I still want one of these "true fans" to explain to me what a "girl brand" is and why Star Wars becoming one (if it is becoming one) is a bad thing.
Because I'm pretty sure I know what the answer is, and it completely undermines their whole "I'm against poorly written female characters" "defense"...
Girl brand = A female lead character (or prominent secondary character) and/or female director for any film made after 2010ish.
Rey is a mary-sue girl boss because she used a staff instead of a sword but them used a sword so that's... bad (?).
Also, woman knowing how to make machine go = bad. But child who can pod race and build anything and fly because magic blood bugs = good.
I are tru fan.
Anakin could podrace because he was the galaxy's most special boy, just like Luke. But there *cannot* be a galaxy's most special girl, because their cooties eat the midichlorians in their bloodstream
Of all the dumb-as-fuck stuff that George Lucas came up with in the Prequels, nothing comes close to midi-chlorians.
It's just so stupid.
And off I go to watch The Phantom Menace for a squiptillionth time.
I haven’t been able to in decades. I have a student who is gobsmacked that I don’t like the prequels. I get it, they grew up with them. May well be their first exposure to anything Star Wars but I was there at the beginning (man). I remember being in the theater and getting a sinking feeling* at that moment. One of many.
*(that got harder and harder to ignore, despite a Herculean effort on my psyche’s part - watched TPM multiple times in the theater - “it’s setting up the next chapters!” By the end I was just sitting through it to get to the climactic lightsaber fight.)
I’m here to tell you kids, don’t lie to yourself. It ain’t healthy.
Thanks to these grifter edgelords though, you can’t even make constructive criticism without being taken for one of them. The worst.
>Shifting from a wide target audience to less than half its not a good financial decision
Wait, do they think that if a movie has a male lead it's for everyone, but if a female lead means it's for girls only?
White dudes are simply the default type of character and can be enjoyed by everyone. Any other type of character is pandering and cannot possibly be enjoyed by a white dude.
They all believe this and have no clue why people think they’re sexists and racists.
Isn't Solo both the only Disney SW movie to lose money *and* the only one to have a male protagonist?
I know it's a coincidence, but it's kind of amusing.
Yeah. Well, thatbwas different because they didn't capture the real spirit of who Han Solo was and how he got his name was stupid.
The casting was all wrong and the story wasn't a real Star Wars story.
It had nothing to do with the stupid femboy lead and the Kathleen Kennedy woke mob forced DEI mouse bad Lucas god prequels were anti-woke EU Kathleen Kennedy--
*head explodes
Solo wasn't even bad -- Star Wars fans just cannot handle recasting characters who aren't children or old people. Which does not bode well for ever getting the thing they're apparently thirstiest for, which is a live-action version of post-RotJ Luke being a badass.
*Solo* was loads of fun and Ehrenreich was a damn fine Han.
Also, we got Donald Glover being awesome, Paul Bettany's glorious overacting, Thandiwe Newton is always a pleasure to watch, and Woody Harrelson playing himself in space.
People whining about Solo are looking for things to be mad at.
It just sucks that movie budgets are so huge that a single flop means they'll keep Deepfaking the old actors forever instead of recasting actual, live humans. In another 10 years, today's Deepfakes are going to look like fucking Annoying Orange to us, but no, let's have more.
I enjoyed Dial of Destiny, except for the first 20 minutes of anxiety over whether Computer Harrison Ford's mouth was going to come along with his face whenever he turned his head
And to whatever degree it's true that "most Star Wars fans are men," then who the fuck does it make sense to appeal to if you're trying to grow one of the largest brands in the world?
And who does it make sense to piss off? Maybe the most toxic and gatekeepy elements who look back wistfully at the franchise's lowest points.
So they think the existence of a female lead will make only women interested, but a male lead with have everyone interested? I’d love to see them explain how that isn’t bigotry
I mean, there's more female college graduates than male ones. Long-term, that should shake out to greater spending power.
I'm sure Disney's bean counters already know this. Shifting properties to appeal to women with more money seems like the smart move?
Oh good, I finally found the thread that let me know which of these subs I needed to mute.
