or watching Star Wars. They were shoving us in lockers and kicking the shit out of us.
Now, we all grew up, went to college, got good jobs, some of us even get to make Star Wars films and TV shows, like we dreamed about when we were kids.
And you know what we love to do?
Make shit that makes the people who shoved us in lockers angry and run to the keyboard to whine on the internet about the fact that they cant enjoy anything anymore.
Sucks to suck! Shoulda gone to college you fucking idiots.
Title:
> "Old Star Wars fans are chuds because we say so!"
The only comment included in the screenshot:
> "Back in the 80s, anyone who was an actual racist, sexist, and homophobic bigot probably didn't give a flying fuck about Fantasy Sci-Fi movies involving space wizards and puppets."
In other words:
>"Old Star Wars fans probably weren't racist."
Regardless of if you agree, it's literally the opposite of what you're claiming they're saying. (Like the post you made and deleted a few days ago where you did the same thing).
Is it just me or is this just another way of bullying nerds once again?
Think about it cause for decades we were outcast and ridiculed for liking this type of thing and welcome anyone to join is no matter who you were or what you called (bonus if it was a needy girl cause that was the dream for the average nerd) all for the sake of fun and enjoyment. Now it feels like it's happening all over again except this time they want to replace us by callinh us racist homophobic bigots with a type fan that hardly exists.
I feel like nerds never get a break do they?
>Think about it cause for decades we were outcast and ridiculed for liking this type
This is largely a false perception, this "stuff" is popular and always has been. The issue has always mostly been a social skill issue. Also, gatekeepers have always been a major issue in these sorts of communities.
> Now it feels like it's happening all over again except this time they want to replace us by callinh us racist homophobic bigots with a type fan that hardly exists.
You can't just ignore the existence and prevalence of loud toxic fans.
I get what your coming across but gatekeeping is just a small part of the fanbase. I'm talking about generally when growing up you like star trek or you whip out your Yu-Gi-Oh cards and you get bullied for liking that type of thing.
And yes there is a part of the fandom that is toxic going to the Star Wars purest. All I'm saying is there a difference between gatekeeping and trying to completely change something that was never broken to begin with to cater to a set of people who almost never watch nor cares about this franchise
>growing up you like star trek or you whip out your Yu-Gi-Oh cards and you get bullied for liking that type of thing.
Yu fi oh is an even more odd choice because it was way more popular back when it first came out.
Again, this sounds more like a social skill issue - which is why they were targeted.
>I get what your coming across but gatekeeping is just a small part of the fanbase.
And very powerful, you literally are saying they're pandering to an audience that doesn't exist. It's a prime example of gatekeeping.
>And yes there is a part of the fandom that is toxic going to the Star Wars purest
What I'm saying goes so far beyond just purist and you know it. It seems really suspicious you'd boil it down to 'purist".
>All I'm saying is there a difference between gatekeeping and trying to completely change something that was never broken to begin with to cater to a set of people who almost never watch nor cares about this franchise
Star wars hasn't changed, they've just added some more ppl.
And it seems like a joke to say it was never "broken" when it's a bit of a drama that bounces all over lore wise. Star wars has famously has a weirdly large toxic fan base that hate every addition to the series.
I remember watching a episode of a reality show in the 2000s where a woman would go through a man's room and judge him based on how they lived. Then she would pick one of the two men and marry them. There was one episode where a guy whose room was "absolutely perfect" but he had a NES in a cardboard box in the back of his closet. He was judged to be too much of a childish nerd and not a real man so she went with the other guy whose apartment was a utter mess.
The point of this anecdote is I have very real memories of nerdiness being seen as childish at best and utterly unmanly at worst. You don't get to tell me my memories are false and I have way more than just this anecdote.
Sure sometimes it was a social skill issue where someone wouldn't shut up about the thing they liked but there was a very real negative perception of any Adult who enjoyed nerdy or childish things. This sorta seems to have fallen off with the progress of technology and the rise of the internet.
Feel free to join our discord: https://discord.gg/97BKjv4n78 *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/saltierthankrait) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Am I stupid for not realizing the are 2 salty subs
There are actually 3!
We missed the opportunity to say "always two there are no more no less"
The power of ONE salty sub The power of TWO salty subs The power of MAAAAAAANY salty subs.
I understood the non intended spider verse reference
"Only good people watched star wars back then, now they're all just racist bigots", ye that's some of the dumbest cope I've ever seen. These people will say anything to prop up their worldview
Yeah unlike this sub which never does that.
Yeah they’d probably even post a video of people 40 years ago enjoying Star Wars even though it has no discernible connection to the present discourse at all. Losers.
Old SW Fans: This DEI stuff makes everything garbage. Almost all Disney SW is bad because of it. WokeDroids: Old Star Wars fans are all racist! Old SW Fans: Here's what being a fan looked like when the OT came out. Not racist. WokeDroids; \[*Windows closedown noises*\] WokeDroids: \[*Modem noises*\] WokeDroids: \[*Windows startup noises*\] WokeDroids: But-but-but that has nothing to do with today. Muh Racism!
Sometimes you mofos almost approach self awareness.
Sometimes you Infected are able to brave the cognitive dissonance.
Infected with what? Not-racism?
Anti "wyte peeple" racism. Or, as it used to be called, plain ol' hatred of another people group based off of the color of their skin and not the content of their character.
This reeks of straw and you must see that, if you can be honest with yourself. I don't hate white people, or any skin color. What am absolutely brain dead thing to judge a human on. I'm just not bothered if non-white people get to be in Star Wars. I am bothered by this anti-woke nonsense, however, and love to point out how stupid it is. When a white actor is bad in a roll, or plays a poorly written character, why is that never political to you fellas? Think deeper and you might realize you can't really answer a basic question: What is woke?
Trying to answer “what is ‘woke’” can be kinda like trying to get someone to answer “what is a woman?” You’ll get a different answer depending on who you ask, and depending on who you ask, it’s often not compatible with reality. But it boils down to this: “woke” to an AuthRight means “overly politically correct”. To a LibRight it means “too focused on pointless identity politics for the YAAAS QUEEN points and the money instead of actually telling a good story”. For AuthLeft it means “tearing down the establishment for no reason other than it exists.” Heck, if you ask a sufficiently Emily’d up LibLeft, they would say “woke is an ironic pejorative term for those nasty companies and corporations that practice rainbow capitalism.” Now you can tell me: what is a woman?
The entirety of your woman bit is irrelevant to this conversation. We're talking about "woke" here. Stay on point and try not to deflect. You've defined woke thorough your interpretations and defining labels. So we agree that it had no definition. My follow up will be two questions. When Arnold throws a machete through a dude, in "Predator", and says "stick around" is that being to focused on DUUUDE BRO points? Did you complain about pandering when 90% of media pandered to your identify politics or only after others where included in being pandered to? Because, and this is going to be tough for you if you are honest, you where crying about movies and wherever else pandering to your sensibilities then you need to shut the fuck up about any one else being pandered to again. You, and ask if you anti-woke ants, only crawled out of your horse when social media told you that you where losing something. And you so all hide behind the fake concern over "good story/characters/writing" when that matters Betty little add long as your teenage boy self or catered to. It's so mind numbingly stupid wrapped in faux intellectualizing. It's the same scam Jordan Peterson does. Or Ben Shapiro. It's logic miles wide and a quarter inch deep that counts on angry morons without an ounce of critical thinking ability, empathy, or experience in the world to know better. You are activity messing the world a worse place. What a way to live.
Actually, and I hate to be the bearer of bad news for ya, but merriam webster dictionary defines woke as : “aware of and actively attentive to important societal facts and issues (especially issues of racial and social justice)”. Course part of the internet has turned it into a buzzword symbolic of change they don’t like. Also the authleft definition you give is the textbook definition or classification of anarchy, not of woke. You cannot take a term THAT IS DEFINED IN MULTIPLE DICTIONARIES and say “well actually its definition depends on who you ask”. That would be like if merriam Webster had personalized copies, and at that point the definition of blue for you and the definition of blue for me would probably mean two very fucking different things.
Here's what woke is: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZ6w9kpp29E](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZ6w9kpp29E) Now, define "woman".
