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.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

 Earth127 wrote:
Plz ignore peregrine and stop this stupid anti-semitism discussion.

Even when he is right he is trolling.

Since you have always been nice, I will respect this wish. I feel as if once he finds something in a thread he dislikes, he keeps going until it closes down. We've all seen this before.

Actually, I don't agree with some of Peregrine's politics, for sure - tho not familiar with much, so here say 'some' -
but one thing about him is that he is smart, and can follow a line of reasoning.
His interlocutors - present company included - cannot, or at least cannot seem to demonstrate such an ability in an actual thread of discussion.
This is why threads get closed down, because people lose their way, toss out unfounded claims of antisemitism and such,
and always - to the last - fail to accept that they are likely, or even possibly, mistaken about something.
Same case here, from what I can tell.
Not Peregrine's fault, at all.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:
Is that someone from the group, or is that the group's position? Having one 'Alt-RIght' person in a group does not make the group 'alt-right'. Come on, now.

It's from a person with the ability to post as that group (IOW, a moderator/page owner). It's safe to say the rest of the group doesn't disagree too strongly with the person acting as the voice of the group, otherwise they wouldn't be speaking from that position.

Sure, Peregrine.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 jeff white wrote:
Actually, I don't agree with some of Peregrine's politics, for sure - tho not familiar with much, so here say 'some' -
Not Peregrine's fault, at all.

I don't really care one way or the other. I'd rather not turn a discussion into the Peregrine Show again and get it shut down. It was a relatively interesting debate back and forth until he zeroed in on something he dislikes.

 Peregrine wrote:

 jeff white wrote:
In every 'entertainment' industry arm from the West, there has been a rather rapid decline with some exceptions few and very far between. I mean, in fact, I have not simply given up on movies, music, and television. The culture is corrupted from top to bottom with so little redeeming that there are simply no good stories left to tell.

“The children now love luxury. They have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise.”

― Socrates


The truth here is not the same old complaints about how culture is in decline, complaints that have been made for literally thousands of years, it's that we have a biased view of the past. When you look back at movies/music/etc from decades ago you only see the good stuff, because that's all anybody bothers to preserve. You see the classic movies that everyone praises and encourages their friends to watch. You hear the best songs that make it onto radio playlists. Etc. You don't see all the mediocre and awful stuff that was mercifully forgotten. And so you forget that back then 90% of movies/music/etc were trash and people were busy complaining about how bad everything is compared to the good old days. Just like people 50 years from now will be nostalgic for 2018 and a time when entertainment didn't suck, while boasting about how they've given up on modern stuff.

I exalted the post, cuz you understand, and deeply.
Though I do disagree with your assessment of contemporary culture, I must admit to the trend to which you point.
Things are especially bad now, as Socrates and later especially Aristotle had warned - demagogues and so on, democracy being the worst from of government,
descending rapidly into tyranny...
In the 50s, or better yet prior to the third central bank in the USA and the installation of current unelected overseers of the political economy in the USA for example,
demagogues had less power and influence, due the lack of central control over information.
TOday, of course, 5 or 6 families control 95+% of all corporate media, and this is growing through politics to control of alt media and new media as well...
So, on this concern alone, I will hold my ground.
Under sway of an especially nefarious group who do control this information,
and wag the dogs of war all the way to the bak and home again,
things are much worse now...

That is.. Very offtopic.

Anyways, getting back to things hopefully rather then the usual show... TLJ certainly has been the most divisive movie to date at least.

 jeff white wrote:

I exalted the post, cuz you understand, and deeply.
Though I do disagree with your assessment of contemporary culture, I must admit to the trend to which you point.
Things are especially bad now, as Socrates and later especially Aristotle had warned - demagogues and so on, democracy being the worst from of government,
descending rapidly into tyranny...
In the 50s, or better yet prior to the third central bank in the USA and the installation of current unelected overseers of the political economy in the USA for example,
demagogues had less power and influence, due the lack of central control over information.
TOday, of course, 5 or 6 families control 95+% of all corporate media, and this is growing through politics to control of alt media and new media as well...
So, on this concern alone, I will hold my ground.
Under sway of an especially nefarious group who do control this information,
and wag the dogs of war all the way to the bak and home again,
things are much worse now...

