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.

 Galef wrote:
...there is so much good stuff they could have used when starting the Sequel trilogy.
But I thought the question she answered had to do with EpIX, not the sequel trilogy as a whole.

That is absolutely the question she was asked. But she answered by saying the whole trilogy was especially difficult because of the lack of reference material. So:

1. She took a question where you could have had a point and took it away.
2. If she meant what she said she had to be talking about beat for beat story lines. Because the OT is littered throughout the ST.
3. Episode Nine will feature Lando Calrissian and Emperor Palpatine. There's some existing material right there. Good thing they had a villain on hand from the source material.

Soooo she did did draw from existing source material (OT) for ep nine, she did complain about making a ST in its entirety, and she is objectively wrong. I mean, in TLJ they replaced the rebel foot soldiers in trenches protecting the base from imperial walkers on a snow planet with resistance foot soldiers in trenches protecting the base from First Order walkers on a salt planet that looks like a snow planet.

Maybe I'm wrong, but my point is that all these "bUt sHe HaD LoAds of mAtErIal!!!" memes don't make any sense if you look at the context of the conversation.
She wasn't saying STAR WARS didn't have source material (jettisoned or not), but rather the story they were telling is not BASED on existing source Material.

Does the Thrawn Trilogy have Rey in it? Does The New Jedi Order feature Ben Solo turning to the Dark Side? No, and that's the point. These are new stories that have no existing source material

I don't much care for Kathleen Kennedy either way, but it bother me when people react in such a negative way to something taken out of context.

Based on your confusion about the context of the question and her answer I think her detractors have thought about it just as much as you have. Yes, the ST has introduced new characters. No, that doesn't make KK's complaints about how difficult it is to do her job understandable.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

But for Sad Little Edgelords (again, nobody in this thread for the hard of understanding) have....well.....shall we say inherently mutable opinions. When the sad acts decide to get upset, they’ll find something they can pretend justifies it. Even when you look back over their commentary and find quite impressive contradictions in their stance.

So. Again. Had Disney adapted say, the Thrawn trilogy? Self same Sad Little Edgelords would’ve pissed, moaned and whined about it - BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT THEY DO.

Look at Star Trek Discovery. There are many entirely valid criticisms (why not build the rest of the cast to Burnham levels?). Yet. The Sad Little Edgelords? OMG ST STOP FORCING DIVERSITY ON ME. It’s like they have absolutely bugger all concept of why Star Trek is so highly regarded.

You do see the difference. Yes?

People liked Thrawn in rebels.


I don't think you could have picked a worse example to try to prove your point.

I always felt her "my job is difficult because" statement to be baffling.

I mean, MOST movies are made without a ton of source material.. that's the NORM! And it's not like she's paid much attention to the source material out there (TFA and TLJ largely did their own thing) so I don't feel a ton of sympathy for this.

After The Last Skywalker has gone through theaters, I would not be surprised if the public in general underwent a massive burst of Star Wars fatigue. Solo I think was the beginning, and while the final movie of the trilogy will undoubtedly sell well, I think that Disney will find that many people are now exhausted by the franchise. Not to say that it still won't be quite popular and that stuff like Rise of the Resistance will be well-loved, especially by kids. But movies and merch? I have a sense that there's gonna be a big downswing in interest.

Overall, "there was a lack of source material" being the excuse for making a movie is still disgusting- even if the EU didn't exist at all.

It just goes to show you what happens when Hollywood's creative process has gone bankrupt, so their go-to default method is "find popular comic/book/old movie/old show/video game/urban legend and then movie that thing". Not being able to function outside this paradigm is laziness.

Having no source material shouldn't be an excuse. It should be a golden opportunity. The borders to work within just got much, much wider.

After declaring Star Wars' EU to be non-canon, we were left with just a scant few guidelines of the Star Wars Universe setting- that's not so much a detriment, but rather a sandbox to play in with more to work with. That is a recipe for success and creativity tied to something well-known and established, that should be the last place a creative person fails. It's like being given a D&D Campaign setting, but you can't DM it unless you're following a campaign module and forbidding players to deviate from the module. I expect that from an Amatuer, not someone who is taking control of the most popular science fiction franchise in the world.

But, apparently some people get led to a tree with a rope and a tire- and when you come back to see if they've made a swing... they've hung themselves and set the tire on fire, just to make it more chaotic.