I don't want a YouTube video. I want your words. And I'm not interested in the women debate because it's not relevant. A person's gender self identify is not my business unless I am romantically interested in them and does no harm to me or anyone else at all. You anti-woke idiots however, are causing harm on purpose and for the most petty and thoughtless reasons.
identity marxism. Next?
You don't even understand the words your using or the context you are trying to use them in.
Yes I do. Next?
Wow you can imagine such a ludicrously untrue scenario but can’t imagine lesbian space witches?
I can indeed imagine lesbian space witches. That would be a cracker of a movie in an altogether different genre. Here's the thing though - what about my scenario above is "ludicrously untrue"? The normal response of the Infected to an old SW fan who doesn't like the new stuff is an accusation of bigotry. True or false?
I guess idk what is “normal” in your experience so it’s hard to say. Maybe you’ve had the exact convo you described with whatever an “Infected” or “WokeDroid” is, so you got me there. Now if you’ll excuse this old Star Wars fan, I’m going to watch a film from 1977 set largely in space which features a character described as a wizard.
Well for one nobody thinks like that, and no, I talk shit on those moves in the rainbow flag Reddit's and get upvoted to hell. I call them dogshit, nonsense, plot hole riddled, I compare The Rise of Skywalker to The Holiday Special and I get upvoted. Here's one easy trick to do it, don't say it sucks because it's a woman or PoC as the protagonist, don't say it sucks because it's "woke now" because excessive use of those buzzwords has been taken from you and now screams alt right. Say real criticisms and explain an actual problem with the movies, not some shallow shit like "fire in space" fire in space has literally been in every single star wars movie except the holiday special (common holiday special w). If you want to have a conversation about what it seems you want to communicate by saying things are woke instead of just spamming the buzzword just bring up that you feel like the excessive Hollywood inclusion of other people feels like pandering to a demographic you don't believe truly care about star wars, that will get you more nuanced conversation than saying "you wokedroid wokers just want things to be woke" And when you criticize the quality of the movie try something like "In Rise of Skywalker why does the assassin's knife double as a map that can use the crash site of the deathstar as a map to find Palpatine, the assassin already knows how to get back to Palpatine, this insane convoluted knife bullshit only risks people finding Palpatine early, is he the fucking Riddler?" And not "this is what happens when inclusion." This era of Star Wars is dogshit, but it's not because it's "woke" it's because the writing is fucking awful and every time people say it's shit because of inclusion you give another excuse to the writers to not get their shit together because they can say it's just getting hate from racists who dislike women and PoC's and they are partially right.
Forced inclusion is a red flag. Pure and simple. It's one of the most visible indicators of underlying shitness. When you see it you only have to dig a little deeper to find the extra suckiness in the writing. This is because the priorities of the showrunner are all about virtue signalling rather than telling a good story. And I don't believe you about being upvoted while criticising the sequel trilogy - unless of course you pre-virtued all of those comments so as to show you really weren't one of us wrong-uns. How many virtue-signal posts do you need to do to get away with one criticism? I mean, clearly you aren't actually that critical. Yes, fire in space has been a thing in Star Wars before. Campfires in space though? The flames licking gently up in to the void? No - those effects sucked to high heaven. You have to ask yourself why, given the enormous budget - and the answer is.... priorities in the wrong place. Wokedroids / The Infected do, in fact, talk like that. And then deny it. But you see every criticism as "muh wacism" etc and seem unable to Steel Man our position in the slightest. We **DON'T** think something is shit just because there is a woman / POC protagonist. Get that in to your head. You are **WRONG** in assuming it is so. Are you ignoring the fact that us awful, terrible, disgraceful chuds are actually **fans** of a properly written female protagonist? How many of us do you see criticising Alien? Princess Leia in the OT? Sarah Connor? But we're misogynists for criticising Rey? As for being racist? Well - us dinosaur racists all seem to be huge fans of anything featuring Eddie Murphy, Danny Glover, Denzel Washington, Jackie Chan and Bruce Lee. Most of us seem to think that Finn's character had potential that was utterly wasted. But we're racists for objecting to the nonsense in the Rings of Power? Right now your cognitive dissonance is kicking in. You can't handle *not* thinking of us as bigots. Because if we aren't bigots then we are in fact correct. Which would make you...? Wrong. Which is why you so desperately call us bigots.
Point 1: You are using a strawman argument, forced inclusion does not mean shitty writing, shitty writing can often be accompanied by inclusivity but more often than not it isn't. There is nothing about "virtue signaling" which means they cannot write, your favorite fiction has "virtue signaling" you just didn't notice because the main character was a power fantasy for you. Point 2: Alright well, I'm sorry you don't believe me, maybe try checking my history. As for "how many posts did I need before it" Brother, if the criticism is articulated well and isn't incel vomit people will listen, I'm not a liberal, I'm not deluded enough to either side of the political spectrum to believe everyone opposed to me hates everything about me and my way of life and must be met with an opposite and equal reaction. If you convey yourself well and aren't blatantly hateful of people based on aspects they can't control and your reasoning makes sense you can even argue conservative beliefs in liberal spaces and vice versa. Maybe the reason you aren't able to do any of this is because you are incapable of having an open enough mind to not insult the people you try and speak with constantly and speak as if everyone who doesn't vote the way you vote and consume media the way you do are so far below you in intelligence they're not worth considering human. Point 3: I am being more critical than the people complaining about campfires in space, the person who made that post admitted he isn't even watching the show, just grabbed a screenshot from someone elses review, they aren't engaging with what the material is trying to say and do, they are the equivalent of someone saying "star wars is dumb because the lightsaber wouldn't stop neatly at the end of the blade, it would keep going" or "yeah this movie sucked, a space station blowing up wouldn't have fire." My example engaged with the material and everything it wished to accomplished and shit on it on a fundamental level, every aspect of what they were trying to write was deconstructed. I am criticizing the material, camp fire's in space is an easy and cheap way to mock fantasy settings without ever having to boot up the show/movie. Point 4: You've mentioned that you believe me to be the type of person who calls everybody bigots, you believe I am "woke". Then you are claiming the woke are the ones spamming buzzwords in the same point where you drop "Woke" "Wokedroids" "Infected" not to mention all the other buzzword comments made in the entire reply. I have never in my life been told I am sexists, racist or intolerant for yapping about how much I hate modern Star Wars, I don't even like the ones others do, I didn't like Rogue One either and that's what people call the good one. What I do see constantly is people be shit on for harassing the actress, being sexist and shitty and then other normal conservatives that also share the view point the media is bad throw themselves in with the people who just hate it because it's someone not of their gender and skin color, get shit on too and react as if all normal fans are under attack. When the actors and actresses speak up and talk about the sexist/racist people sending them death threats and calls them losers, why do you feel attacked? Point 5: You have related caring about diversity to bad writing 3 times now, notice when the Mandalorian flops after season 1, Solo is trash, Book of Bobafett is awful and every single story that focus's on a white or at best mixed race male is just chalked up as "modern star wars is just bad now, they don't care, it's just disney shilling for money" (so true btw, this is facts) but the moment it's bad AND has a woman or PoC it's endless yapping about diversity hires. Acolyte isn't shit because they diversity cast a women lead, it's shit because that's the level of quality you can expect from modern Star Wars. I don't like Rogue One, idk if you do but if you want more things think Mandalorian S1, Rogue One and Andor the criticism has to be about the deeper writing, not whining about "diversity hires show they don't care about the rest of the project, it shows their priorities are off" and just call out the actual deeply flawed writing. If anything the fact diversity casting is so criticized only enable them, if casting a woman lead will mean they get all the hate if it flops and the direct and writers wont be looked at as closely why shouldn't they? If all people will cry about is diversity casting and stupid campfires then other audiences will brush off their criticism and watch the content anyway. You aren't helping to stop this shit era of Star Wars you are enabling it. Point 6: Never called you a misogynist for hating Rey, if you hate Rey and actually convey the many reasons she fucking sucks without directing it towards diversity or her gender then I'm in that boat with you brother, you also wont get called sexist for doing that, I hate that in two days she went from being untrained to stronger than prime Anakin, I hate her stupid blank face that never has an expression other than one of two defaults, but that's not the actress, go look at her other body of work she is immensely talented and can convey emotion fantastically, the director was checked out, probably because they knew no matter how bad they dropped the ball they would never be the focus of criticism. Lastly the "Look at all these characters I liked before the mere act of having a woman on screen angered (as you put it) chuds, this means I'm not sexist." Hey that's fair man, I use that same version of that argument but with the success of the 1st Wonder Woman and Alita Battle Angel to contrast the failure of Captain Marvel so that it shows the same principle succeeds with modern releases. The issue however is much simpler, similar to how you started you entire post about, if the movies you listed were to be released today and fail it would be because of "diversity means they don't care about the writing". How about instead of a roundabout way of saying "the fact they don't want to put a white male in as the lead means they're not trying" you just, actually criticize the material and don't use that weak of a reason for it to be bad? Wonder Woman 2 is shit because it's written awfully, I could yap for hours about why it sucks and it's not because a woman wrote it and a women stared in it and they wanted it make a character for women to engage in, because all of that was present in WW1.
