Solo: A Star Wars Story

Collector Freaks Forum

Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Re: Solo: A Star Wars Story (May 25th, 2018)

Actually I think it's poking fun at hero stereotypes in general, in particular Poe's line: "Permission to jump in an X-wing and blow stuff up?"

Leia: "Granted."

One thing that *does* bother me though: If Snoke isn't a Sith, does that mean Kylo isn't either? And do you need Sith to have balance, or will any darksider do?
 
Re: Solo: A Star Wars Story (May 25th, 2018)

So is Boba Fett destined to be the villain in this or has there been a casting for a different character?

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

Holdo: "He's a real troublemaker."

Leia: "Yes he is."

Holdo: "I like him."

Leia. "Me too."

So apparently TLJ's "#metoo" movement is pro-flyboy in the end. So much for Holdo being KK's "voice" against all of those horrible males.

Too much money to be made from capitalizing on the "I remember that!" crowd not to have Fett as the primary villain, I'm afraid.


I think the biggest issue is that, despite what defenders and detractors might both prefer, it doesn't seem like the writers had a clear direction or philosophy underlining this film at all. The best example is Kylo's wacky and indecipherable character arc. Yes, there were feminist undertones. At times. There was also a clear anti-capitalist message. But they seem somewhat isolated and not necessarily connected to other elements of the film. In the case of Poe, I think the idea was more to have this character mature and develop than to try and force-feed a political agenda down people's throats. But hey, that's just my view. Anyone can find support or opposition to whatever they want if they look hard enough. But the clearer picture, to me, is of a film that lacked a genuine identity and narrative logic in many respects. On the one hand, that benefits a film in that fans can find whatever they liked and latch onto it as connected to a larger whole. On the other hand, we can have those who dislike it finding strands that connect every piece to some larger, terrible agenda. I say the truth, as with many things, is somewhere in-between. Personally, I choose not to focus too much on the politicized stuff and enjoy the parts of the film that did work for what they were. But to each her (!) own.


You wouldn't have a very effective military if you allow for desertion and let subordinates question authority whenever they chose to. Dehumanization is another important part of military effectiveness. And in that sense, maybe Leia and Dern were right to ignore and emasculate Poe!

In terms of Star Wars, again, I think you have different approaches and philosophies (such as they are), with the original films showing the rebels to be a loose coalition of those opposing the Empire, without much structure and organization. That would be dangerous in the real world, as you wouldn't want someone who has access to training locations, strategies, etc., just flying off and doing their own thing whenever they chose to. But it was a more optimistic view of things, where Leia and the leadership apparently trusted Luke, Han, etc., didn't fear that they may give away info. from being tortured, and weren't paranoid.

The new films have a more realistic view of how rebels get along and survive. If a member of ISIS, or the IRA in the '70s, or Che Guevara's revolutionaries wanted to just get up and leave, they couldn't really do that. There is a security consideration, there is also consideration for the precedent it would set, and the impact it would have on group cohesion.

You're equivocating. You don't think the mutiny was a feminist critique of toxic masculinity? Even feminists disagree with you. There are countless articles on this. Here's a couple:

https://www.denofgeek.com/us/movies/star-wars/269657/toxic-masculinity-is-the-true-villain-of-star-wars-the-last-jedi

https://uk.movies.yahoo.com/star-wars-last-jedi-unexpected-examination-toxic-masculinity-spoilers-115626888.html

Just because self-identified feminists and, er, anti-feminists (?) think X doesn't mean any of them are right. White supremacists and leftists might both agree that the protest of Confederate monuments are led by racists and antisemites. But other reasonable people may say that's a someone slanted and myopic perspective.

There are three issues here. The first, is whether or not adherence to authority was being justified via egalitarianism. Was there a subtext that Poe undermined Holdo's authority because he demands machismo from those he obeys? I think so, and it sounds like you agree.

The second issue, is whether or not people should obey authority. For instance, when at war is there a practical reason that might lead one to obey authority out of necessity? Sure. I'm not an idealist; you can do as you please. However, to suggest that one has a moral obligation, or that justice demands that we obey authority is a false statement. There's no obligation to do anything, ever.

The third issue, is whether or not you could have a successful organized and militarized struggle without hierarchy. I don't know. The only way to find out would be to engage in social experimentation, attempting to falsify whether or not people need authority to organize themselves in combat, or elsewhere. I'm all for experimentation.