 ArcaneHorror wrote:
After The Last Skywalker has gone through theaters, I would not be surprised if the public in general underwent a massive burst of Star Wars fatigue. Solo I think was the beginning,...

No it wasn't. Solo was simply proof that even Star Wars movies need proper marketing.

And it wasn't the movie started us down the dark path. That was the one befoer Solo.

SW.com has put out two videos on their YT channel recently. They're all retrospective looks/new movie previews that have a bunch of behind the scenes stuff from the first three movies and some stuff from the sequel trilogy.

And almost 0% from the prequels.

Disney really hates them prequels.

 insaniak wrote:

 ArcaneHorror wrote:
After The Last Skywalker has gone through theaters, I would not be surprised if the public in general underwent a massive burst of Star Wars fatigue. Solo I think was the beginning,...

No it wasn't. Solo was simply proof that even Star Wars movies need proper marketing.

Well yes and no. I know this from working in the media industry in London, but Arnie talks about it in his autobiography as well. The studios have a collection of metrics that they use to predict the success of a film, if in the crucial days before the marketing goes into full swing the metrics aren't giving them the right answer, they can pull or minimise the marketing and save the money.

Nothing in what you just said actually contradicts my point, though. Whether or not marketing would do enough to pay for itself, the film still needs adequate marketing to do well.

Solo wasn't a bad film. It suffered from the divided reaction to TLJ, a negative perception even before it was released based on the production shenanigans associated with it, and then a bad release slot with very little advertising. While not the best Star Wars film ever, by any means, it was good enough that I think it could have done significantly better with marketing, but was always going to need a LOT of effort to counteract the handicap it started with.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

And almost 0% from the prequels.

Disney really hates them prequels.

A LOT of people hated the prequels. I don't know how old you were, but I remember being stoked for them... and then the Phantom Menace happened, and I was rather confused but tried to convince myself it'd probably get better. And then Attack of the Clones happened, and I realized it wasn't going to improve. And then I found Revenge of the Sith on a pre-owned DVD and had nothing better to do, and just kind of confirmed it was all pretty bad. Which, of course... is exactly what has happened with me regarding the more recent movies.

Gungans were awful. At least Ewoks had the 'cute' thing, and from a marketing perspective that can put asses in seats and sell merch. Gungans were fugly, stupid, and obnoxious and I'm pretty sure that if the Empire genocided them, there wasn't a whole lot of protesting in earnest.

Lucas seemed to forget that practical effects are capable of being awesome, and the CGI was just overwhelming to the point where it felt like you were watching a Pixar movie with live-action people moving around sometimes. We get it, Lucasfilm can do cool stuff that... looks really odd and out of place, but expensive.

Anakin was LOATHED, and I'm pretty sure that actor is in a padded cell in an asylum somewhere, using his own excrement to write his manifesto on the walls as he babbles incoherently to himself and screams at random intervals. He probably re-enacts those awful lightsaber flourishes until the orderlies restrain him. The internet hated that guy into obscurity, Rose Tico had it easy.

Anakin was just an awful execution- he had no natural chemistry at all with anyone, it was like he was secretly being abused by the other cast behind the scenes and had to force himself to communicate- and it always came out as deadpan and half-hearted, and the only other emotion he seemed capable of showing was "10 year old that got grounded for a week" when he cried and whinged and whined. Even his 'rage' seemed more like it suited a small child, and it blatantly soiled the image of the Badass Darth Vader that actually used to be scary and intimidating. Well, soiled until Rogue One's finale... and then you could go and watch the Prequels again and just feel this uncomfortable confusion. Maybe Palpatine gave him bionic testicles or something. I mean, FFS- the animated Clone Wars series had a more respectable Anakin with backbone.

There were a few gems with the Prequels, but not many. The Clone Wars was pretty fun (both the animated and CGI versions). Some of the comics were rather good. A few character designs were also solid, and we got Republic Commando. There was also a lot of enthusiasm because of the Knights of the Old Republic and Jedi Knight: Jedi Academy games, and the Star Wars D20 RPG and Miniatures games were a big thing, too. Overall, the general attitude back then was "I hate the Prequels but there's still some Star Wars out there for me that I can enjoy". Until the Mandalorian came out, we couldn't really say that. And still, I think we'll be able to all have a piece of Star Wars we still love.