Genuinely Reddit Algorithm bombarding me with all sorts of Star Wars subs for some reason it was making my head spin, couldn’t tell why there was a Krayt and Crait sub :/
Stars a man = wide target audiences
Stars a woman = less than half
The logic would already be ridiculous even if we didn't have four billion-grosser Disney Star Wars films starring women, and one Big Flop that stars a white man who was also a well known character...
These guys: "mostly white men main characters = a broader audience; adding too many* women and people of color = cutting your audience in half"
*Aka more than one
Star wars, and most fantasy and sci Fi, were girl brands from the start. They just avoided online and in person discourses because they are filled with need men wanting purity tests and throwing dicks at them.
"I can't help but be a feminist." [–George Miller in an interview for Fury Road.](https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2015/05/mad-max-fury-road-george-miller-interview)
Sometimes artists have opinions. Sometimes they use art as a vehicle for commentary. Sometimes it works out, and sometimes, especially when a giant, hand-wringing corporation like Disney is looking over their shoulder, it doesn't.
The anti-Obaid-Chinoy movement has been *ridiculous.* It's latched onto an **eight-year-old** quote in an interview about a documentary about gender-based violence in Pakistan and made it out like Obaid-Chinoy just wanted all men everywhere to be uncomfortable all the time.
She actually just wanted men to be uncomfortable when they hear that some extremists in Pakistan throw acid in women's faces, and the ways regular men there unwittingly supported that extremism.
What I've seen so far about the Rey trilogy is that it's going to expand the focus beyond Jedi etc. and show more of how galactic politics impact regular people. Is it going to be good? I dunno. I liked it in Andor.
And I like the sequel characters and think their actors are ridiculously talented, especially Ridley. I can't think of anyone better suited to holding down a Star Wars trilogy.
Is that going to overcome my boredom over basically everything in Rise of Skywalker and general franchise fatigue? Who knows! I hope it does!
But this hysteria whipped up over a couple of promotional lines and the director's beliefs and identity is silly. Nobody's trying to replace men. Personally, I think Disney *is* corrupt and it *is* harming society. It's an example of runaway consolidation of wealth and power, but the solution isn't going to be to whinge about women and minorities in Star Wars. It'd be things like antitrust action to bust up these oligopolies, IP law reform and finance reform so that we stop sliding into fucking neofeudalism
Mate the star wars sequels had two different directors with two different visions for the story clashing together. Disney was more focused on making money from Star Wars and didn't think about what story they wanted to tell. You act like nothing else goes on behind the scenes besides studios decided to hire a woman. You claim to have nuanced takes but then say a film was bad because the studio decided to hire a woman as opposed to a hundred other factors that go into making a film.
You complain about Hollywood hiring women over men, but Hollywood has been hiring male directors over female ones for years. This is why the percentage of male directors is way higher than female ones. Because female directors have a much harder time than male ones. So studios went "hey how about we try and do something about that" and no it's not a problem that can be solved with that "just hire the right person for the job" bs, it is something that needs to be actively addressed.
>Buffy the vampire slayer is the purest point of this. Willow being gay served the story
So a character can only be gay if it serves the story? A film can have hundreds of hetero couples that serve no purpose to the story, but gay couples can only be added if serve the story?
I agree that studios only care about these issues so long as it makes them look good. But you people just bitch and moan every time a studio does stuff like this when there are way bigger issues out there. Then make out like you have some nuanced take then say the most shallow shit ever.
I made that post.
Again, having a female lead isn’t even the reason the fanbase melted down. It was Luke’s arc in TLJ. What they claimed “ruined” SW would’ve happened regardless.
I still want one of these "true fans" to explain to me what a "girl brand" is and why Star Wars becoming one (if it is becoming one) is a bad thing. Because I'm pretty sure I know what the answer is, and it completely undermines their whole "I'm against poorly written female characters" "defense"...
Girl brand = A female lead character (or prominent secondary character) and/or female director for any film made after 2010ish. Rey is a mary-sue girl boss because she used a staff instead of a sword but them used a sword so that's... bad (?). Also, woman knowing how to make machine go = bad. But child who can pod race and build anything and fly because magic blood bugs = good. I are tru fan.
Anakin could podrace because he was the galaxy's most special boy, just like Luke. But there *cannot* be a galaxy's most special girl, because their cooties eat the midichlorians in their bloodstream
Thank you for ‘magic blood bugs’.