That's not the point. You can't analyze the subtext of fiction without being familiar with the underlying normative beliefs. If you know nothing about socialism, you're not going to watch a socialist movie and say, "Aha! That there is a movie advocating socialist beliefs." You need familiarity to see it. Feminists who are obviously familiar with their own feminism, see it within the subtext of the film. Then they write articles, explaining to you why they see it. Then I post links to those articles, not so you'll be persuaded because they're experts, but so you'll actually read the articles and see for yourself why it's a feminist movie! :lol

wait.... why are we talking about the last jedi in this thread?
is this a the last jedi safe space or something?
 
Re: Solo: A Star Wars Story (May 25th, 2018)

NO. But a lot of foolish people apparently think so based on all those silly links that you think somehow prove you right. :lol

I will second that.....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Re: Solo: A Star Wars Story (May 25th, 2018)

I'm liking Luke's Lord Jim style journey. That moment of weakness that was the catalyst for his descent; his re-emergence and final sacrifice.

Yes, while I actually quite enjoy the Rey/Kylo/Snoke moments the film lives and dies on Luke's shoulders IMO (I knew that before I even saw the flick) and for me the Luke parts were awesome so it's a win.

My two main criticisms are the kids on Canto Bight and the Resistance space chase narrative leaning too heavily on contrivances.

With regard to the kids I actually don't mind them in the last scene. Playing with the Luke figure then the one kid going outside with the broom. That's all fine to me. The part that makes me roll my eyes is earlier in the film when Finn is watching the "abusive" animal handlers through the binoculars and he knocks the one kid down. For some reason all three kids in *that* scene just appear so corny and "Disney" cute. Like when Broom Boy got pushed down I could almost hear Johnson saying, "not quite so mad, try it again more pouty and adorable as you furrow your brow." Like something you'd see in an Annie movie or something.

And then with regard to the contrivances, I've already mentioned the insane convenience of Finn and Rose being jailed with yet another master code breaker (really?) but then you've also got the entire premise of the Resistance fleet chase hinging on the completely illogical notion that "if we pull out of range of the Star Destroyers then the fighters will pull back." Huh? Why? In the OT the Empire was constantly aware that every ship bigger than 10 feet long was bristling with escape pods and was constantly monitoring their use (tracking the Blockade Runner pods in ANH, reviewing the Falcon's ship logs, etc.) But in TLJ the Resistance is able to sneak an entire flotilla of full-sized transports without the FO picking up on it? I just don't see a reason why the FO wouldn't have several squads of TIE's flying parallel to the Resistance ships at all times. Or hell even bombing the crap out of them with their own TIE Bombers.

Normally it's pretty easy for me to handwave away stuff like that but until someone comes up with a plausible reason that the FO would withhold their fighters/bombers from the pursuit then I just have to accept it as an unexplained plot hole. Luckily the drama and excitement is at such a level from beginning to end that when I'm watching the film I don't really care.
 
Re: Solo: A Star Wars Story (May 25th, 2018)

Y But in TLJ the Resistance is able to sneak an entire flotilla of full-sized transports without the FO picking up on it?

The transports were cloaked. When DJ made the FO aware of this, they ran a de-cloaking scan and were able to see (and fire upon) the transports.
Now, I realize that if fighters were in the vicinity of the cruiser, this plan may not have worked, but it is mentioned by Hux to Kylo that the fighters needed to pull back because the Destroyers couldn't "support" them at that range.
 
Re: Solo: A Star Wars Story (May 25th, 2018)

The second issue, is whether or not people should obey authority. For instance, when at war is there a practical reason that might lead one to obey authority out of necessity? Sure. I'm not an idealist; you can do as you please. However, to suggest that one has a moral obligation, or that justice demands that we obey authority is a false statement. There's no obligation to do anything, ever.

The third issue, is whether or not you could have a successful organized and militarized struggle without hierarchy. I don't know. The only way to find out would be to engage in social experimentation, attempting to falsify whether or not people need authority to organize themselves in combat, or elsewhere. I'm all for experimentation.
Military regimentation is based off of a pretty good understanding of human behavior. If you want to build up group cohesion, and if you want to ensure discipline is followed, then conventional military training just about anywhere gives you a good handbook. Morality goes a bit out the window at that point (which creates a contradiction when you also say that "just following orders" isn't a valid excuse for immoral behavior in war, as they did post-WWII, but. . .). You have to hope that the people high up the chain are ethical and have good judgment. Unfortunately, that's not always a correct assumption.