Anyone who thinks this raging fandom for Star Wars now is a new thing... wasn't paying attention back them. The prequels were really bad, and I think what makes some people seem angrier about the new movies is that we had high hopes- and it really started to seem like it was going to pay off, and then things got stupid. This isn't new, it's just got a few different buzzwords, some overblown nontroversies, and a bit more hype involved.

And perhaps, a little break is in order. Maybe get some creative and passionate minds together and make a Star Wars saga that has us arguing about who the cooler villain/hero/ship is, rather than the other nonsense- and where we're more stoked to go online and look for spoilers than bicker at one another.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

Anyone who thinks this raging fandom for Star Wars now is a new thing... wasn't paying attention back them. The prequels were really bad, and I think what makes some people seem angrier about the new movies is that we had high hopes- and it really started to seem like it was going to pay off, and then things got stupid. This isn't new, it's just got a few different buzzwords, some overblown nontroversies, and a bit more hype involved.

I do sometimes wonder if the prequels being a big disappointment actually did a lot to create the edgy, cynical, hyper-critical internet """fan""" culture we're saddled with these days.

And perhaps, a little break is in order. Maybe get some creative and passionate minds together and make a Star Wars saga that has us arguing about who the cooler villain/hero/ship is, rather than the other nonsense- and where we're more stoked to go online and look for spoilers than bicker at one another.

I don't think that'll happen, regardless of the quality of the movies. There's a very loud segment of the fanbase that just enjoys being angry, and will latch onto any excuse to be angry, not resting until everyone has stopped liking what they don't like.

Yes, the Prequels certainly could have been better but the constant backlash was far more objectionable. Today it's worse with more channels opened up on youtube by creepy dudes with an obsession for stalking Kathleen Kennedy, Rian Johnson & co and making them suffer for making films to amuse the masses.

Of course Binks was an awkward character, but I'd much rather hang out with him, having beers, than the - sadly real - pathetic idiots who would not give it a rest and shut up about how awful he was.

It actually gets to the point where you feel like saying "Jar-Jar? Ah, mate - hes my favourite character! Fancy watching Phantom Menace?" just to wind them up.

I can relate. Posts like yours are the reason I started bothering to type out criticism. Really cathartic.

I think it was the 129th "If Rey is a mary sue than so is Luke" did it for me.

The funny part is I recall reading that the bloke who played Jar Jar blamed the media for the reaction to his character, not fans.

It's almost as if the kind of people that are routinely held up as being representative of the critical element of fandom are actually a vanishingly tiny minority who're not actually representative at all, and some of the folk involved in franchise media can grasp that...

Funny bit is I have fairly positive views on anything outside the current trilogy. I liked rogue one more than I thought I would. I never saw solo but it sounds ok or decent. I like the idea of the mandalorian if they don't mess it up though I don't watch tv or anything like Netflix. I've said it before but I think nobody knows how to handle Jedi anymore. The last Jedi was really the only awful movie which ruined the trilogy. The force awakens was basically everything recycled and Mary sue Rey. Oddly I feel like Rey wasn't as obnoxious in the last Jedi. They honestly just didn't have her learn anything or do anything except sorta set something up with Kylo.

I don't know why girls being Mary sue is good these days. I figured everybody has to have flaws, be able to learn from mistakes and grow and also not come off as smug unless it's a flaw the character must later fix or it's played off for humor. Of course media loves to make it all about activism now. I honestly think it'd be nice if the media just ya know talked about the movie and what's going on in the set.

 Galef wrote:
While I do agree that there is tons of "source material" to draw inspiration from, I do think that KKs comment is being taken WAY out of context here.
It looks like she means "there's no source material of the continued adventures of Rey and Kylo", NOT that's there is no source material for SW at all. And she's right, as unlike Marvel that has decades of existing material about the character in those movies, the sequel trilogy is all new characters that have never been established prior to TFA

I'm not trying to defend KK by any means, but come on guys, let's be a bit more fair.

-

Except.. It's the trilogy, Luke and them didn't exactly have tons of books for source materials to pull from since it was literally just being written by Lucas and the people working on the movie.

It just makes it sound worse when you put it like that.

 Galef wrote:

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
How does that follow? She had source material before creating those characters, and she ignored it. She could have planned their arcs or adapted existing character arcs into their stories, and she didn’t. You say we should give her a break for ignoring source material because she had already ignored source material? Your post doesn’t add any new perspective.