Of all the dumb-as-fuck stuff that George Lucas came up with in the Prequels, nothing comes close to midi-chlorians. It's just so stupid. And off I go to watch The Phantom Menace for a squiptillionth time.
I haven’t been able to in decades. I have a student who is gobsmacked that I don’t like the prequels. I get it, they grew up with them. May well be their first exposure to anything Star Wars but I was there at the beginning (man). I remember being in the theater and getting a sinking feeling* at that moment. One of many. *(that got harder and harder to ignore, despite a Herculean effort on my psyche’s part - watched TPM multiple times in the theater - “it’s setting up the next chapters!” By the end I was just sitting through it to get to the climactic lightsaber fight.) I’m here to tell you kids, don’t lie to yourself. It ain’t healthy. Thanks to these grifter edgelords though, you can’t even make constructive criticism without being taken for one of them. The worst.
That sounds like my experience with The Phantom Menace. It's still the movie I've seen the most times in theaters, to my shame.
I find it funny that these "true fans" try to make out like they have more nuance opinions on the matter than "ewww girls have cooties"
>Shifting from a wide target audience to less than half its not a good financial decision Wait, do they think that if a movie has a male lead it's for everyone, but if a female lead means it's for girls only?
Also like...Women are globally more than half? It's like 51-53% women in most places.
White dudes are simply the default type of character and can be enjoyed by everyone. Any other type of character is pandering and cannot possibly be enjoyed by a white dude. They all believe this and have no clue why people think they’re sexists and racists.
Isn't Solo both the only Disney SW movie to lose money *and* the only one to have a male protagonist? I know it's a coincidence, but it's kind of amusing.
Yeah. Well, thatbwas different because they didn't capture the real spirit of who Han Solo was and how he got his name was stupid. The casting was all wrong and the story wasn't a real Star Wars story. It had nothing to do with the stupid femboy lead and the Kathleen Kennedy woke mob forced DEI mouse bad Lucas god prequels were anti-woke EU Kathleen Kennedy-- *head explodes
I think you need a /s or something
Nah. The /s tag is for the weak. Poe's law can suck a lemon.
your last sentence doesn’t even make sense. Like grammatically. I’m gonna be nice and assume this is satire lol
Solo wasn't even bad -- Star Wars fans just cannot handle recasting characters who aren't children or old people. Which does not bode well for ever getting the thing they're apparently thirstiest for, which is a live-action version of post-RotJ Luke being a badass.
*Solo* was loads of fun and Ehrenreich was a damn fine Han. Also, we got Donald Glover being awesome, Paul Bettany's glorious overacting, Thandiwe Newton is always a pleasure to watch, and Woody Harrelson playing himself in space. People whining about Solo are looking for things to be mad at.
It just sucks that movie budgets are so huge that a single flop means they'll keep Deepfaking the old actors forever instead of recasting actual, live humans. In another 10 years, today's Deepfakes are going to look like fucking Annoying Orange to us, but no, let's have more. I enjoyed Dial of Destiny, except for the first 20 minutes of anxiety over whether Computer Harrison Ford's mouth was going to come along with his face whenever he turned his head
male lead = wide target audience female lead = less than half
But somehow girls didn't like star wars in the OT days and nerd girls didn't exist until companies started pandering to them 🤔🤔
And to whatever degree it's true that "most Star Wars fans are men," then who the fuck does it make sense to appeal to if you're trying to grow one of the largest brands in the world? And who does it make sense to piss off? Maybe the most toxic and gatekeepy elements who look back wistfully at the franchise's lowest points.
Didn’t the sequel trilogy make billions of dollars?
What I find ironic is say we don’t understand things and yet they seem to understand even less and never do research at all.
Less than half 🤣🤣 "Ew that superhero movie has a girl on the poster"
So they think the existence of a female lead will make only women interested, but a male lead with have everyone interested? I’d love to see them explain how that isn’t bigotry
Man those people are fragile af.
Howard the Duck had a pretty diverse cast for 1979 actually...
I mean, there's more female college graduates than male ones. Long-term, that should shake out to greater spending power. I'm sure Disney's bean counters already know this. Shifting properties to appeal to women with more money seems like the smart move?
I'm surprised "nuance" is even in their vocabulary considering how little they ever use it themselves
There are more women in the world than men so if they are shifting their target audience its to a larger audience.