I am all for experimentation, but human nature is to be extremely risk averse when it comes to survival. So I don't know if we'll see a willingness for the U.S. or Israel or North Korea or whomever to say, let's see what happens when we let grunts walk off the unit to find themselves, run away from battles, etc. But good sense tells me that if you don't train people to have discipline, and to act in the interests of the group, then your fighting force is going to have problems.

That's not the point. You can't analyze the subtext of fiction without being familiar with the underlying normative beliefs. If you know nothing about socialism, you're not going to watch a socialist movie and say, "Aha! That there is a movie advocating socialist beliefs." You need familiarity to see it. Feminists who are obviously familiar with their own feminism, see it within the subtext of the film. Then they write articles, explaining to you why they see it. Then I post links to those articles, not so you'll be persuaded because they're experts, but so you'll actually read the articles and see for yourself why it's a feminist movie! :lol
That's fine, but you can find fascist thought leaders also defending and explaining the pro-Confederate movements I mentioned earlier, using an ideological/psuedo-philosophical argument to doing so. Interpretation of subtext is subjective. It's about the motivations of the author. And like Kuat, I don't see uniform sub-text at play. Everyone familiar with Marx, Durkheim, Weber, etc. aren't going to agree about when, where, and how their philosophical or ideological ideas are being applied. I'm sure it would not be very hard to find feminists to disagree strongly about how and to what extent Last Jedi promotes their cause.
 
Re: Solo: A Star Wars Story (May 25th, 2018)

Military regimentation is based off of a pretty good understanding of human behavior. If you want to build up group cohesion, and if you want to ensure discipline is followed, then conventional military training just about anywhere gives you a good handbook. Morality goes a bit out the window at that point (which creates a contradiction when you also say that "just following orders" isn't a valid excuse for immoral behavior in war, as they did post-WWII, but. . .). You have to hope that the people high up the chain are ethical and have good judgment. Unfortunately, that's not always a correct assumption.

I am all for experimentation, but human nature is to be extremely risk averse when it comes to survival.

If you're a scientist, then you know that falsifiable evidence is necessary in making claims about the world. You learn through experimentation in attempting to falsify your own beliefs. What experiments have been performed, to falsify whether or not military regimentation is necessary for combat? Any? We have anecdotal information that is far from controlled and peer reviewed.

As for human nature, I'd argue that there isn't one. We differ from one another, are capable of adapting and deviating, while desire is subjective. For instance, some people are risk-averse, while other people are not. You can condition people to be risk averse, or embrace risk. Cognition is plastic.

As for your moral argument, morality doesn't exist. Morality is an error theory.

So I don't know if we'll see a willingness for the U.S. or Israel or North Korea or whomever to say, let's see what happens when we let grunts walk off the unit to find themselves, run away from battles, etc. But good sense tells me that if you don't train people to have discipline, and to act in the interests of the group, then your fighting force is going to have problems.

You're presuming that people can't behave cohesively toward an endeavor without authority or hierarchy. Is that true? How do you know? Appealing to "common sense" isn't how knowledge works. You have to attempt to disprove your own theory by trying to falsify it. Meanwhile, we live in a society where contracts have succeeded in organizing people, without hierarchy. Modern corporate structures are actually doing away with hierarchy, preferring interdependent models because (as it turns out) within corporate environments, interdependence is more efficient. Maybe the same could apply to combat? We'd need to experiment to find out.

That's fine, but you can find fascist thought leaders also defending and explaining the pro-Confederate movements I mentioned earlier, using an ideological/psuedo-philosophical argument to doing so. Interpretation of subtext is subjective. It's about the motivations of the author. And like Kuat, I don't see uniform sub-text at play. Everyone familiar with Marx, Durkheim, Weber, etc. aren't going to agree about when, where, and how their philosophical or ideological ideas are being applied. I'm sure it would not be very hard to find feminists to disagree strongly about how and to what extent Last Jedi promotes their cause.

That's a very Post Modern take on communication. Are people capable of communicating ideas, or do we project meaning onto the speech of others? Germbely geep niblerty flort?
 
Re: Solo: A Star Wars Story (May 25th, 2018)

Just because self-identified feminists and, er, anti-feminists (?) think X doesn't mean any of them are right. White supremacists and leftists might both agree that the protest of Confederate monuments are led by racists and antisemites. But other reasonable people may say that's a someone slanted and myopic perspective.