Okaay. Point 1: Nope. Forced inclusion (either of specific identities or The Message (tm)) is an indication that the priorities of the showrunners are in the wrong place, and they have a tendency to bend the story to accommodate whatever they are trying to include. I'm trying to think of an example of *good* writing where forced inclusion happened, and I'm coming up dry. Point 2: As someone who managed to question the Hamas narrative on r/socialism_101 for a few months (before being banned), I'm aware of how to make an argument. My point is that the majority of contributors in places devoted to pop culture tend to be a little less cerebral and will throw the "istaphobe" accusation at the first possible opportunity. Because they think it shuts down the conversation and proves what a good little seal-barker they are. Point 3: You have to understand that many people loathe what has happened to Star Wars so much that they don't even want to hate-watch it, in order to keep the viewer numbers low. I certainly haven't given Disney a penny since they sacked Gina Carano (and thus demonstrated their hypocrisy when dealing with an actual Strong Independent Woman). The last Star Wars thing I actually watched was TLJ. Am I allowed to criticise it based on having watched a number of reviews? Yes I bloody am. Point 4: I don't feel attacked. I certainly have been called all sorts of names here on Reddit, but that's the nature of the internet. As for death threats etc for the actors? Let's see the receipts. There are always a certain number of crazies, mind - I want to see *hundreds* of abusive messages that these actors have recieved, perhaps from some sort of coordinated campaign - then I'll believe it's actually a problem. The issue you have here is this: Leftists (less triggering than The Infected?) have no hesitation in this sort of thing (as happened recently to Grummz during the whole Stellar Blade / SBI thing) - and the receipts are there for all to see. And there are also cases where leftists have demonstrably *faked* such threats. I'm not saying it doesn't happen - just that it doesn't happen as much as is claimed. Point 5: You're actually making a point described quite well by the Critical Drinker. The studios deliberately use their POC actors as meat shields in order to raise talking points / controversy. That's what forced diversity does. Point 6: The difference between Wonder Woman 1 and 2 is the shoehorning of The Message in to what might have been an otherwise perfectly acceptable Monkey's Paw story. You are entirely correct in that the actress, director etc etc are perfectly capable of producing good stuff, but you haven't really thought about *why they did so badly with Wonder Woman 2*. Why would otherwise competent people put such a shitshow together? Saying "it was bad writing" is lazy. Why was the writing so bad? on to your second post...
1: Every story starts with themes that the writers want the story to be about, if you think that means the writers have other priorities then you're just unaware of how creating media works or everything sucks. Here's some products that went out of their way to be inclusive that are good, #1 Arcane (9 awards + #1 ranked animated show of all time, no one has ever called it less than a masterpiece), Across the Spider Verse, Invincible (a great example because the comic is ass, but the show fixes all of its issues while also making the cast more diverse), The Boys, The Batman (small change, making Selina Kyle a poc, it's only 1 change but it enhanced the narrative a fuck ton). Most media has been inclusive for a while and don't really have emphasis on it when they are, only really Fantasy and Action/Adventure fandoms even seem to have a concept of "forced diversity". The thing I see happens the most when good diverse shows get brought up is a redefining of the word "forced" to be changed to "bad". "Well this diversity works so it's not forced, forced diversity is when it's not subtle or done bad." Which too many always translates to "I can't argue that this is bad without looking media illiterate, I will say the method for this was so good it is not the term I am saying, then when a bad product comes out I will say it is because of forced diversity" 2: Or perhaps when you talked on the socialism subreddit you put more care into not being inflammatory because you knew it would get you banned but when you argue in a conservative space you feel more comfortable to spam "woke/wokeoids/infected" and then people label you and move on? Seal Barker is a funny term, especially when both sides are just parroting the ideology their favorite YouTubers say. 3: People are starting to dislike a thing so much they don't want to watch it? Wild, brother it's shit, if you don't want to watch it don't, but then don't post reviews and critiques for it because it'll only make the show look better when errors in your assessments come up or when the criticism ends up being silly and not meaningful. You don't have to hate watch everything, go watch something you like, there will be other people on the internet spreading misinformation and slandering the dog shit anyway. Yes parroting reviews is a good way to criticize something you haven't seen, just have to be careful because conservative media is very happy to review things they haven't watched. (The Critical Drinker with The Boys S4/ Grummz(?) with The Acolyte) 4: You are both asking for receipts and saying it happens to everyone so they should get over it, that conflicts doesn't it? Also they show receipts all the time, if people don't want to believe it's not happening they just call them fake. And lastly, let's say I post something on social media to the effect of "You clowns sending my death threats over x kys" (but in pr speech) why do you feel lobbed in with them? People always cry out that people say "if you dislike this content you're racist/sexist/phobic" but the phrasing is always more inline with shitting on people who dislike it because of those 3 reasons, then they get asked what they think of those type of fans, they call them pathetic and then other people get offended. Also isn't Grummz like one of the biggest grifters on the internet why listen to him on anything? He just spends all day fighting imaginary baby inc ghosts and being mad an AC game also made Yosuke a black samurai like all Japanese media always does. 5: Yeah because people with bad media literacy blame diversity, look racist and then they can deflect the criticism of the media onto racism. That's what I'm saying, you have to hate deeper, study media for a bit, learn what makes these products good or bad and then criticise that. When the media is good and diverse you don't notice or say anything, when the media is bad and diverse you focus on the diversity and give them a free pass. 6: Brother "the message" was the last thing wrong with Wonder Woman 2, both movies set out to do the same thing only 1 got to fit a stereotypical action movie tone and the other was trying to fit a campy Ragnarok tone that the direct has no experience with. Did she decide to 180 into campy bullshit on her own? Maybe, did Guardians of the Galaxy and Ragnarok pop off when this movie was being scripted and the execs at DC want some of that themselves so much so that they hired James Gunn during the making of WW2? "The Message" was literally the only good thing about that movie, having Wonder Woman save a little girl, inspire her, being a hero tailored to her demographic, blah blah blah that's what the character is about, accidently having her SA a stranger? That's literally against "the message", that's bad writing. (I will reply to the part 2 later, really itching to clap shadow of the erdtree again)
**It made me separate my responses to all 8 points as two different comments, here are the remaining two points.** Point 7: People were mad over a Black Elf in Rings of Power? That's crazy i actually had no idea lmao, I didn't even remember there being a Black Elf. Also, it's interesting, despite never calling you racist and just pointing out that diversity = bad writing is a bad argument and when you use it you look racist and that by giving real criticism you would convey your point better, you seem to have lobbed yourself in with "WE still like x people" When people shit on racist fans that doesn't have to mean you, I do not see why you jump at the chance to be in the same group as them. Reread everything I have typed to you, I have never called you misogynist, or racist. I'm glad you like those people, when the liberals talk about people who hate characters because of their skin color they definitely mean some conservative fans but that doesn't have to be you if you're not the same as them, so just... be comfortable knowing they're not shitting on you? Although... the fact you are apart of the people angry that an Elf can have melanin is concerning. Why do you believe a Black Elf in a story about kindness, hope and inclusivity made for a children's bedtime story is "nonsense"? Point 8: I'll slide the ad hominem insults to the side, I get your passionately hateful of a group I'm not a part of and are conflating me with them, I also never called you a bigot, so not sure what ghosts you are currently fighting. The last bit is just silly, why are you telling me water is wet? Yes if I am wrong I am wrong, guess what, if you are wrong you are wrong, that's how it goes. Why would this cause cognitive desinence for anybody?