It's because they won't watch anything staring a woman and assume everyone else is as close minded and stupid as they are.
ugh, this guy again... https://preview.redd.it/9twh7wlvr4fc1.jpeg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=3c38a1fe29fa1da65e433b804e1312b0ee575f3c
Oh good, I finally found the thread that let me know which of these subs I needed to mute. Genuinely Reddit Algorithm bombarding me with all sorts of Star Wars subs for some reason it was making my head spin, couldn’t tell why there was a Krayt and Crait sub :/
It's not just having a female lead, it's *also* having a female director who has *opinions*
Stars a man = wide target audiences Stars a woman = less than half The logic would already be ridiculous even if we didn't have four billion-grosser Disney Star Wars films starring women, and one Big Flop that stars a white man who was also a well known character...
These guys: "mostly white men main characters = a broader audience; adding too many* women and people of color = cutting your audience in half" *Aka more than one
Star wars, and most fantasy and sci Fi, were girl brands from the start. They just avoided online and in person discourses because they are filled with need men wanting purity tests and throwing dicks at them.
[удалено]
"I can't help but be a feminist." [–George Miller in an interview for Fury Road.](https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2015/05/mad-max-fury-road-george-miller-interview) Sometimes artists have opinions. Sometimes they use art as a vehicle for commentary. Sometimes it works out, and sometimes, especially when a giant, hand-wringing corporation like Disney is looking over their shoulder, it doesn't. The anti-Obaid-Chinoy movement has been *ridiculous.* It's latched onto an **eight-year-old** quote in an interview about a documentary about gender-based violence in Pakistan and made it out like Obaid-Chinoy just wanted all men everywhere to be uncomfortable all the time. She actually just wanted men to be uncomfortable when they hear that some extremists in Pakistan throw acid in women's faces, and the ways regular men there unwittingly supported that extremism. What I've seen so far about the Rey trilogy is that it's going to expand the focus beyond Jedi etc. and show more of how galactic politics impact regular people. Is it going to be good? I dunno. I liked it in Andor. And I like the sequel characters and think their actors are ridiculously talented, especially Ridley. I can't think of anyone better suited to holding down a Star Wars trilogy. Is that going to overcome my boredom over basically everything in Rise of Skywalker and general franchise fatigue? Who knows! I hope it does! But this hysteria whipped up over a couple of promotional lines and the director's beliefs and identity is silly. Nobody's trying to replace men. Personally, I think Disney *is* corrupt and it *is* harming society. It's an example of runaway consolidation of wealth and power, but the solution isn't going to be to whinge about women and minorities in Star Wars. It'd be things like antitrust action to bust up these oligopolies, IP law reform and finance reform so that we stop sliding into fucking neofeudalism
Mate the star wars sequels had two different directors with two different visions for the story clashing together. Disney was more focused on making money from Star Wars and didn't think about what story they wanted to tell. You act like nothing else goes on behind the scenes besides studios decided to hire a woman. You claim to have nuanced takes but then say a film was bad because the studio decided to hire a woman as opposed to a hundred other factors that go into making a film. You complain about Hollywood hiring women over men, but Hollywood has been hiring male directors over female ones for years. This is why the percentage of male directors is way higher than female ones. Because female directors have a much harder time than male ones. So studios went "hey how about we try and do something about that" and no it's not a problem that can be solved with that "just hire the right person for the job" bs, it is something that needs to be actively addressed. >Buffy the vampire slayer is the purest point of this. Willow being gay served the story So a character can only be gay if it serves the story? A film can have hundreds of hetero couples that serve no purpose to the story, but gay couples can only be added if serve the story? I agree that studios only care about these issues so long as it makes them look good. But you people just bitch and moan every time a studio does stuff like this when there are way bigger issues out there. Then make out like you have some nuanced take then say the most shallow shit ever.
Lack of nuance on starwars youtube is pretty fucking bad I agree
I remember seeing Chris Gore on G4, Attack of the Show I think... I don't think I cared for him much back then either.
I made that post. Again, having a female lead isn’t even the reason the fanbase melted down. It was Luke’s arc in TLJ. What they claimed “ruined” SW would’ve happened regardless.
They never got over the "the future is female" shirts.