Welp. It just got weird.

Not really, I enjoy a good spooky theory as much as the next guy but unless this can reconnect to 'The Death Star's Destruction was an Inside Job' then I think we've gone too far off the rails.

Because really, a ventilation shaft straight to the core that can be blown up with one torpedo? Someone had a say in that and I think the Bothans are more entrenched in this than we realize.

 Earth127 wrote:

 jeff white wrote:

 Formosa wrote:


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

As the movie was released, most professional critics rated the it highly.

True

Most (everyone I have heard/known/read) who are not professional critics frankly did not like the movie, at all.

[Citation needed, I give 25-35% at best. With 40-50% not really caring either way

Stylized Transformers in space - just noise and spectacle.

Plz go watch an atual transformers movie. Or don't It's almost a hate crie to force someone to watch them

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,

OT is just as guilty of this. It gave us 2 death stars.

simply the lack of intellectual effort,

It's there. But then again it was overflowing in the prequels. Didn't make them any good

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.

Plz don't project general dissapointment in an industry on one movie

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.

As above

Automatically Appended Next Post:

I think the anti-SJW feedback is but a small nearly meaningless loss. And if Black panther and wonder woman have proven anything going the other way would have been worse.

ALso remember the fringe dude who made a cut with all the women removed and got royally mocked by the cast/ Rian on twitter.

In the interest of a healthy discussion, I would advise Ignoring Dakka's primary salt troll. Live is a lot more stess free without him.

FYI Rian loved it on twitter, so did the cast. Is it really any different than the phantom menace cut which removed jarjar? same principle.

https://www.gq.com/story/angry-fan-re-edited-star-wars-the-last-jedi-to-make-it-less-feminist


For what it's worth, director Rian Johnson and Mark Hamill weighed in themselves with good humor and relentless ridicule:
Priscilla hits all the major points here but I’ll just add hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha https://t.co/f0bKJ9NeUe
— Rian Johnson (@rianjohnson) January 16, 2018

Agreed. But let me add [many laughing faces]
- mh

I actually do believe it’s gotta be a brilliant troll. It’s just too perfect.
— Rian Johnson (@rianjohnson) January 16, 2018

Wasn't the 'Star Wars with no women' thing a joke, anyway? I thought that was the point.

I’m starting to reconsider DakkaDakka

 Peregrine wrote:

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:
Is that someone from the group, or is that the group's position? Having one 'Alt-RIght' person in a group does not make the group 'alt-right'. Come on, now.

It's from a person with the ability to post as that group (IOW, a moderator/page owner). It's safe to say the rest of the group doesn't disagree too strongly with the person acting as the voice of the group, otherwise they wouldn't be speaking from that position.

Oh the fun we could have with that logic if we used it analyze what the mods around here have posted and their political leanings. So you'd say you don't disagree too strongly with anything the moderators have ever said here?

back on topic though

TLJ is a clear example at how to fail at telling a compelling story. There's no point in having a diverse cast if you cast them in sterotypical roles and don't give them depth as a character.

sirlynchmob wrote:
TLJ is a clear example at how to fail at telling a compelling story. There's no point in having a diverse cast if you cast them in sterotypical roles and don't give them depth as a character.

I didn't think Finn was stereotypical. He seemed more like the easiest character to identify with, oddly enough. When I first heard there was a 'renegade Stormtrooper' idea floating around, I was afraid they'd take the 'disgruntled, jaded veteran' stereotype out of the box again. "Lemme tell you 'bout war, son..."

As far as 'stereotypes' go, I think the only one was 'Mary Sue'... if that even counts. Maybe 'hotshot fighter pilot'? I don't know. They seemed less like 'stereotypes' and more like... RPG Player Character concepts by people with very little imagination.