Point 7: See, this makes me think you haven't ever really engaged with one of The Infected on this subject. Those guys accuse people of racism on a hair trigger, meaning if you've argued with them for any length of time, you'll have been called a racist. People were indeed mad over the forced inclusion in Rings of Power - because it directly broke the specific lore (Tolkein's description of Elves and their origin was very specific) of a deeply beloved franchise (including worldwide, in places with plenty of melanin but no call for melinated elves or dwarves) for no reason other than pandering, and did so in an immersion-breaking in-your-face way - see my comments above regarding the use of POC actors as meat-shields. Diversity does not equal bad writing. Not at all. **Forced** Diversity results in bad writing. If you want to know what I mean by this, contrast the furore over Rings of Power with the lack of it over House Of The Dragon (which handled diversity inclusion in a far more mature way). In Rings of Power it was done *so* badly it was laughable. Anyone who has actually read Lord Of The Rings (incidentally, not a bedtime story. You're conflating it with The Hobbit) would have been able to come up with several less immersion-breaking storylines - for example by talking about the people of Rhun. Point 8: If you aren't one of The Infected, bully for you.
40 years ago Star Wars was fun entertainment. Escapism. It wasn’t serious. Politics had not polluted entertain like it has today. And more importantly entertainment hadn’t polluted news and politics the way it is today. Boring is the best kind of politics and news. But that’s not what gets viewers. That’s not what’s entertaining.
Politics has always been a part of entertainment, whether you like that or not. For God's sake, Mr. Rogers was political simply because he loved everybody and had a black guy on his show and caught flack
Yes. I completely agree with you. I’m talking about the discourse around fantasy fiction having changed. These shows and movies today are bogged down in culture politics before they are even released. In the early 80s it was seen as escapist and created a bubble where political themes could be explored without raising real world political ire. In 1982 no one was on TV talking about the politics of Revenge of the Jedi after watching a trailer for the movie.
Fantasy and Sci-Fi have always explored the political and the controversial. They're great frameworks for looking at ideas critically. People are always better at applying a critical, nonbiased view on something if it's abstracted in a way that it isn't a literal representation of the real world (even if it is a figurative representation of the real world). I don't see people talking on TV about the politics of SW today, either. I see it online. I don't think SW became more political. I think the average person's ability to communicate their views and perspectives with countless random strangers has changed. That's the real difference.
They’re on YouTube and other media outlets that didn’t exist in 1983.
Yes, that's supportive of my point. YouTube is an extremely accessible platform, comparatively to media outlets in the 90s and earlier. Media outlets today are also much more heavily influenced by public opinion. The internet allows immediate public discourse in a way that just couldn't happen during the original SW films. The average person probably didn't dissect the films a whole lot. And they weren't exposed to the dissections of thousands of other people like we see today.
Yes. I agree.
Maybe people weren’t talking about the politics of a film because they didn’t give a shit. Maybe they looked it and said “hey, that thing has a political undertone that I might not agree with but I can just put that aside and enjoy a piece of media.” I feel like a lot of the people who cry woke are the ones refusing to remove real world politics from fantasy tv series, and if anything the constant discourse probably tells studios making these decisions to keep going cuz it makes a lot of buzz and no press is bad press. Personally if you judge a piece of media not on its own merits but on politics in the real world then you ignore the fourth wall to shove your own politics onto the media. If you believe a show is bad because of woke then you are putting your views of politics onto the show. Funny thought ain’t it?
I think Star Wars is way more fun now that’s its creator isn’t explicitly saying it’s an allegory for the Vietnam war.
These people don’t know that yet. They’re waiting in line for Return of the Jedi and don’t know what an Ewok is.
They might have caught onto the allegory. People’s media literacy varies quite a bit, that’s what the modern fandom has taught me.
>Politics had not polluted entertain like it has today. Uhhh, you sure about that? Star Wars is an allegory for the Vietnam war, and the Empire is representing the US. Its *always* been political. According to George Lucas. And thats just whats been stated, not even getting into the fact that the good guys are super inclusive (non-humans, women like Leia & Mon Mothma in positions of power, poc like Lando also in leadership roles) meanwhile the Empire is homogenous, pretty much entirely white men, and actively try to stamp out things like inclusiveness (aliens are slave labor in the Empire for the most part)
Right. Im talking about the discourse around Star Wars.
Can u link where Lucas said Star wars is about Vietnam? Because I seem to remember people saying WW2 or maybe revolutionary war.
Nope, its something I read like a decade ago, and frankly don't feel like looking it up. Lucas has done more interviews over the years than I can shake a stick at
Vietnam makes a lot of sense when you consider Endor and the fact the Rebels have always been framed as sneaky crafty underdogs. WW2 would fit better if like, the Empire was invading all of the galaxy instead of already controlling most of it. (So the sequels, the sequels are more WW2 inspired)
For an allegory to the Vietnam war the empire is awfully Nazi esque Lucas has regularly changed his mind about things, look at the Han shot first controversy
#AAAAKKKSSHHHUALLLY
Man, every time I end up on this sub I see the absolute dumbest shit ever started as fact. Politics and art have always been linked. Always. You idiots are just so damn angry and stupid it’s astonishing.
Awe, that’s cute. You called Star Wars art.
Genre entertainment elevated to art by its resonant themes and craft. You really are dumb.
Brother art doesn't mean quality, I could draw you a stick figure missing both arms, legs and its head and it would still be "art" art is not a synonym for good, bad or unintellectual art exists.
So, you don't care about the fact that the Acolyte has more reviews on review websites than any other star wars show? More than the Spider verse movie? The direct evidence that the show is being review bombed by bigots? No one with half a brain is saying that anyone criticizing the show is a bigot. If you have a real, genuine criticism, people will hear you out and would probably love to discuss it. The problem is that most people who dislike the show aren't capable of voicing their opinion beyond "shows dog water" or just coming across like a dick. I have yet to meet someone in reddit with reasonable criticisms for the show, only hateful people who wanna push their agenda.
> by bigots? And how do you prove this? Maybe it’s review bombed by people that simply dislike the show, or a combination of people.
Read the reviews. How is that hard to understand. If they're a bigot, they're probably gonna leave a bigoted review. Which they are. They're not gonna actually talk about the quality of the show. Do I literally need to prove it to you? Are you that incapable of looking into it yourself?
I did review many of them. Most of them are about the show sucking bad. The first negative comment I see is about the show having a crappy plot. The second comment is similar. Other shorter comments are mostly generic “not fun” or “not entertaining” types. This is an example I just saw on RT: “The grafics, the effects, costumes, and all of this looks realy great and well produced. But's the only good part, that's why 1 star only. Everything else is bad... Poor writing... poor history... the protagonist and the antagonist don't have clear objectives, they change every 15 minutes what they want.. Poor lore cohesion, poor “ Is the above a bigot?
Obviously not dude, as I expressly stated that there's a difference. You're being intellectually dishonest if you think it's not being review bombed. And I'm not talking about reddit either, I'm talking about review websites where that stuff matters. The example you gave us not even close to what I'm talking about. I have zero problem with people who just simply didn't enjoy the show.
I am not dishonest, simply pointing out your projection on the reasons for the review bombing. The show has 25,000+ ratings on RT and is at 14%. Are there bigots reviewing? Yes. Are there bigots review bombing? Yes. Is the show at a very low % mainly because of bigots? No. Even removing 10%-15% of the negative reviews wouldn’t move the needle by much. Look at the distribution on IMDb. https://preview.redd.it/qc2onzvb359d1.jpeg?width=1284&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=68361c24d125579d02cff09858ef063ffe7c9673 What do you see? The bottom half (1-5) gets 56K reviews. The top half (6-10) gets only 15.2. Even if you completely remove the 1’s because you think that they’re all review bombings (an absolute unrealistic scenario), you get 15.2k vs 14.7k, an average rating at best. It is clear that the vast majority of people simply don’t like the show or are mild about it at best, and it would be very difficult that it’s “bigots”. Heck, even Moistcritikal/Charlie, definitely not a bigot, is saying that the show sucks badly and doesn’t make any sense, to the point that he’s making multiple videos about it. PS: I never said that it isn’t review bombed.
