Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:
Careful, you'll get sand in your nose if you bury your head that deep.

So, straw man followed by condescending denial and refusal to acknowledge that you misrepresented your own link. You're certainly off to a good start here. Did you think I wouldn't actually read it and would just trust you that JJ Abrams said what you claimed?

It was as I said. And you're working on getting sand in your mouth, now.

Seriously, it's RIGHT THERE. You sure that you have an opinion, because it seems like your opinion has got you. Might have to admit you're wrong here.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

That does not match what you claimed, at all.

Careful, you'll get sand in your nose if you bury your head that deep.

Yeah it does support his claim, quite convincingly in fact.

Read the quote.

What AD claims people say: And if you see problems with it, you're stupid. Or a bigot.

What JJ Abrams said: If you are someone who feels threatened by women and needs to lash out against them, you can probably find an enemy in ‘Star Wars.’

There is a massive difference between "if you see problems with it you're a bigot" and "if you're a bigot you will see problems". Nowhere in there does it say that people who objected to the movie based on pacing issues or not being fans of scifi in general or whatever are stupid or bigots. I know the right-wing outrage machine makes misquoting people a core part of their method, but please be better than this.

 Peregrine wrote:

There is a massive difference between "if you see problems with it you're a bigot" and "if you're a bigot you will see problems". Nowhere in there does it say that people who objected to the movie based on pacing issues or not being fans of scifi in general or whatever are stupid or bigots. I know the right-wing outrage machine makes misquoting people a core part of their method, but please be better than this.

Yeah, context isn't a thing. If people hated Hancock, and the creators suddenly shifted the conversation to "if you hate black people..."

I mean, if you hate Jews and want to be anti-semetic you might have a problem with my post. Just saying.

Context.

Insinuating critics are "lashing out at women" because they didn't like the movie kind of nails my point on the head.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:
Yeah, context isn't a thing.

Yes, context matters. And what is the context of the quote? An interviewer asking him about his opinion on sexist comments about the movie. Sexist comments like this:

“I’m frustrated that feminism and diversity have made their way into this film. This has ruined Star Wars for me as well as my kids. Keep liberalism out of it and stop ruining once good things.”

There is no sudden shift in the conversation, the interviewer directly asked him about it to open the article. Please stop misrepresenting the material you are quoting.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:
Yeah, context isn't a thing.

Yes, context matters. And what is the context of the quote? An interviewer asking him about his opinion on sexist comments about the movie. Sexist comments like this:

“I’m frustrated that feminism and diversity have made their way into this film. This has ruined Star Wars for me as well as my kids. Keep liberalism out of it and stop ruining once good things.”

There is no sudden shift in the conversation, the interviewer directly asked him about it to open the article. Please stop misrepresenting the material you are quoting.

Yeah, seeing as how you treat 'right wing' like an insult, not sure what you mean. Where is this quote? Who said this?

I want the politics out, too. I want diverse and solid characters, not purse puppies. Does that count as bigoted?


I'm sure 54% of the critics were woman-hating conservatives.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:
Yeah, seeing as how you treat 'right wing' like an insult, not sure what you mean. Where is this quote? Who said this?

Did you even read the article you posted? It's right there in the article.

I'm sure 54% of the critics were woman-hating conservatives.

Stop posting straw man arguments.

 Peregrine wrote:

Stop posting straw man arguments.

Give me something to dignify with an actual argument. All I see is you denying the truth.

Also, who was this person? Seems like a troll. It's all.lay a caricature of an argument by someone wwho doesn't understand it.

Like a lot of sock arguments.

Nah, it was the Nazis.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

Stop posting straw man arguments.

Give me something to dignify with an actual argument. All I see is you denying the truth.

Also, who was this person? Seems like a troll. It's all.lay a caricature of an argument by someone wwho doesn't understand it.

Like a lot of sock arguments.

Nah, it was the Nazis.

You realise you're arguing against the very article you posted to support your initial argument?

...

We have truly reached the point of absurdity. You are demanding sources for a quote from an article you posted, apparently without reading it first. You are posting obvious straw man arguments that nobody here is defending ("I'm sure 54% of the critics were woman-hating conservatives.") and complaining about "denying the truth" when I call you on it. At this point I'm honestly lost on how to even respond to you, as it feels like having an argument with a random text generator.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:


You realise you're arguing against the very article you posted to support your initial argument?

The one I pointed out as blatantly biased?

 Peregrine wrote:
...

We have truly reached the point of absurdity.

My first thought when you started responding, TBH.