Was there really several pages of people asking for links to proof that anyone who was criticizing TLJ were doing it for bigoted reasons?

http://nationalpost.com/entertainment/movies/is-a-self-admitted-bigot-and-mens-rights-activist-sabotaging-the-last-jedi-scores-or-do-people-just-hate-it

He was attacking the movie’s scores, he wrote, to get back at Disney for changes to the “Star Wars” canon (as well as various superhero franchises). It sounded like an ultra-nerdy version of the plot to Stephen King’s “Misery,” and not many paid attention.

But in subsequent posts, the nameless Facebook man added gender politics to his list of “Star Wars” grievances – and suddenly reporters came calling.

“Male leads who aren’t (gay) or colored or both WILL ALWAYS be better than female leads,” he wrote. “They should just stay in the kitchen instead of playing with Lightsabers,” he added.

“I’m sick and tired of men being portrayed as idiots,” he told HuffPost. “There was a time we ruled society and I want to see that again.”

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/kelly-marie-tran-racists-last-jedi_us_5a4400fee4b06d1621b6b2bb

Last week, someone changed the Rose Tico page on the “Star Wars”-oriented Wookieepedia website to feature a character description that can only be described as flat out racist.

The page text has since been changed back to the original character description, but the screenshot below shows the offensive entry, which includes changing the character’s name to “Ching Chong Wing Tong” and referring to her as “stupid, autistic and slowed.”

There are people who criticize TLJ for legit reasons (pacing, just not liking it, whatever). And then there are those who ARE being racist and sexist. Unfortunately, those people have poisoned the well so to speak. You cannot look at that viewer review score without knowing that some unknown % of the dislikes IS from bigots. Is it a big number? Is it small number? Nobody knows and there really isn't a way to know. It doesn't mean the people with legit criticisms should be silenced or lumped in with the bigots, but it also means you cannot deny their existence


The "SW with no Women" cut isn't a joke.

 Lance845 wrote:
There are people who criticize TLJ for legit reasons (pacing, just not liking it, whatever). And then there are those who ARE being racist and sexist. Unfortunately, those people have poisoned the well so to speak. You cannot look at that viewer review score without knowing that some unknown % of the dislikes IS from bigots. Is it a big number? Is it small number? Nobody knows and there really isn't a way to know. It doesn't mean the people with legit criticisms should be silenced or lumped in with the bigots, but it also means you cannot deny their existence.

And I fully agree with you. The problem with poisoning the well is far too common in our society with various criticism of media. Imagine, if you will- if someone came to Dakkadakka and was very selective about whose opinions those chose to represent the forum. Imagine if they found some of the rather 'extreme' 40k fan groups on Facebook and thought that represented the 40k fandom.

Now, imagine if you and I are sitting there and having a game of 40k (you're losing because it's my example, I can do what I want). Someone comes up to us and asks us what we're doing, and after you roll a handful of 1's (my example, again)- you sweep your squad off the table and say, "We're playing a friendly game of 40k." One dude points and says, "Hahaha, you're a bunch of crazy soyboy nerds with Female Space Marine fetishes!" and then another says, "You're the jerks that like Nazi memes!" And here's you and I, finishing a game in turn 2- and we're both insulted because we've been cheapened. We don't get to represent what we love, we've been 'othered'.

As a wise man once said to me, "The village idiots are the first ones people notice when they come to your town."

I just also believe that 'poisoning the well' is often very convenient for some people, especially when that person's income depends on public consumption and negative criticism can hurt their bottom line. "Don't listen to them, they're [Insert Bad Thing]. That's why they hate it." Is a pretty sound defensive tactic for low-information and impressionable people.

 Lance845 wrote:
The "SW with no Women" cut isn't a joke.

You have got to be kidding me. (It does have women in it, but some of them are edited out). I love accidental comedy.