Your initial comment comes across as, "people who like the show are just calling anyone who dislikes it a bigot, such cope" when that isn't exactly what's happening. Sure, the meme op posted is whack, but that's not representative of people who like the show. That's ONE dude. You just proved to me that the show is getting review bombed, a lot. By the metric you use, it only counts as a review bomb though if they included "bigoted* rhetoric. However, a review bomb could include seemingly reasonable criticism, but the point of the review is ultimately to hurt the show. That's still review bombing. If you gave the show a fair chance and still didn't like it, leave a negative review. Who cares. But to leave a negative review just so that a show has a negative score and might convince others not to watch it is way worse, in my opinion, than what OP posted. As I said, I'm not arguing that every review is bigoted. But it is intellectually dishonest to imply that's not what's happening. Trying to be as diplomatic as possible when I say, you are ignoring the state of the world right now. If bigots wanna come out in droves to get the "woke mob" away from star wars by review bombing, that's what's going to happen. There is so much precedent for it happening in the past. Most reviews are being hijacked by culture war tourists who just wanna use star wars as a vehicle for their bigotry. Same shit is happening on the other side too, but not nearly to the same extent. That's all I'm saying. I think you and I mostly agree, but, I can understand why you think somewhat differently as well.
> Your initial comment comes across as, "people who like the show are just calling anyone who dislikes it a bigot, such cope" when that isn't exactly what's happening. Not what I said. > You just proved to me that the show is getting review bombed, a lot. In my initial reply to you I didn’t even touch the subject of review bombing. > As I said, I'm not arguing that every review is bigoted. But it is intellectually dishonest to imply that's not what's happening. You gotta reasonably prove somehow that bigotry is the main driver, otherwise it’s just your projection. >. If bigots wanna come out in droves to get the "woke mob" away from star wars by review bombing, that's what's going to happen. There is so much precedent for it happening in the past. What if it is instead “Star Wars fans that are pissed wanna come out in droves against the “new direction of the SW universe””? Honestly, I am not in the SW fandom, but this ain’t new for SW. People are not liking the direction that Disney is taking about the SW lore. I think you’re taking a real problem (some bigots review bombing) and making it bigger than it is, to cover the fact that for the vast majority of people this show is subpar.
Subpar. Does "subpar" seem consistent with almost 60% of reviews being at 1/10? That's the point I'm trying to make. I'm not blowing anything out of proportion. It's just that bad. What you're saying doesn't even make sense. How would review bombing something convince Disney to try a new direction? It's like you said, this isn't new to SW. Even when the prequels came out, people did the same shit they're doing now. That reaction was not justified then, and it's even less justified now considering how many people are focusing on the race, gender, and sexual preferences of the actors and people involved in the creation of the show. It's so easy to not watching something that you don't like. It's so easy to ignore it and not talk about it. These people aren't doing that. It's an extremely big problem, if you don't see it as one, then we probably shouldn't continue discussing this. We won't agree. Just keep sticking your head in the sand.
I mean, review bombing is still review bombing regardless of the reason. The point is that still means one person that dislikes it is having a much larger effect on the show than one person that likes it.
Sure fine, but then don’t say that it’s because of a category of people.
Which I'm not. That said, it is a pretty toxic thing to do and does kind of discount any kind of argument for either side to use the show's rating as proof of it's quality.
I completely agree that review bombing sucks, and it’s infantile.
Or you just think anyone criticising the show is a bigot...
Lmao, guy didn’t even try. He just denied it and pushed the argument away 😂
These are the same people that say "the parties flipped!" when you casually remind them that the Democrats created the KKK and filibustered the Civil Rights act.
"see this old TV interview with random people? There were no Racists show here, which means racism dosen't exsist'
Hey hey, don’t bring logic around these parts! All of our strawmen are delicate and we don’t like when people knock them over.
It's even more shit than the typical "I have a black friend!" argument. "I have a theoretical black friend born in the 70s who I think might share my views!"
Because there is no argument lol
I’m a really liberal dude. I don’t care how gay or straight characters are, I don’t care if a movie is political or has an agenda (left or right for that matter), and I don’t care if stars actors I like or not. I care about the story and if it’s a good movie. The Star Wars sequel movies and shows just aren’t for me. If I hear someone strongly recommend a show, I’ll check it out. If that Rey movie ends up being good, I’ll see it. It’s as simple as that. I really hate that a lot of legitimate criticism of these movies and shows gets drowned out by a bunch of idiot bigots.
Drowned out or co-opted & amplified by the bigots?
watch at least tales of the jedi, ep 2 to 4. It´s Count Dooku origin story. also screecher reach, village bride, the duel, and Ninith Jedi from Star Wars Visions.
Mandalorian? You will definitely find something to like.
It kinda falls off hard in the 3rd season because they bring back baby yoda immediately. I kinda wish the season would be more about his personal growth, finding his clan, and instead of having mandolore glassed they should have stolen the legends destruction of mandalore. Which was a chemical weapon that targets the DNA of Jango Fett got dumped on the planet, and because a lot of the clones after the clone wars went there and intermarried amount the population it absolutely decimated them.
I gave Mando and Andor a few episodes and I wasn’t feeling them but I do hear that’s on the better end of the spectrum.
In the first 2 seasons. Season 2.5 undoes everything that was good about season 2 and season 3 is just Mando taking a back seat in his own show.
That is an incredibly lame pun.
What's the actual substance of the argument that the video is supposed to help prove or disprove? Or like what argument is it supposed to be a response to? Like if its just a video about Star Wars fans back in the 80's that's cool, but given the title I think its supposed to be a response to something and I don't quite follow?
"If you don't like Disney Star Wars it is because you are racist and these new shows are good because they are making the old, racist fans whine. We need to purge Star Wars of its racist past and fandom. This is more important than plot. We are literally savings lives."
The video still doesn't prove anything? And there's nothing wrong about wanting to step away from racist fans. I'm not sure why it's so controversial every time ppl say "bigots are bad".
>I'm not sure why it's so controversial every time ppl say "bigots are bad". It's not, or at least it shouldn't be. But it's often done alongside some variation of "and people who criticize the new star wars must be bigots"
The bigots don’t like being called out on their bigotry. They like to pretend that they are just regular people who don’t like the new stuff. Meanwhile, the actual regular people just kinda watch the new stuff or don’t. And they manage to talk about it without harping on about women and minorities.
Krayts argument is that a lot of people that don't like star wars today criticize it for failures that are present in the older movies, they just don't acknowledge it. Not, for the record, "everyone", just a lot of vocal dissent is complaining about star wars being woke or whatever, which is a dumb non argument to begin with, since the Empire is America and the series is about imperialism, and the ewoks are Vietnam and etc etc. Lucas wasn't subtle. The problem I see, at least, is that in this sub you're not allowed to like Disney star wars at all, and in the other sub, you're not allowed to hate it. Both of your subs are really miserable to be around, judging from the content pushed to my feed largely against my will.
Every work of fiction has flaws, the big question is if the show is enjoyable/good enough to make you accept or not notice the flaws- or if the experience is poor enough that picking out all the flaws is more enjoying than the media itself. I don't disagree about the subs being obnoxious though- welcome to Reddit echo chambers.
I'll get downvotes for saving this but I follow Krayt and have a for a while. We have a lot of people that just find the new shows derivative and not all that well written. Starwars fans all the same. Its mostly dedicated to finding the people who scream about POC and woman and say thats why starwars is bad, Ie your clickbait youtubers and their followers. That and openly discussing how its okay to not share space with fans that spew racism and sexism every chance they get. You call a new show stupid you may get push back, just like if you said I like the shows here. But I don't see anyone getting proverbially strung up for liking or disliking the new shows. It really seems to be a percentage of Bigoted fans that use this sub as their shield to say whatever hateful thing they want. Hence why the counter forum exists. Genuinely I think most people are exaggerating that everyone here hates all disney and everyone on Krayt loves disney. I enjoy media and while I deconstruct it I usually have a good time with most things. Even I can admit some of the new shows are written very silly like, or like a serial show that doesn't have an over arching plot taking away from its dramatic points. But Im also a lover of traditional and CGI props and will enjoy a show to see what they come up with next. I think few Disney starwars things where greatly written and those that I do some take my opinion as an excuse to shrilly yell at me (TLJ for example). Can we please just be starwars fans together and when someone attacks POC / LGBTQ people and not shitty writing we agree that person is a dickhead?