Point is, if Star Wars didn't have a majority negative review and people posted this, we'd laugh it off. But because most people did not like the movie- gotta shift the narrative.

Up to your shoulders already?

Evasion and excuses. You posted a straw man argument, misrepresented the article you posted as "proof" that your straw man is actually an argument people are making, and started attacking your own article with demands for sources. And now, rather than provide any evidence that the supposed "and if you see problems with it, you're stupid. Or a bigot" argument is one that any meaningful number of people are making you're just going to double down on the same old right-wing outrage machine nonsense. Straw man arguments, insulting everyone, and insisting that the straw man is obvious truth despite the utter lack of evidence.

 Peregrine wrote:
Or a bigot" argument is one that any meaningful number of people are making you're just going to double down on the same old right-wing outrage machine nonsense. Straw man arguments, insulting everyone, and insisting that the straw man is obvious truth despite the utter lack of evidence.

"Weepbwicans! In my ceweal! Oooh makes me so mad!"

So is "right wing" a dirty word in your mind? As you can see, there's a reason most people don't want this kind of toxic influence in entertainment.

If you're going to lash out at Jews, then you have a problem. Star Wars is for everyone.

Are you ever going to provide evidence for your claim, or are you just going to keep posting irrelevant insults and nonsense in the hope that everyone forgets you made it?

If you're going to lash out at Jews, then you have a problem.

Good thing nobody is doing this.

 Peregrine wrote:
Are you ever going to provide evidence for your claim, or are you just going to keep posting irrelevant insults and nonsense in the hope that everyone forgets you made it?

If you're going to lash out at Jews, then you have a problem.

Good thing nobody is doing this.

Yeah. You certainly are.

And missing the point. At waist level now.

Muh rite weeng!

Sorry, I deliberately grabbed a left wing resource for you and it wasn't enough. Now you gotta play weasel words.

The only insults I see are from you, using right wing like an ethnic slur. Since you talk about doubling down.

Everyone that doesn't agree with your side must be a Reagan. Way to, you know, prove the point.

Have fun with it, I suppose.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:
Careful, you'll get sand in your nose if you bury your head that deep.

So, straw man followed by condescending denial and refusal to acknowledge that you misrepresented your own link. You're certainly off to a good start here. Did you think I wouldn't actually read it and would just trust you that JJ Abrams said what you claimed?

so what do you think he means when he says this:

Abrams was clear: “Their problem isn’t ‘Star Wars,’ their problem is being threatened.”

or my favorite from Johnson:
https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/29/entertainment/star-wars-last-jedi-rian-johnson-mark-hamill/index.html

Looking back, was any of the criticism fair?
Johnson: No, no.

so there's the denial, that even the criticism you listed like plot holes and placing, is not valid, so what's left?

https://fee.org/articles/the-last-jedi-and-the-politicization-of-storytelling/

Other articles, such as these in The Independent, The Guardian, and Wired, insinuate that anyone not on board is an "alt-right" hater of diversity.

and there's the conclusion, no criticism is valid, if you didn't like it you must be a "hater of diversity" ie bigot.

and let's not forget, the whole line of "we watched the movie wrong" and "we just didn't get it", ie we're stupid
the links are out there, I'm getting bored looking them up again

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:
Yeah. You certainly are.

You will now apologize for your offensive and blatant lying about me "lashing out at Jews". Your post has been reported, hopefully your apology and edit arrives before a moderator sees it.

Sorry, I deliberately grabbed a left wing resource for you and it wasn't enough.

You "grabbed a left wing resource" and misquoted it. It wasn't enough for me because it didn't say what you claimed it said.

The only insults I see are from you, using right wing like an ethnic slur.

JFC that's a stupid argument. No, it isn't like an ethnic slur, at all. Don't pull this kind of ridiculous martyrdom attempt.

Everyone that doesn't agree with your side must be a Reagan.

There you go, making straw man arguments again. Your political affiliations are hardly a secret, and you're following the standard right-wing outrage machine blueprint perfectly. But that doesn't mean that other people who disagree with me fall into that same category.

 Peregrine wrote:


You will now apologize for your offensive and blatant lying about me "lashing out at Jews". Your post has been reported, hopefully your apology and edit arrives before a moderator sees it.

No.

 Easy E wrote:
I think the biggest "problem" for me was I wanted simple morality play narratives of good vs. evil and I got Nihilism instead.

In this movie, essentially "Nothing Mattered". It didn;t matter what you did, it just didn't matter.