These new SW movies very clearly treat male and female characters differently. Male characters often embarassingly fail when trying to do something cool, generally as a moment of comic relief. This happens over and over to male characters but never to the female characters. Male characters are portrayed as blundering compared to female characters, who are generally hyper competent. I would guess the intention is to portray women as strong, whereas in the past women (it is claimed) have been portrayed as needing men to save them. But the unintentional result is, the male characters are better drawn, undergo more character development, and are ultimtely more sympathetic than the female characters, who end up as just boring.

sirlynchmob wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:
Is that someone from the group, or is that the group's position? Having one 'Alt-RIght' person in a group does not make the group 'alt-right'. Come on, now.

It's from a person with the ability to post as that group (IOW, a moderator/page owner). It's safe to say the rest of the group doesn't disagree too strongly with the person acting as the voice of the group, otherwise they wouldn't be speaking from that position.

Oh the fun we could have with that logic if we used it analyze what the mods around here have posted and their political leanings. So you'd say you don't disagree too strongly with anything the moderators have ever said here?

back on topic though

TLJ is a clear example at how to fail at telling a compelling story. There's no point in having a diverse cast if you cast them in sterotypical roles and don't give them depth as a character.

I found it compelling. So did my wife and my daughter.

 MonkeyBallistic wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

And that’s a large part of the problem. They’re movies for 12 year olds. George Lucas said it himself. However, we look at them now with our adult mentality and we can pick all kinds of holes in all them them, but with our nostalgia glasses on, we give the silliness a get out of jail card

.

Except that not what those paid critics say - "no no no, its a visionary subversion of the universe" - not its a fun flick for kids - there are plenty of those - few get held up some sort of cinematic gem with the plot, pacing and character problems that this pile of gak is rife with.

That’s a pretty strong accusation. Find me one critic who said “it’s a visionary subversion of the universe” and then give me proof they were paid by Lucasfilm to say it.

I certainly wouldn’t say TLJ was a “pile of gak”. As films for 12 year olds go, I quite enjoyed it. But then I, like everyone else who says they enjoyed it, was bribed by Disney to say that.

Unless you are a paid critic I didn't say you were.

I would and do say its a pile of gak and that's being generous. Different strokes and all that.

I have no reason to read any film critics words but a quick browse on RT and get bs like this:

The Last Jedi” is absolutely the “Star Wars” film we deserved and didn’t expect. The prequels, stand alone “story” films and even the animated series considered canon are a frustratingly repetitious and revisionist cycle. “The Last Jedi” is not a crude predictable entry to the series; Rian Johnson has delivered a luminous spark that’s left the future of the franchise looking bright.

So Subversive and visionary - yep. Do I agree Hell no.

 Manchu wrote:
These new SW movies very clearly treat male and female characters differently. Male characters often embarassingly fail when trying to do something cool, generally as a moment of comic relief. This happens over and over to male characters but never to the female characters. Male characters are portrayed as blundering compared to female characters, who are generally hyper competent. I would guess the intention is to portray women as strong, whereas in the past women (it is claimed) have been portrayed as needing men to save them. But the unintentional result is, the male characters are better drawn, undergo more character development, and are ultimtely more sympathetic than the female characters, who end up as just boring.

Except Poe flies in and in one sweeping spinning long shot shoots a ton of enemy fighters out of the air in TFA and everyone talks about how great a pilot he is. And in TFA it opens with Poe solo flying across a big ass enemy ship stripping it of all it's dorsal defensive turrets. And Luke absolutely killed it with Kylo as a force projection coming in and buying time and saving the day.

Meanwhile Rey tried to turn Kylo and failed miserably. She may be winning fights but shes loosing causes left and right.

I am not saying the writing in these movies has been the best. Because it hasn't been. Again, SW has never had the best writing in my opinion. They are just dumb fun.

But I think it's more that the characters are portrayed more evenly now and everyone is focusing on the negatives that support their argument.