NO. But a lot of foolish people apparently think so based on all those silly links that you think somehow prove you right. :lol

yeah, someone should tell Kennedy what a foolish braindead ******* she has been :lol I dont think shes aware of this Khev. someone should inform her that her movies dont have the propaganda that you say they donthave , it would be really helpful if someone told her what a moron she has been about it




what a loon. what a nutso... if she ONLY KNEW these movies dont have an agenda :cuckoo:
 
Re: Solo: A Star Wars Story (May 25th, 2018)

yeah, someone should tell Kennedy what a foolish braindead ******* she has been :lol I dont think shes aware of this Khev. someone should inform her that her movies dont have the propaganda that you say they donthave , it would be really helpful if someone told her what a moron she has been about it




what a loon. what a nutso... if she ONLY KNEW these movies dont have an agenda :cuckoo:


This is what Post Modernism does to people. They feel comfortable projecting their interpretation onto the text, because they completely disregard the fact that you can interpret the intentions of the author or speaker. All of this nonsense stems from the idealism of Post Modernists, who've convinced themselves that you can't avoid bias, because we inherently bring values to the text. That's not true; you can abandon value, and see the text for what it is.
 
Re: Solo: A Star Wars Story (May 25th, 2018)

If a fast moving virus were to kill every female on the planet in 36 hours crows would either A, be really bored with nothing else to talk about or B, he would be really busy complaining about the huge increase in gay men and I mean huge lol
 
Re: Solo: A Star Wars Story (May 25th, 2018)



Poor Gwendoline Christie.... She thinks Phasma was a strong feminine role!! With her shiny bling armor, but it was normal looking? :lol And I guess she doesn't consider Carrie Fischer as princess Leia being a strong feminine role back in 1977?? :slap
 
Re: Solo: A Star Wars Story (May 25th, 2018)

If a fast moving virus were to kill every female on the planet in 36 hours crows would either A, be really bored with nothing to talk about or B, he would be really busy complaining about the huge increase in gay men and I mean huge lol

but jye, my boy, you forget....
option C

pefect_robot_woman.jpg
 
Re: Solo: A Star Wars Story (May 25th, 2018)

True you could always complain about the Kennedy A.I. bot that some SJW scientist would build at least you would feel right back at home in the new world. lol
 
Re: Solo: A Star Wars Story (May 25th, 2018)

I think assumptions should be challenged. But in the social world, experimentation isn't always feasible, because there are potentially very dire consequences. There is a lot of work in social psychology and industrial/organizational psychology that can speak to how people behave when there is more or less structure and individualization. The problem, again, is that the consequences of even minor deviations from expected norms matters in a different way in life or death situations than elsewhere. You can fiddle around in a lab all day, but you aren't going to take chances when it matters. If you ran a country and wanted to have a loosey-goosey military operation, then we could see how well you would fare against others. Just like we could see how someone would operate if they didn't follow the prescriptions of mutually assured destruction if they had nukes. But human nature being what it is, we've never had a nuclear state attack another. And we don't need to run an experiment to figure out why. In security situations, when the stakes are highest, people behave in a certain manner.

As for the feminism/post-modernism thing, I never argued that there wasn't an element of feminism to the nu Star Wars films. Of course, making all these new protagonists women isn't an accident. My argument is that people are blowing things way out of proportion here with Last Jedi.
Selectively picking out soundbites from producers and actors, from videos apparently made years back, doesn't do much to help make a compelling argument to the contrary. But people see what they want to see.
 
Re: Solo: A Star Wars Story (May 25th, 2018)

True you could always complain about the Kennedy A.I. bot that some SJW scientist would build at least you would feel right back at home in the new world. lol

nope. you think I like this? you think I like the way SJW are ruining Cinema?

I just wanna watch cool movies with hot babes will enjoying my dinner sir

the-robot-wife_1.jpg
 
Re: Solo: A Star Wars Story (May 25th, 2018)

I think assumptions should be challenged. But in the social world, experimentation isn't always feasible, because there are potentially very dire consequences. There is a lot of work in social psychology and industrial/organizational psychology that can speak to how people behave when there is more or less structure and individualization. The problem, again, is that the consequences of even minor deviations from expected norms matters in a different way in life or death situations than elsewhere. You can fiddle around in a lab all day, but you aren't going to take chances when it matters. If you ran a country and wanted to have a loosey-goosey military operation, then we could see how well you would fare against others. Just like we could see how someone would operate if they didn't follow the prescriptions of mutually assured destruction if they had nukes. But human nature being what it is, we've never had a nuclear state attack another. And we don't need to run an experiment to figure out why. In security situations, when the stakes are highest, people behave in a certain manner.