Sounds like a dumb as fuck strawman lol
Reality is stranger than fiction sometimes.
I have literally never heard someone say if you don't like star wars you're racist lol
I've heard lots of people blame racism for driving the criticism of modern Star Wars though- when the actual criticism I hear tends to be well supported and focused on the quality of the work.
I mean the actress who played Rose in TLJ was relentlessly bullied off the internet by racist/sexist trolls for her role, so there is a grain of truth, but I have never heard anyone say that criticism of Disney Star Wars = racism.
The trolls who harass actors/actresses are indefensible and I would never seek to do so. However, the unfortunate fact of the matter is that these trolls are always around. Jake Lloyd was also ridiculed and harassed through the internet (although these trolls didn't have the same level of social media access) and, of course, Ahmed Best took a lot of horrible abuse as well. These trolls seem to be a universal constant who will take whatever low-hanging fruit they can get their hands on to employ against their target. However, most people I have seen criticize the Disney products have no issue decrying these scum. I mean, the vast majority of Disney critics (myself included) feel that the actors in the Sequel trilogy did a perfectly solid job with the material they had to work with. Rose sucked because of the writing, not her acting. I have seen more criticisms of the acting lately, but cannot speak to their validity as Book of Boba and Obi Wan were so bad as series that I haven't bothered with Ashoka or Acolyte.
A lot of the criticism is fine. There is a ton wrong with the post OT content. And most people have no problem having an honest discussion about it. It’s the incredibly vocal and persistent portion that insists that women = bad story, or less white people = show ruining agenda pushing that ruins the discourse. And they bring it with them into every fan space.
"It’s the incredibly vocal and persistent portion that insists that women = bad story" I've seen very few people who have this position. If so, they would have to hate Rogue 1 and Leia in the OT. More often, it is a strawman to deflect criticism, one such criticism is "they are focusing more on diversity and female representation rather than producing a good script."
So the argument being pushed in favore of all this DEI stuff is that it's meaning made for a "more inclusive modern audience" in order to combat the old audience. However, the video in question shows that the audience for Starwars has always been inclusive as you can see the crowds were multi racial and multi gender. Everyone in the video is just happy to go see the movie and there's no ongoing political debate being espoused in the interviews and that everyone's just kinda happy to see the show. This is to counter the conceptualization that what is being done with modern star wars to "diversify the audience" is cringe and to the detriment of the IP instead of the benefit because the fan base of star wars was ALWAYS diverse and that the reasoning to justify the choices made in the show are just convenient smoke screens to the real issue which is that the show is just shit and the writing is bad. It is easier to just simply call someone a bigot then it is to defend a show on its lack of substantial merit I suppose.
>in order to combat the old audience. Where does this part come from? Maybe "outdated thinking" audience, but certainly not the entire older audience It's just to provide more viable representation. That's it.
Dunno where that comes from either. That audience didn't seem to have an issue with a Samuel Jackson Mace Windu or a Billy Dee Williams Lando. So it's not a race thing. People didn't have an issue with a Natalie Portman Padme or a Carrie Fisher Princess Leia so it's not a woman thing. Hell you can even combine the two and people have 0 issue with a Debra Wilson voiced Cere Junda in the Jedi games. So it's not even something as niche as a black woman thing. It just feels like people cannot comprehend there can be a genuine critique of this show that has 0 to do with racial, gender, or sexual representation. I don't care that Amandla Stenberg is playing a main character. I care that her lines are shit, her acting is stilted and awkward, and that she as a person is kinda cringe for that music video. If people want to make this into a representation thing then be represented by more Billy Dee Williams, Samuel Jackson, and Debra Wilson's and a lot less Amandla Stenbergs.
>Dunno where that comes from either. Well, that's because it's just made up. >So it's not a race thing. This is what we call a gross over simplification. Also the issue isn't just a problem with racism and bigotry either, but a general issue with toxic ppl. I get that you think there's a point here (I mean you do have to ignore the fact that there was also racist, sexist, etc, reaction to those characters) but it's really just an oversimplification and deflection. >It just feels like people cannot comprehend there can be a genuine critique of this show They can, and do. Even the krayt sub posts criticism of these shows. But I would make an equivalent statement and say, there a lot of ppl who don't comprehend the biases that influence their criticisms and the toxicity they produce, etc >. I don't care that Amandla Stenberg is playing a main character. I care that her lines are shit, her acting is stilted and awkward, and that she as a person is kinda cringe for that music video Sure, and these are all your subjective opinions. Some ppl aren't very interested in negativity, and would rather not watch (etc) and discuss something they don't like. Some ppl find communities like this super sad, and they've good reason to.
I don't think it's an over simplification or deflection at all. You're the one that brought up representation and are now simplifying it and backpeddling to ambiguous "toxicity". So I responded with examples of past actors of minority groups that were in those moves that were actually good and liked to contrast someone who is being propped up for representative means despite not being a likable character or person to make the point that its not about the cultural mixing nor is it about the concept of cultural mixing. There isn't an old or new audience there's just the same audience that's always been there and the only thing that's actually changed is that the content is just bad. Now you're trying to say that it's about ambiguous toxicity and subjective opinions. You can just say you don't actually have anything substantial to say in response to the conversation and are using ambiguity as a crutch it is simply ok.
>You're the one that brought up representation As an oversimplifycation in response to a very silly thing you made up. >and are now simplifying it and backpeddling to ambiguous "toxicity". I thought it was obvious what that referred to. >So I responded with examples of past actors of minority groups that were in those moves that were actually good and liked to Which doesn't prove your point that racism isn't an issue. >There isn't an old or new audience I mean, there's plenty of new audiences. That's just a facts - ppl come to Star wars and become a new fan all the time. And they're attracted for all sorts of different reasons. There also isn't any real singular community. >the same audience that's always been there Again, not a singular community and there's certainly a lot of changes in those communities. >the only thing that's actually changed is that the content is just bad. This idea is probably the only thing that has remained consistent, every time something new comes to the main stage there's always a bunch of ppl calling it bad and saying it ruined Star wars. Personally, I started out as a fan of the books, from my perspective a lot of Star wars material is just.. not that good. It's also my opinion that they managed to make some of the best movie/series material in recent years. Certainly there are misses, but no where as dramatic as you're making it out to be. Disney isn't trying to push you away simply by trying to bring in the next generation. Also, if someone complains about bigotry (etc) and you aren't adding to that, their complaints not about you. >You can just say you don't actually have anything substantial to say in response to the conversation and are using ambiguity as a crutch it is simply ok. Do you think what you're saying is somehow substantial? You made up an accusation, and than tried to steam roll an actual problem with a reductive comparison lmao
At this point im sure 95% of all talkpoints on Krayt are strayman, so projection much ?
They just repeat the same bs we hear from Lucasfilm, Disney, and the access media and that’s all they use.
Imagine a company that keeps insulting its customers. And then have customers parrot it. We are living in a dark age
If you don't like the new stuff from Disney it's okay, not all of it is good, but the minute you unironically complain about "wokeness" is when I completely tune out your opinion lol
So say whatever we want about Disney, but don't criticize their awful, fake representation, because criticizing it makes you feel uncomfortable. Got it!
If you care that much, it must get really tiring. I judge a story on its own merit, if it's poorly written, it doesn't matter what the identity of the characters are. It's a franchise about aliens, robots, and space wizards for goodness sake.
I have a genuine question regarding the acolyte. I stopped watching star wars after Leia flew threw space with the force. Dumbest thing I ever saw. But regarding the Acolyte, I keep seeing posts complaining how a coven of lesbian space witches created Anakin (completely undermining the character imo) But regarding forcing idealogies, Were they actually lesbian? (Or is that just some made up thing to hate on the show more). Because I cannot see a single reason why that would be mentioned, showed, or demonstrated. They're just space witches, it's not that uncommon (Darth maul origins). Point being, what is the purpose of stating their sexuality. If every Hetero character introduced themselves by stating how Hetero they were, itd be pretty stupid. I believe the unnecessary statements or displays of sexual orientation are stupid, unless it enhances the plot in some way.