 Mr Morden wrote:

The Last Jedi” is absolutely the “Star Wars” film we deserved and didn’t expect. The prequels, stand alone “story” films and even the animated series considered canon are a frustratingly repetitious and revisionist cycle. “The Last Jedi” is not a crude predictable entry to the series; Rian Johnson has delivered a luminous spark that’s left the future of the franchise looking bright.

So Subversive and visionary - yep. Do I agree Hell no.

...that almost reads like a satire. I'm not kidding. It has to be a joke. That's got to be a troll post.

I stay away from 'professional' critics of anything because I've found they thrive on too much negativity and tend to serve as 'advertisements' more than reviewers... so this could very well be authentic for all I know.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:
Is that someone from the group, or is that the group's position? Having one 'Alt-RIght' person in a group does not make the group 'alt-right'. Come on, now.

It's from a person with the ability to post as that group (IOW, a moderator/page owner). It's safe to say the rest of the group doesn't disagree too strongly with the person acting as the voice of the group, otherwise they wouldn't be speaking from that position.

Oh the fun we could have with that logic if we used it analyze what the mods around here have posted and their political leanings. So you'd say you don't disagree too strongly with anything the moderators have ever said here?

back on topic though

TLJ is a clear example at how to fail at telling a compelling story. There's no point in having a diverse cast if you cast them in sterotypical roles and don't give them depth as a character.

I found it compelling. So did my wife and my daughter.

and I accept that and take you at your word for it. There's nothing wrong with liking the movie, it's flaws prevented me from doing so. But then again I liked 'dude wheres my car' so tastes do vary wildly

 Lance845 wrote:
I am not saying the writing in these movies has been the best. Because it hasn't been. Again, SW has never had the best writing in my opinion. They are just dumb fun.

Perfectly valid way of seeing it. I put Star Wars and Transformers in the same little box of movies for when I want to see whiz-bang shiny-woos. If I want deep characters, dynamic storytelling, and gripping plot twists I fire up me some Golden Girls and Mama's Family.

Jokes aside, 'dumb fun movies' aren't bad unless they're pretending to be something else. I have more disdain for someone trying to convince me that Transformers is 'awful' for not being Citizen Kane. WTF you think I bought this movie ticket for- inspiring dialogue? No, I want to see robots beat the piss out of each other and the rest of the movie can be armpit noises and Dorito's ads for all I care.

You can't say that Rey failed to turn Ben. This is an interaction between two characters, not a unilateral issue. Ben has his own mind and is responsible for his own actions. "Failing" to turn to the Light Side should not be pinned on Rey any more than Finn deciding to run from the FO at Maz's castle should be pinned on Rey, who tried to persuade him to stay.

When it comes to unilateral action, Rey succeeds at everything she tries. Finn certainly doesn't. In TFA, Poe doesn't either.In TLJ, both constantly fail. It's not that these male characters never get to do anything cool. The point is that Rey never fails and certainly she is never shown trying to be cool and failing in an embarassng way. The most badass moment in TFA, IMO, is when Finn decides to ignite the lightsaber and face Kylo Ren to protect his friend. The reason this is so badass is precisely because Finn does not stand a chance. That was real courage. Nothing Rey does really requires courage because she will succeed no matter what.

 Manchu wrote:
You can't say that Rey failed to turn Ben. This is an interaction between two characters, not a unilateral issue. Ben has his own mind and is responsible for his own actions. "Failing" to turn to the Light Side should not be pinned on Rey any more than Finn deciding to run from the FO at Maz's castle should be pinned on Rey, who tried to persuade him to stay.

When it comes to unilateral action, Rey succeeds at everything she tries. Finn certainly doesn't. In TFA, Poe doesn't either. It's not that these male characters never get to do anything cool. The point is that Rey never fails and certainly she is never shown trying to be cool and failing in an embarassng way. The most badass moment in TFA, IMO, is when Finn decides to ignite the lightsaber and face Kylo Ren to protect his friend. The reason this is so badass is precisely because Finn does not stand a chance. That was real courage. Nothing Rey does really requires courage because she will succeed no matter what.