Agreed, there is so much good stuff they could have used when starting the Sequel trilogy.
-

Really there is not that much in old EU which would be useful for todays Star Wars script writers. At best, as I explained, they could have brought out character like Thrawn and use him in different setting (which is indeed what they have been doing outside the new trilogy), or then some very individual good ideas which sometimes appeared in the stories, but picking them out is substantial effort in itself. Many of the EU stories were basically recycled OT tropes. Or then they were plain bad. For example, aforementioned 'Dark Empire' - it had nice art, but storyline-wise, it was garbage, and it brought no interesting characters. I would not go watch it in big screen.

Having said that, I don't see much use complaining "oh the writing is so hard when we don't have ready made story hook". I would be excited for such an opportunity for clean state story using existing background! Even at the risk that the fans think that my approach sucks.

The EU was like a testing ground for ideas, characters and arcs to see which ones resonated with the fans and which failed. The MCU didn't lift directly from the comics, but did look at which stories resonated with the fans and took what worked from multiple iterations of each character to get a final product that had, in essence, already been tested and approved by the audience.

At the very least, they could have used the background state of the galaxy from the novels as a sort of armature for the new series' background,p; having a written background that doesn't get foreground attention in the movies would help ground the characters and add depth to the setting. Making up Hosnian Prime just to blow it up because ... power? It makes the movie feel small and unsculpted.

I don't think the background of the new trilogy is a problem as such...I think it is just fine actually. Problem is that they don't ever refer to it, thus making the galaxy feel small, as you say.

They could have also referred to at least some EU stuff there. Like Han saying "Oh well, we survived Thrawn, how bad could these guys be?" or Luke having holo-pic of Mara in his hut. Stuff like that to reward the fans and add depth to the universe. At present, DT movies feel detached.

 Yodhrin wrote:
The funny part is I recall reading that the bloke who played Jar Jar blamed the media for the reaction to his character, not fans.

I mean, he should have blamed his employer as well. But the media doesn't help. You can trawl through any comments thread and find a few psychos, the new Clickbait + Outrage Fetish media just loves to go and drag those up as proof of some looming evil force of basement-dwelling terrorists.

 Yodhrin wrote:
It's almost as if the kind of people that are routinely held up as being representative of the critical element of fandom are actually a vanishingly tiny minority who're not actually representative at all, and some of the folk involved in franchise media can grasp that...

Every village has an idiot. And he is always loud, hard to miss, and he's more than willing to be the first to welcome you.

The biggest problem is, there's a lot of poisoning the well. There's a lot of VERY valid critique out there, and it gets passed off as being some malicious neckbeard bigotry by the usual suspects out there.

I mean, I'm so sick of hearing that these fans hate women. Because after so many Star Wars side media with female fan favorites... if these guys hate women, it was a habit they picked up immediately after The Force Awakens. And I've listened to their scathing reviews, and Rey isn't the only problem with the movies they've spoken on.

For me, it's right now the trailer for the next movie- the clip with the... tracked motorcycles... that can keep up with hover-vehicles for some reason. And the catapulting rocket troopers into the sky.

"tHeY cAn FlY nOw?!?"

Wow, such a totally new and groundbreaking addition to the conflict. Here's a spoiler for you: They also have guns, missiles, and body armor. Just in case you haven't paid attention to literally anything that's been around in this particular universe of yours for tens of thousands of years.

I didn't even see the last trailer for Rise of Skywalker. I just don't think they can really salvage this trilogy after TLJ. It was that bad. I feel like I shouldn't re-iterate what was bad because we've heard it a million times by now but if I get flak for it I will say what it is.

I never got the supposed neckbeard bigotry. It's not bigotry it's called being a hardcore fan. Yes it's obnoxious sometimes but these people buy all the gear from the franchise and probably even have the star wars Christmas special and every other abortion, obscurity or rare thing star wars had. Depending on the person it can be an obsession and just as there are people that hate a franchise regardless or hate change in a franchise regardless there are those that will love something a franchise regardless of what they do and consider it the 2nd coming of Jesus Christ. Being a big fan of Warhammer Fantasy Battles I get it when the series pops out a turd or the whole franchise is destroyed (thank god WHFB is coming back and I thank total war and vermintide for that). Yes there is fan elitism sometimes. There's also people that see us as nerds for enjoying what we love. Both groups can be a pain to be around. All that said being an obsessed or hardcore fan doesn't make you sexist. Perhaps you would be obnoxious to be around but not sexist.