Spoiler:

Blew up the Dreadnought.... but the enemy fleet is still on your tail!
Search for your parents..... They aren't important.
Killed Leia and Luke.... No you didn't Leia lived and Luke faded away on his own.
Destroyed the resistance.... except they escaped.
Defeated the Empire.... No, they came back
Force was re-balanced.... except it wasn't.
Destroyed the sacred texts.... No, wrong again!
Killed Snoke.... but no one actually cares.
Rescued the animals.... except you really didn't.
Found the master hacker..... except he ended up being unhelpful

Essentially every single element of the movie followed this exact same pattern of something happened! But it doesn't matter because of X.

This movie only succeeded on one level. It was Theatre of the Absurd. If that was the intention, then congrats. You win and I bow to your mastery of creating Star Seinfeld.

In this whole thread, this ^^ was the most insightful comment that I have found so far.

Yeah, there is no need to 'reconsider'.
This movie and its producers are symptoms.
Where is the contemporary Shakespeare, Moliere, or for that matter George Lucas?
Rian Johnson? Kathleen Kennedy?
We live in an inverted world.
The meek haven't inherited the Earth.
It is the mediocre, and they are dumbing everything down because they can't hold two opposing ideas in their heads at the same time.
Conflict - the ability to entertain real, deep, visceral conflict - this is missing in generation snowflake
and the producers of its entertainment.
This movie has all the substance of wet tissue, and deserves a similar fate.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:


You realise you're arguing against the very article you posted to support your initial argument?

The one I pointed out as blatantly biased?

 Peregrine wrote:
...

We have truly reached the point of absurdity.

My first thought when you started responding, TBH.

Point is, if Star Wars didn't have a majority negative review and people posted this, we'd laugh it off. But because most people did not like the movie- gotta shift the narrative.

Up to your shoulders already?

On IMDB TLJ has got 7.3/10 on 386K user reviews. On Rotten Tomatoes it's at 2.9/5 on 194.5K user reviews.

If we pro-rate those two percentages against the total number of reviews -- approx. 577K -- we get an overall positive rating of 67.94%.

This is very far from a majority negative.

We won't look at the professional film critic ratings.

 Kilkrazy wrote:


On IMDB TLJ has got 7.3/10 on 386K user reviews. On Rotten Tomatoes it's at 2.9/5 on 194.5K user reviews.

If we pro-rate those two percentages against the total number of reviews -- approx. 577K -- we get an overall positive rating of 67.94%.

This is very far from a majority negative.

We won't look at the professional film critic ratings.

Thank you for the insight. I stand corrected on my numbers. But please, let's do ignore professional critics. I find they are out of touch and often a bit biased or they are shills.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:


You realise you're arguing against the very article you posted to support your initial argument?

The one I pointed out as blatantly biased?

 Peregrine wrote:
...

We have truly reached the point of absurdity.

My first thought when you started responding, TBH.

Point is, if Star Wars didn't have a majority negative review and people posted this, we'd laugh it off. But because most people did not like the movie- gotta shift the narrative.

Up to your shoulders already?

On IMDB TLJ has got 7.3/10 on 386K user reviews. On Rotten Tomatoes it's at 2.9/5 on 194.5K user reviews.

If we pro-rate those two percentages against the total number of reviews -- approx. 577K -- we get an overall positive rating of 67.94%.

This is very far from a majority negative.

We won't look at the professional film critic ratings.

No please do, I’m interested in the result.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:


You will now apologize for your offensive and blatant lying about me "lashing out at Jews". Your post has been reported, hopefully your apology and edit arrives before a moderator sees it.

No.

Where is all this joo hatred?
I see none...

Maybe I missed something,
but Peregrine is not the sort to hate on anyone, well, at least not groups of people anyways.

This all seems like a distraction.

sirlynchmob wrote:
so what do you think he means when he says this:

Abrams was clear: “Their problem isn’t ‘Star Wars,’ their problem is being threatened.”

It means what it says. However, it doesn't mean what you are trying to present it as. The "their" in the quote is, as is clear from the context of it, referring to a specific group of people: anti-feminist s who posted sexist garbage about the movie. It is not referring to everyone who ever said anything bad about it.

or my favorite from Johnson:
https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/29/entertainment/star-wars-last-jedi-rian-johnson-mark-hamill/index.html

Looking back, was any of the criticism fair?
Johnson: No, no.