Bull crap. Luke succeeded in turning Vader back from the darkside. Thats the actual climax of RotJ.

If you can say Luke succeeded in that then you can absolutely say Rey failed with Kylo. She went there specifically to do that thing. Not just having a conversation with a person in a bar they happened to both be in. She got herself in a shuttle pod and she went directly to Kylo for that express purpose. She spent half the movie planning for it.

There's a difference between good dumb and bas dumb tough. Pacific rim, marvel , star wars to a lesser extent are good dumb. Transformers, indiana jones IV olympus has fallen are bad dumb.

Making a dumb movie is no excuse for dumb movie making. And I am looking at you Michael Bay.

 Lance845 wrote:


Bull crap. Luke succeeded in turning Vader back from the darkside. Thats the actual climax of RotJ.

Vader made a choice. At the end of the day, it was Vader that listened to what his son said and considered it and let the better side of him that he'd hidden away win over. He did so out of his own agency.

And he's speaking of 'Unilateral' actions. That's 'doing your own thing by yourself'. A Unilateral action would be like me going to the gym and working out. Otherwise it is a bilateral or multilateral action, like you and I driving to the gym to spot one another while we lift weights.

Vader made his own choice. But Luke suceeded because he wanted vader to make that choice.

 Lance845 wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
You can't say that Rey failed to turn Ben. This is an interaction between two characters, not a unilateral issue. Ben has his own mind and is responsible for his own actions. "Failing" to turn to the Light Side should not be pinned on Rey any more than Finn deciding to run from the FO at Maz's castle should be pinned on Rey, who tried to persuade him to stay.

When it comes to unilateral action, Rey succeeds at everything she tries. Finn certainly doesn't. In TFA, Poe doesn't either. It's not that these male characters never get to do anything cool. The point is that Rey never fails and certainly she is never shown trying to be cool and failing in an embarassng way. The most badass moment in TFA, IMO, is when Finn decides to ignite the lightsaber and face Kylo Ren to protect his friend. The reason this is so badass is precisely because Finn does not stand a chance. That was real courage. Nothing Rey does really requires courage because she will succeed no matter what.

Bull crap. Luke succeeded in turning Vader back from the darkside. Thats the actual climax of RotJ.

If you can say Luke succeeded in that then you can absolutely say Rey failed with Kylo. She went there specifically to do that thing. Not just having a conversation with a person. She got herself in a shuttle pod and she went directly to Kylo for that express purpose. She spent half the movie planning for it.

I wouldn't say luke succeeded in that, sure he knew vader still had good in him, but letting the emperor try to kill you with lightning is hardly a plan. It's not like luke talked him back, nor had any coherent plan to win him over to the light side. vader choose to kill the emperor to save his son, but does that one action negate all the evil he's done and put him back in the light? If vader had pause another second to think about it luke would have died with vader and the emperor.

 Earth127 wrote:
There's a difference between good dumb and bas dumb tough. Pacific rim, marvel , star wars to a lesser extent are good dumb. Transformers, indiana jones IV olympus has fallen are bad dumb.

Making a dumb movie is no excuse for dumb movie making. And I am looking at you Michael Bay.

Eh, to each their own. I found the SAW sequels to be 'bad dumb'. I find something like the classic Slasher movies to be 'good dumb'. It's more about me being entertained by what I'm watching, and it's a matter of preference.

Like, Uwe Boll has some real 'bad dumb' movies but there's a couple of them that I'll sit through with pizza on a rainy Sunday just because they're flashy boredom-killers.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Earth127 wrote:
Vader made his own choice. But Luke suceeded because he wanted vader to make that choice.

And because he didn't end up hacking him to bits.

The is no sense in which Rey is responsible for Ben Solo being a murderous jerk so his decision not chnage his whole lifepath around because some girl asks is also not her responsibility, not her failure.