This is just "the thing" for the past few years though.

If a consumer critiques your product, you can do one of two things:

1) Politely accept their criticism, and respond like an adult. Maybe look into critique to learn for future endeavors, or step back and better critique your own piece. Take feedback into account and make use of it.

or...

2) Call the person a racist/bigot/sexist/elitist, etc.

Because number two is easy. You're not required to respond, debate, or consider criticism if you just vilify the person saying it. You're allowed to insist that your product (which you made...FOR consumers) is great and they are simply hateful because they didn't appreciate the kind gift that you've bestowed upon them. Then in your biased media article, where you're kissing up to the production companies so you can get invited to early screenings and industry parties, you use words like "Troll", or "Man Baby", or "Misogynist" when you report on said criticism. We live in a world where 'adult' journalists (and I use that term sparingly) actually use internet hyperbole like 'Troll' in communications.

You see the same thing on forums, including Dakka. Instead of discussing and debating a topic, you immediately see the same words; troll, hater, etc. etc. Basically words that are used to vilify someone because you're too lazy to effectively debate or prove your point. Someone who disagrees with you is never a coherent adult with a differing opinion; they're a "hater!". As long as they're this bizarre sub-human race of people who aren't allowed to have a different opinion you can maintain your stance on your high horse. This is 2019.

I love the lengths people go to defend the underbelly of nerdom when it rear's it head.

There's a difference between a movie not being up to par (or far below par like the prequels mentioned earlier) and the sort of open masturbatory glee of "when the movie bombs the company will wake up to the objective fact females can't be in films and will make mens only movies for men!"

It's not even an exaggeration, we saw exactly that here on Dakka when Capt. Marvel was announced. It was declared, as if the assertion made it fact, that would be the case.

But hey if we just keep saying we were always at war with Eurasia that will make it so. Same with there being no political motivation whatsoever to modern SW hate. Just keep saying it and swallowing those redpills.

 ScarletRose wrote:
I love the lengths people go to defend the underbelly of nerdom when it rear's it head.

I can understand how you feel, it's my reaction when someone decides that instead of doing the intellectual exercise and examining the argument, they just dictate what another human being's intent was and try to poison the well. It really can be bothersome, especially when you can almost smell the dishonesty from their statements.

 ScarletRose wrote:
There's a difference between a movie not being up to par (or far below par like the prequels mentioned earlier) and the sort of open masturbatory glee of "when the movie bombs the company will wake up to the objective fact females can't be in films and will make mens only movies for men!"

I don't think this was said, but if it was- I believe it may be time for you to learn what an internet troll is. You see, sometimes they say absurd things just to get a rise out of people- and those things can be exaggerations.

 ScarletRose wrote:
It's not even an exaggeration, we saw exactly that here on Dakka when Capt. Marvel was announced. It was declared, as if the assertion made it fact, that would be the case.

I'm sure someone was banned over this, otherwise you'd be providing some sort of evidence for it.

 ScarletRose wrote:
But hey if we just keep saying we were always at war with Eurasia that will make it so. Same with there being no political motivation whatsoever to modern SW hate. Just keep saying it and swallowing those redpills.

Wow, weird that the two extremes default to "It's a political agenda conspiracy".

Maybe, and just maybe-

...the movies were unpopular for a lot of reasons that a lot of different people can understand. Personally, I'd love for one of these people asserting that the hate of Star Wars is "bEcAuSe ThEy HaTe WoMeN!" to go and meet two of the Star Wars fans I know, that hate the movies. It's been a while since I've seen a lady punch a skinny geek.

Going back to 1977, SW fans never had a problem with tough female heroes and leaders.

 Manchu wrote:
Going back to 1977, SW fans never had a problem with tough female heroes and leaders.

Nuh-uh, evilbadwrongcishetwhitemale neckbeard nerds have *always* hated women. They were just pretending to like Leia, Ripley, Sarah Connor, Kira etc etc for all those years, because the only possible reason for someone to criticise a modern film wot has women in it is they hate women. Yup. Must be that.