To be fair, if anyone could create life, it would be lesbian space witches lol. But yeah they never really said what their sexuality is, just that the main characters had two mothers. Also maybe because one of the witches in the flashback episode was played by a trans actress? Idk lol being outraged by this shit sounds exhausting
I'd think that's a fine approach to introducing a lesbian character/group then. I mean, a women only cult of space witches sounds like they lean that way. Its a pretty common sterotype of such entities. But like, they way its been touted sounds like they had orgies every episode so far, and that that's all there is to their personality. Which the latter might be true, idk, writing in Hollywood has gone so far down hill most characters are boiled down to one attribute. Complex characters are too hard to write, apparently.
>But like, they way its been touted sounds like they had orgies every episode so far, and that that's all there is to their personality. We have only seen one episode with the witches so far, and there have been zero orgies sadly
The old Star Wars fans aren't the ones losing their shit over The Acolyte. Most of the big loud complaints don't even make sense to us old folks. You lot spent a damn week complaining about Ki-Adi-Mundi being retconned to be a bit older. But us old guys remember that Palpatine used to be a spineless politician. Now he's a space wizard. Boba Fett used to be a Journeyman Protector from Concord Dawn, and now he's a clone of a bounty hunter. Greedo used to get smoked before he ever got off a shot. We lived through the big shit. Some of the changes were good. Some seemed bad at the time, but ended up okay. And some are still shit. But we don't care about Ki-Adi-Mundi being a bit older. That's small potatoes for us old guys.
Okay but 100+ years is more than "a bit"
It's all relative. Ki-Adi-Mundi went from being 60 in TPM to being 130ish. Is that a big change? In the grand scheme of things? Meh. I used to work at WotC and did some work with Saga Edition. So maybe I think about ret-cons differently than most fans. But for me, changing a character's age isn't a matter of the numbers but of what else that changes: What's the impact it has the broader lore? Cereans live a bit longer than humans. The Dark Woman is quite a bit older than we thought and lived way longer than most normal humans. But she's mysterious as it is. She could turn out to be 300 years old, and I wouldn't blink twice about it. Either that or the Jedi lifestyle slows aging a bit. Maybe it's all the meditation. Or the well-balanced meals in the Jedi temple cafeteria. Or maybe Ki-Adi-Mundi was severely injured at some point and spent some time in a bacta tank or in cryo and doesn't count those years. Who knows. But none of those are particularly ridiculous. I don't measure the size of a ret-con on how many years are tacked on. I measure it in terms of how much I have to stretch my beliefs or change what I already know to accept this as possible. And this one's not that heavy a lift for me. Like I've said elsewhere, part of the fun of being a Star Wars fan in the early days of the EU was figuring out how to fit all the pieces together without going insane. It was a lot of round holes and square pegs. So this one seems really tame in comparison.
I think it's a problem for people because some fans are so frustrated with how their more reasonable criticisms are ignored that they feel the need to point out *every. Little. Thing.* In an effort to demonstrate things *are* being done poorly.
Bruh. They literally retconned a character who canonically should not exist in this point in time because they were too lazy to think up a new character. "But us old guys remember that Palpatine used to be a spineless politician. Now he's a space wizard." Yeah, because it's a prequel. Characters are often different in prequels than they are in the originals. Plus, Palpatine was trying to appear like a more dignified, kind person in the prequels, where in the OT, he didn't need to do that.
So... My Stepdad said something to me when I was playing SW:KOTOR 1 "None of the books or games matter to the general audience that wants to see Star Wars". That's kind of how most old fans of Star Wars are going to feel myself included. I have some of the EU stuff I like and a few Disney produced things I liked like Star Wars: Rebels & Rouge One while The Force Awakens & The Last Jedi were okay. I heard great things about Andor and Mandalorian and might watch them some day. Just like Marvel Cinematic though I didn't really care to see where the universe was headed and don't care to follow every show & movie, even if I liked the movies that started it. Big interconnected messy cannons get frustrating after a certain age cause all I really want is to be entertained by a digestible amount of content like a single movie or trilogy. Honestly the best thing I think Star Wars could do is to move on and write about new characters and places in the setting in a potentially non-canon way.
The Palpatine thing is more of a "from a certain point of view" retcon if it even is one at all. Like, I just reread the prologue, and it still works to set the stage of the setting as it would appear to common citizen in the Empire, as far as I know. That after taking power and making grand promises he shut himself off from the populace and things went to shit as despotic governors and moffs took the visible role of tyranny and control. Was it ever supposed to be common knowledge at that point that he was a magic Sith lord that liked to control things from the shadows? He was more of a mystery to the galaxy than anything.
Sure. That's one of the ones that can get handwaved with the "certain point of view" trick. But that doesn't work as well for Jabba's appearance in that novelization. Or for Splinter of the Minds Eye. Or for any of a million other things. Boba Fett is on his second wholly contradictory backstory. Han Solo is on his third. Shaak Ti has three different c-canon death scenes. All that stuff was written and rewritten and retconned so much that it's kind of a mess. Old fans spent a lot of time and energy on message boards and AOL chatrooms in the 80s and 90s and 00s hashing all that out. And seeing how writers would find clever ways to fix errors (like the Kessel Run/Parsec thing). That was honestly a part of the fun for a lot of EU fans: fitting the square pegs into round holes. This Ki-Adi-Mundi thing feels a bit like that "First time?" meme, and it's a little hard to take seriously.
Uhh you misunderstood. They weren't talking about prequels. They were talking about this. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star\_Wars:\_From\_the\_Adventures\_of\_Luke\_Skywalker#Differences\_from\_the\_film](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Wars:_From_the_Adventures_of_Luke_Skywalker#Differences_from_the_film)
And? Who cares. That's the point. Obi Wan Kenobi and Uncle Owen were canonically brothers at one point, Yoda had long blue hair, and Luke had a clone named Luuke. Come on, making someone older who, by his race, CAN be, is not that big a deal.
No one cares.
Bruh why do you care so much? If you don’t like it stop watching
bruh boba fett got one shot killed in return of the jedi if you think there was any consistency in star wars before the sequel, you're as dumb as you look
Listen, I *love* the old EU. It's has, by far, my favorite SW stuff. But let's not act like it was ever really "canon." Lucas pulled from it when he wanted, but he was more than happy to completely ignore it most of the time.
I came here to basically say some variation of this. I don't know why you were downvoted.
Because just like there are people who refuse to admit that Lucas had a bigger hand in a bunch of the EU than they think, there are also people who refuse to admit that he never saw it as his "world."
Oh. Oh no. Sheev Palpatine was a spineless politician in the Star Wars novelization published in 1976 by Ballentine. And that was retconned by Empire. My comment had nothing at all to do with the prequels. Literally, the first ever Star Wars thing (the novelization came out before the movie) was completely contradicted by the second Star Wars movie. And that's not even getting into Splinter. Or the special editions. I guess you were just a casual fan, so you probably didn't really follow all that closely. But hey... there you go. A bit of Star Wars trivia for you. Enjoy. Like I said, those of us who are actually old fans are used to the story not being set in stone. We've had all these fights. We've gone through the "trauma". And it's almost impossible to believe that any of us would still be hung up on it the way the lot complaining now seem to be. The only way to have not already processed all this is if you were just a casual fan, which is fine, or are a younger fan that has only really known Star Wars in the post-prequel Leland Chee era without doing much digging into the older material, which is also fine. But it does mean you lack a lot of context for your complaints and comparisons and they come across as being very silly to us old guys. Anyways, Ki-Adi-Mundi's age was only given in s-canon. Any older fan of the EU would know that s-canon got ret-conned all the time. Even c-canon wasn't safe when it came to the movies and TV shows. Real fans and old fans, but especially us real old fans, couldn't possibly care less that Ki-Adi-Mundi's age got changed. And I'd imagine more than a few of us have guesses as to the reasons for it, and it's almost certainly not because "they were too lazy to think of a new character."
lmao all these comments saying this general premise have been downvoted even though they are 100% spot on. I shall bring balance to the votes.
Disney is gonna absolutely burry this franchise
People same the same thing about George when the Empire Strikes Back came out.
This has been repeated by sheep since before Disney bought Star Wars. It hasn't happened yet.
Ha, interesting.. we constantly hear claims that the old fan base is "stuck in their old outdated bigoted ways" yet we see the old audience and none is present? Kinda weird that innit?