By contrast, Luke is Vader's son. He tells R2-D2, I can't kill my own father. Yeah because that, everyone knows, is abominable. There is no "good" way to kil, your own dad. Luke has a responsibility, not for what Vader has done (that's down to Yoda and Obi-Wan) but to himself. Luke's success was not turning Vader (he didn't) but rather not turning to darkness himself, which is what broke through to Vader.

There is nothing like that in TLJ. Two kids who are basically strangers talk online and might hook up but when they meet IRL there is no chemistry.That's it. Can't blame that on Rey.

 Earth127 wrote:
Plz mods lock this thread.

Just like with the previous thread on TLJ people (me included) are just too polarized to discuss it in a civil manner on the internet.

I dunno, it seems like there is one consistent problem with this thread getting off track over and over again. Better shut the whole thing down though I guess.

Rey isn't responsible for Ben being evil. But she chose to go to the Raddus setting herself the task of turning Kylo ren back into Ben solo and she failed to do so.

@lance845:

I think I have the perfect example to demonstrate the problems with the character(s) we're talking about. I don't know how familiar you are with comics, so I'm not trying to insult your knowledge here, but bare with me.

Two Superheroes, both INSANELY powerful- yet one is a better character than the other, by all standards of criticism. Those characters are Superman and Sentry.

Sentry is a Marvel character that was some guy who thought he could get high on some juice he found in a lab. It turned him into a hero with 'the power of a thousand exploding suns'. He suddenly manifested in the comics out of nowhere. Everyone in the Marvel Universe was like, "Oh yeah, Sentry, that guy" like he'd been there since the beginning and his existence and abilities were just common knowledge. He does have flaws, but they are kind of lame in comparison to what he is (He has some pretty severe mental issues and they are completely invalidated the moment he turns into Sentry). He literally ripped the God of War in half like it was nothing, a God that's give a lot of the most powerful MU characters a run for their money. He manages to show up and be a Deus Ex Machina whenever he is in comics- because Marvel still has a handful of talented writers on board that know he needs to be kept far the hell away from any normal story because he's so godlike that it makes the threat almost pointless. He's pretty much one of the most hated characters in comics, and that's saying something considering the current era. He COULD be really good, but it'd take a LOT of work and development, and quite frankly it's probably too late for that.

Superman is just as powerful. He got his powers because something something something Krypton and Earth's Yellow Sun. If he were introduced later, most of us would loathe him as much as we loathe Sentry. But writers have taken the time over the years to try and smooth him out and make him more relatable (sometimes it sucks, though). He has his flaws now- he sometimes struggles to make the right decision. He sees great potential in humans and is in awe of the things they achieve, and sometimes fears that they might end up like the Kryptonians if they don't change their ways. He struggles between 'inspiration' and 'guiding light' because the latter often makes him feel as if he's stepping too close to being a god or leader and it cheapens mankind's achievements. He had to master not crushing someone's hand, not slapping a bad guy into wet pulp, and not tearing doors off the hinges- which would be like handling a robin's eggshell in a dune buggy while on PCP. He's vulnerable to magic, so even chain-smoking Johnny 'Conjob' Constantine could shut him down with a few words. He may be awe-inspiring as Superman, but a lot of his geeky nerd side as Clark Kent is 100% awkward sheltered farm-boy and it's authentic. He fails- A LOT, in fact he got punked out during No Man's Land because all the super-powers in the world couldn't manage that crisis and literally no one gave a damn that Superman was there, because he couldn't work a water filter or make food grow- they actually ran past Superman to the guy who knew how to work a water pump and fell in line to follow HIM.

In the end, people are going to appreciate a character that struggles. The one that falls on his face. The one that screws up. He can go and splatter a billion bad guys and do awesome stuff but if he's given a proper background to support him and you see the human side- that side that screws up, makes a selfish decision, embarasses himself- but grows from it... then you have a likeable, enjoyable, fun character with enough depth to seem like a bit more than a list of abilities.