Look ScarletRose, nobody is denying there are scumbags out there. We're just denying they're even remotely relevant numerically. In fact, I'll argue flat out that the only reason they have any real power at all - if they can be said to have any - is down to their supposed opponents constantly building them up into a boogeyman because they're incapable of handling the idea that other people might not like the thing they like, or as a convenient way to deflect valid criticism and deflect from behind the scenes drama.

Remember the whole "Manbabies are trying to start a boycott of Star Wars because it has a black Stormtrooper!!!!1" stuff that was circulating after the TFA trailers? That was like, two morons making tweets and a handful of other morons retweeting their support, and the hashtag was taken over pretty much immediately by people telling them to sit the feth down and/or taking the piss. But it was still spread around as if it actually meant something, as if it was actually relevant. Because racist nerds trying to boycott a film is a lot sexier and click-worthy than "a couple of idiots said something dumb on twitter", and because some folk just love the idea that they're part of some enlightened and special group of "real fans" who're proper decent people, not like those awful neckbeards...

I liked Rey in the first sequel film.

I didn't hate TLJ because it had Rey in it. I hated TLJ for what it did to Rey... and every other character.

 Yodhrin wrote:

Nuh-uh, evilbadwrongcishetwhitemale neckbeard nerds have *always* hated women. They were just pretending to like Leia, Ripley, Sarah Connor, Kira etc etc for all those years, because the only possible reason for someone to criticise a modern film wot has women in it is they hate women. Yup. Must be that.

 Manchu wrote:
Going back to 1977, SW fans never had a problem with tough female heroes and leaders.

Funny how all these Star Wars fans hated women...

Except you know, all of those other women that were in Star Wars fiction beforehand. I can bang out a list.

And it oddly wasn't until after the movies were released that they hated women. But also hated a lot of other things about the movie.

It's almost like this "they hate women" thing is a lie, made up by people who need a convenient dismissal of criticism.

 Yodhrin wrote:
Look ScarletRose, nobody is denying there are scumbags out there. We're just denying they're even remotely relevant numerically. In fact, I'll argue flat out that the only reason they have any real power at all - if they can be said to have any - is down to their supposed opponents constantly building them up into a boogeyman because they're incapable of handling the idea that other people might not like the thing they like, or as a convenient way to deflect valid criticism and deflect from behind the scenes drama.

Whaaaaat? No, man. They obviously just manifested out of the aether in 2015, fully-grown woman haters with internet access.

Because really, that's less believable than "suddenly all of these fans that were stoked about the new movies just decided to hate women out of nowhere".

 Yodhrin wrote:
Remember the whole "Manbabies are trying to start a boycott of Star Wars because it has a black Stormtrooper!!!!1" stuff that was circulating after the TFA trailers? That was like, two morons making tweets and a handful of other morons retweeting their support, and the hashtag was taken over pretty much immediately by people telling them to sit the feth down and/or taking the piss. But it was still spread around as if it actually meant something, as if it was actually relevant. Because racist nerds trying to boycott a film is a lot sexier and click-worthy than "a couple of idiots said something dumb on twitter", and because some folk just love the idea that they're part of some enlightened and special group of "real fans" who're proper decent people, not like those awful neckbeards...

I've listened to some of the harshest critics of the movies, and absolutely none of them have expressed a hate for women. Maybe a hate for Rey's character, a hate for how Phasma was handled, a hate for how Finn was reduced to cheap comic relief and ineptitude, and an overall hate for the way that RJ has spoken of the fans... but I think it's a show of intellectual bankruptcy/dishonesty to say that means "they hate women". It's a cop-out, it's lazy, and it's blatantly transparent to anyone who has any brain activity whatsoever.

And hey, you know what's funny? Getting combative with the fans never works out. And while a lot of people won't claim this is a metric to measure by, I disagree.

The Mandalorian figures are flying off the shelves and they just came off the trucks. You can't move Rey and Rose off the pegs for $3.00 a toy.

Those 'better people' obviously didn't spend like the dirty nasty neckbeards did, because even when the prequels were out and hated- guys were buying up the figures religiously. Don't really see much of that now, do we?

I'm still confused about whether not liking Rose's character makes me racist or a misogynist...

 Azreal13 wrote:
I'm still confused about whether not liking Rose's character makes me racist or a misogynist...

Shame she wasn't lesbian. Then you could be hit with homophobia at the same time so as to unlock the trifecta achievement.

Fingers crossed for developments in ROS then!