As for the feminism/post-modernism thing, I never argued that there wasn't an element of feminism to the nu Star Wars films. Of course, making all these new protagonists women isn't an accident. My argument is that people are blowing things way out of proportion here with Last Jedi.
Selectively picking out soundbites from producers and actors, from videos apparently made years back, doesn't do much to help make a compelling argument to the contrary. But people see what they want to see.

okay, all right

WHO was the first people to bring up politics for this movie? who were the ones blaming the ALT RIGHT for the bad rotten tomatoes score???

it wasn't after acouple of days of bad press that these people started blaming the alt right and pathetically blaming RUSSIAN Bots (of all things) for the bad reviews

never forget that. while a lot of us were crap posting on the internet about how silly the Leia superman scene and the Luke ***** milk scene were, these people went on overdrive with the political stuff to try to defend the movie from bad reviews.

Lets not forget who threw the first stone shall we not.


I mean, how pathetic can someone get? blaming Russian Hackers and bots? are they mentally ill? the shilling for this movie was out of this world bro... OUT of THIS WORLD....
any negative tweet about the last jedi was attacked and view as a sexist alt right tweet... come on now
 
Re: Solo: A Star Wars Story (May 25th, 2018)

crows how much of a % of your day does obsessing over the feminist movement and SJW occupy, 70, 80, 90, 95%?

Is it an actual career?

It’s got to be as high as me driving DiFabio crazy and that’s high lol.
 
Re: Solo: A Star Wars Story (May 25th, 2018)

I think assumptions should be challenged. But in the social world, experimentation isn't always feasible, because there are potentially very dire consequences. There is a lot of work in social psychology and industrial/organizational psychology that can speak to how people behave when there is more or less structure and individualization. The problem, again, is that the consequences of even minor deviations from expected norms matters in a different way in life or death situations than elsewhere. You can fiddle around in a lab all day, but you aren't going to take chances when it matters. If you ran a country and wanted to have a loosey-goosey military operation, then we could see how well you would fare against others. Just like we could see how someone would operate if they didn't follow the prescriptions of mutually assured destruction if they had nukes. But human nature being what it is, we've never had a nuclear state attack another. And we don't need to run an experiment to figure out why. In security situations, when the stakes are highest, people behave in a certain manner.

Suppose you're right, that people behave in a certain way, when confronting certain circumstances. If that's true, why do we need authority when people are already on auto-pilot? Either the absence of authority leads to loosey-goosey deviation, or it doesn't. If people were hard-wired to behave in a particular way, authority would either be futile or unnecessary.

Meanwhile, I'm specifically arguing that interdependence can organize people without hierarchy in a way that is less loosey-goosey, in the corporate world. Interdependence has been shown to increase group cohesion, as opposed to diminishing it. When people have no one overseeing them, they (presuming you hire the right people, with education) take greater personal responsibility for how their actions affect the group. It results in less deviation, so long as you hire people using a meritocratic process. As you mention, within the context of battle the negative consequence of group dysfunction would be death. That's one hell of a deterrent in preventing deviation. No one tells me to refrain from shoving a fork into the wall socket.

People assume that anarchy and chaos are the same thing. That's not true. The group can mutually enforce laws, rules and standard practices without hierarchy.
 
Re: Solo: A Star Wars Story (May 25th, 2018)

yeah, someone should tell Kennedy what a foolish braindead ******* she has been :lol I dont think shes aware of this Khev. someone should inform her that her movies dont have the propaganda that you say they donthave , it would be really helpful if someone told her what a moron she has been about it




what a loon. what a nutso... if she ONLY KNEW these movies dont have an agenda :cuckoo:


Damn son... crows unleashed....

ConcreteGlossyDiamondbackrattlesnake-size_restricted.gif


:rotfl :rotfl :rotfl

If you're opposed to discussion, why are you on this forum? Are you here to make internet friends? :rotfl Go outside.

Ah yes the forum.. a gathering place the Romans created to tell each other to keep their opinions to themselves, lest they disagree
 
Back
Top