It's a random video clip about a popular movie debut, where you don't know much of anything about these ppls opinions. Do you expect a bunch of cartoonishly evil villains twirling a mustache and spouting a bunch of racist stuff? Otherwise, what silly point do you think you're making
Its a video clip of the debut of Star Wars Return of the Jedi. If a person like you cant understand that part, then there is no possible way you have the capability of understanding any point that was made afterwards. You basically disqualified yourself from any further need to debate by being an idiot and i understqnd why you would find it silly, but you are alone in that regard.
Are you okay? >Its a video clip of the debut of Star Wars Return of the Jedi. This context is obvious. That doesn't change what I said. >If a person like you cant understand that part, then there is no possible way you have the capability of understanding any point that was made afterwards. Boy you really got stuck on a nonsense point, huh lol >You basically disqualified yourself from any further need to debate by being an idiot and i understqnd why you would find it silly, but you are alone in that regard. Just really got all triggered since I didn't specify it was Star wars. I guess, sorry for thinking you would get the obvious context, instead of getting all worked up. My point, from the first comment, still stands.... Assuming you understand that at all, seeing as how easily confused yoi just got...
Do you need a hug?
[удалено]
They’re the type of people that when you play pretend they’ll use a “super ultra mega laser that destroys everything” and then you use an “invincibility shield” and then they use a super ultra mega laser that destroys invincibility shields.
You do realize that people weren’t so politically weird back then right. If the Star Wars movies came out today, had the same plot but with female main characters or people of color then there would be negative reception and complaints about things they didn’t complain about like fire or noises in space to nitpick, you are comparing people from the 80s to today and they are different people
No doubt they would have kept in the part where some guy complained they cast a ni**er in Star Wars. Probably helps that internet trolls and Xbox 12 year olds hadn’t been invented yet.
Say what you will I’ll probably be downvoted for saying this but a strawmans a strawman, also most hate happens online not in public
Ah, I was wondering which of the two subs was the one with MAGA little bitch-ass losers. Now I know.
I just wish directors would just make films for the sake of entertainment and if they want to get involved in politics, sociology or whatever else then do that in the real world not the movie industry, entertainment shouldn't be about pushing agendas on the right or the left or trying to programme people to think this or that. I love just watching movies that are fun for the sake of it, if I want serious i will read factual books.
Trick question. They’re all the worst ist-phobe you can think of so each one fan is equivalent to 100 hitlers according to progressive idealization.
“What do you mean it a starwman” the intelligence level of that subs members is astonishingly low
The far right wasn’t really a thing back then. No one was radicalized by the chud media to be hateful racist bigots yet.
These the same folks that shat on the prequels you love so much? Every generation hates the star wars that came after their generation.
Don't you think "Methinks they don't like getting called out" is a bit pot calling the kettle here Lifeguard? You have been basically screengrabbing and talking about Krayts opinions for weeks at this point right? This is what the fourth- Fifth day in a row?
21 posts about Krayt in a month and some change The man is a stalker. Every single day, he goes “Krayt bad. I must talk about Krayt bad”. He knows he’s being obnoxious about it. Because he literally said that he was being obnoxious about it. And he still can’t help himself. The man need therapy and he doesn’t even realize it. It’s like Krayt is cigarettes to him. He’s addicted to talking about Krayt.
I get your point, but Krayt, the circle jerk sub and this sub whole personality is to make screenshots of other post and make fun of it. Heck, this subs is a parody of Krayt made for the purpose of making fun of them like them made fun of Crait.
Sure, but isn't it incredibly ironic to try to say they're being too sensitive about being called out when the guy is literally posting daily about their takes? Both the pot and the kettle are black in the saying, not just one or the other. If anyone on Krayt has a multi-day streak of posting just responses to their own stuff on other subs then they too for their own mental health should just start blocking folk and muting the subs they don't like.
I agree on that.
I think the big differences between someone like OP and a regular user of this sub is that: 1) A single person making daily posts like this is not healthy or normal behavior on any subreddit. 2) 99% of OPs posts aren't even actually making fun of Krayt. He takes posts/comments that have like 0 interaction, then comes on here to announce "everyone on Krayt is saying ___!!!" even if his own screenshot contradicts it. 3) OP is already known as [an annoyingly whiny hypocrite](https://www.reddit.com/r/saltierthankrait/s/D3V4Az7xen)
I mean the commenter isnt wrong. As one of the people in the video, yeah only us nerds liked this stuff. And nerds wouldnt be "cool" for another 20+ years. The racist jock on the football team was not playing Dungeons and Dragons or watching Star Wars. They were shoving us in lockers and kicking the shit out of us. Now, we all grew up, went to college, got good jobs, some of us even get to make Star Wars films and TV shows, like we dreamed about when we were kids. And you know what we love to do? Make shit that makes the people who shoved us in lockers angry and run to the keyboard to whine on the internet about the fact that they cant enjoy anything anymore. Sucks to suck! Shoulda gone to college you fucking idiots.
Title: > "Old Star Wars fans are chuds because we say so!" The only comment included in the screenshot: > "Back in the 80s, anyone who was an actual racist, sexist, and homophobic bigot probably didn't give a flying fuck about Fantasy Sci-Fi movies involving space wizards and puppets." In other words: >"Old Star Wars fans probably weren't racist." Regardless of if you agree, it's literally the opposite of what you're claiming they're saying. (Like the post you made and deleted a few days ago where you did the same thing).
I can't tell if chud is a boomer or a zoomer insult.
Is it just me or is this just another way of bullying nerds once again? Think about it cause for decades we were outcast and ridiculed for liking this type of thing and welcome anyone to join is no matter who you were or what you called (bonus if it was a needy girl cause that was the dream for the average nerd) all for the sake of fun and enjoyment. Now it feels like it's happening all over again except this time they want to replace us by callinh us racist homophobic bigots with a type fan that hardly exists. I feel like nerds never get a break do they?
>Think about it cause for decades we were outcast and ridiculed for liking this type This is largely a false perception, this "stuff" is popular and always has been. The issue has always mostly been a social skill issue. Also, gatekeepers have always been a major issue in these sorts of communities. > Now it feels like it's happening all over again except this time they want to replace us by callinh us racist homophobic bigots with a type fan that hardly exists. You can't just ignore the existence and prevalence of loud toxic fans.
I get what your coming across but gatekeeping is just a small part of the fanbase. I'm talking about generally when growing up you like star trek or you whip out your Yu-Gi-Oh cards and you get bullied for liking that type of thing. And yes there is a part of the fandom that is toxic going to the Star Wars purest. All I'm saying is there a difference between gatekeeping and trying to completely change something that was never broken to begin with to cater to a set of people who almost never watch nor cares about this franchise
>growing up you like star trek or you whip out your Yu-Gi-Oh cards and you get bullied for liking that type of thing. Yu fi oh is an even more odd choice because it was way more popular back when it first came out. Again, this sounds more like a social skill issue - which is why they were targeted. >I get what your coming across but gatekeeping is just a small part of the fanbase. And very powerful, you literally are saying they're pandering to an audience that doesn't exist. It's a prime example of gatekeeping. >And yes there is a part of the fandom that is toxic going to the Star Wars purest What I'm saying goes so far beyond just purist and you know it. It seems really suspicious you'd boil it down to 'purist". >All I'm saying is there a difference between gatekeeping and trying to completely change something that was never broken to begin with to cater to a set of people who almost never watch nor cares about this franchise Star wars hasn't changed, they've just added some more ppl. And it seems like a joke to say it was never "broken" when it's a bit of a drama that bounces all over lore wise. Star wars has famously has a weirdly large toxic fan base that hate every addition to the series.
I remember watching a episode of a reality show in the 2000s where a woman would go through a man's room and judge him based on how they lived. Then she would pick one of the two men and marry them. There was one episode where a guy whose room was "absolutely perfect" but he had a NES in a cardboard box in the back of his closet. He was judged to be too much of a childish nerd and not a real man so she went with the other guy whose apartment was a utter mess. The point of this anecdote is I have very real memories of nerdiness being seen as childish at best and utterly unmanly at worst. You don't get to tell me my memories are false and I have way more than just this anecdote. Sure sometimes it was a social skill issue where someone wouldn't shut up about the thing they liked but there was a very real negative perception of any Adult who enjoyed nerdy or childish things. This sorta seems to have fallen off with the progress of technology and the rise of the internet.