Well yes, that's certainly a rather narcissistic point of view. But it has nothing to do with the "everyone who didn't like it is a bigot" straw man AD made. The actual claim is that the critics would be saying similarly bad things about the OT movies if social media had been around then. It's probably a bad argument, but it does not at all accuse anyone of bigotry.

https://fee.org/articles/the-last-jedi-and-the-politicization-of-storytelling/

An opinion piece (100% coincidentally, one posted on a conservative site) that does nothing to prove its claims and has to resort to talking about "insinuation" rather than direct quotes.

 jeff white wrote:


Maybe I missed something,
but Peregrine is not the sort to hate on anyone, well, at least not groups of people anyways.

This all seems like a distraction.

I'm screwing with him. I'm barely Jewish. And it was to point out that lashing out at an individual or their product is not the same as attacking their race or gender.

Oh and he does hate groups. He even lumped me in with his favorite group to hate.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:
I'm screwing with him. I'm barely Jewish.

You lied and made an extremely offensive accusation against me. If it were up to me you'd be banned for that.

And it was to point out that lashing out at an individual or their product is not the same as attacking their race or gender.

There you go with the straw man arguments again. Nobody is disputing the idea that you can criticize an individual or product without attacking their race or gender. In fact, given how many times I have criticized TFA/TLJ in this thread, I would think it would be pretty obvious that I agree with this principle.

 Peregrine wrote:


You lied and made an extremely offensive accusation against me. If it were up to me you'd be banned for that.
.

Well it isn't up to you. Remember when my answer to your demand for an apology was 'no'? Let me change my answer.

lol no.

 Peregrine wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:
so what do you think he means when he says this:

Abrams was clear: “Their problem isn’t ‘Star Wars,’ their problem is being threatened.”

It means what it says. However, it doesn't mean what you are trying to present it as. The "their" in the quote is, as is clear from the context of it, referring to a specific group of people: anti-feminist s who posted sexist garbage about the movie. It is not referring to everyone who ever said anything bad about it.

 Formosa wrote:


No please do, I’m interested in the result.

As the movie was released, most professional critics rated the it highly.
Most (everyone I have heard/known/read) who are not professional critics frankly did not like the movie, at all.
Stylized Transformers in space - just noise and spectacle.
For those of us who have been following this storyline for more than 40 years
(Episode 4 was the first film that I ever saw in a theater and not with my Mom/Grandparents - I was 8)
the discontinuity, while at the same time recycling plot lines with name swaps,
simply the lack of intellectual effort,
simply wrecked everything, all the way back,
and has left such a bad feeling about Disney,
as if we needed any more evidence that it is simply the animation wing of the neo-liberal prog-paganda machine,
and about big entertainment altogether,
that honestly I stopped seeing all movies at the theaters.
I will even be waiting for Deadpool 2 to arrive on the VOD at less than 4bux to see on the home projector,
and am doing the same for Infinity War.

It just stopped being fun to be a fan
when these corporate hotshots decide that
to enjoy the movie,
you need to wear special freak-flag goggles
and then, when you do, it is all warmed lube and rainbows.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:


You lied and made an extremely offensive accusation against me. If it were up to me you'd be banned for that.
.

Well it isn't up to you. Remember when my answer to your demand for an apology was 'no'? Let me change my answer.

lol no.

Dude, srsly, this anti-semite stuff is garbage.
I have been on the receiving end of stuff like that.
Everyone knows that it is an evil trick meant to disarm and distract from real wrongdoing.
I don't think that you should be banned,
but I think that if you did it again, then you should be, at least for a while - 3 months?
I mean, there are lots of ways to make the point that you say that you were trying to make.
Dumpn all that on someone, well, that is bad form.
You should be ashamed of yourself...

sirlynchmob wrote:
You keep talking about people posting sexist garbage, but you've never provide any evidence of anyone doing so.

AD posted the evidence for me, with quotes. I'd post a rather memorable one from dakka, but it was so bad that the moderators deleted it and all quotes from it. But it had an impressive amount of whining and crying about how the female characters weren't hot enough for the author.

That "their" in the quotes is referring to anyone who didn't like the movie and that is what the 3 publications picked up on and ran with.

No it isn't. Seriously, read the article:

Asked by IndieWire about pushback from “Star Wars” fans who decried Rian Johnson’s film for its focus on more female-centric stories (bolstered by the edition of franchise newbies like Laura Dern and Kelly Marie Tran), Abrams was clear: “Their problem isn’t ‘Star Wars,’ their problem is being threatened.”

It explicitly references the s and asks Abrams "what do you think about those s". It is not about critics in general.