Stage Select

The Star Wars Thread: Where we discuss ALL of Star Wars


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, Hecatom said:

Palpatine just wanted power.

Yea cuz Sith want power and they will forgo their standards, ethics, and morals to achieve it. That's kinda the whole point of the Dark Side and the Sith. You will eventually compromise everything you are and stand for in the chase for more power. He'll work with Kaminoans to build him an army but that doesn't mean he respects them or anything. 

 

And those aliens are still very rare anyway, Thrawn goes over how he's rare in the Empire and people resent him for being such a high ranking alien in his debut book I. Like it's not just Palpatine the whole Empire operates this way, or was supposed to until Disney's 1st Order. I guess the argument there would be they can't be picky like that anymore since they aren't the dominant force in the galaxy anymore. 

 

Anyway you're welcome to disagree, you're just not disagreeing with me, you're disagreeing with the Jewish guy who wrote said fascist Empire. Pretty sure he knows his inspiration. 

Edited by RSG3
Link to comment
5 hours ago, Darc_Requiem said:

That's not entirely accurate. Shows like Star Trek and Star Wars have always been political. The difference is in the past any political themes were interwoven into the story. The current set of writers for these shows are basically Keenan Ivory Wayans yelling "Message!" in Don't Be A Menace To South Central While Drinking Your Juice In The Hood.

 

Side Note: Yes I remembered the entire title off the top of my head.

Stat trek became less subtle because people didnt get it. They've been arguing modern star trek sucks because it was never political or as political. And thats been one of the funniest things fans have said. It been so subtle almost hurts it in a way.

 

Like look at dax is basically a trans person, every new host you respect the new forms wishes and refer to them as whatever gender they are now ans whatever name they want to be. 

Link to comment
Posted (edited)
56 minutes ago, Maxx said:

Stat trek became less subtle because people didnt get it. They've been arguing modern star trek sucks because it was never political or as political. And thats been one of the funniest things fans have said. It been so subtle almost hurts it in a way.

 

Like look at dax is basically a trans person, every new host you respect the new forms wishes and refer to them as whatever gender they are now ans whatever name they want to be. 

No Star Trek became less subtle because of poor writing and the current trend of ham fisted story telling. If it were a Star Trek only thing it would be one thing but it isn't. It's a universal issue with modern story telling in general. People are too busy saying "Hey look at me, I'm progressive." and forgetting the first rule of story telling is to tell a good story. You wouldn't a get well crafted gem like The Measure of A Man in modern Star Trek . Not only that if they tried a similar concept, there'd be numerous articles prior to the episodes release saying "Hey guys, we talk about (insert issue here) in the 9th episode." Is more about the clout for presenting the message than it is conveying the message in a thoughtful and entertaining way.

Edited by Darc_Requiem
Link to comment
32 minutes ago, Darc_Requiem said:

No Star Trek became less subtle because of poor writing and the current trend of ham fisted story telling. If it were a Star Trek only thing it would be one thing but it isn't. It's a universal issue with modern story telling in general. People are too busy saying "Hey look at me, I'm progressive." and forgetting the first rule of story telling is to tell a good story. You wouldn't a get well crafted gem like The Measure of A Man in modern Star Trek . Not only that if they tried a similar concept, there'd be numerous articles prior to the episodes release saying "Hey guys, we talk about (insert issue here) in the 9th episode." Is more about the clout for presenting the message than it is conveying the message in a thoughtful and entertaining way.

i disagree with star trek specifically. i dont think it has anything to with star trek needing to say "hey we're a progressive show"..its more we've always been progressive. i find modern viewers of shows arent as adept at reading between the lines as in the past. they want to be spoon fed and want everything explained in such a easy manner. like the fact christopher nolan's inception was such a big uproar because people didnt like that they didnt know clearly what the ending meant. i see modern tv like that, they dont like to think and leave any possible grey areas.  i find the writing just reflects the modern fan bases. the writing changed to match who the hell would actually be watching..especially younger people.  broader audiences are the target and not the niche very specific older fan base of star trek.

 

i also think this idea of star trek trying to be uber woke is wayyyyy over the line of anything they actually did. because they started crying when they saw a black female captain before they actually saw anything in the fuckin show.

 

 

Link to comment
51 minutes ago, Maxx said:

Snip

 

Nah, the show has become very stupid on its writing, being partisan with its politics is  only one of its issues.

 

The new shows are a fucking disgrace that pale in comparison with what came before.

Like I said, having political themes is not the same as being political.

 

54 minutes ago, Maxx said:

because they started crying when they saw a black female captain before they actually saw anything in the fuckin show.

 

 

LMAO

Are you fucking serious.

Are we gonna pretend that characters like Jane Wayne and Cisco arent beloved by the fandom now??

 

What kind of stupid nonsense is this?

Link to comment
Posted (edited)
51 minutes ago, Hecatom said:

 

Nah, the show has become very stupid on its writing, being partisan with its politics is  only one of its issues.

 

The new shows are a fucking disgrace that pale in comparison with what came before.

Like I said, having political themes is not the same as being political.

 

 

 

LMAO

Are you fucking serious.

Are we gonna pretend that characters like Jane Wayne and Cisco arent beloved by the fandom now??

 

What kind of stupid nonsense is this?

I have no clue what your trying to say about janeway and sisko. Janeway isn't beloved, alot of the fanbase hates her. Shes usually at the bottom or near bottom of alot of peoples favorite captains.

 

As well as theirs a bunch of people who hate sisko. Alot of people dont like his take and the way he acts. 

 

But sisko overall is loved agree its just not as universal as you may think. Star trek discovery was getting shitted on purely because she was female and black. Their was a meme rollinv through thr first seasons talking about how it was getting cancelled.. It started before it even premiered, before we had a good sense of the story or writing purely on thr strength of people hating the idea of a black captain. 

 

Does this mean i think the whole fanbase is tnat way? No but their is absolutely a huge section of it that thinks like this 

 

 

Edited by Maxx
Link to comment
41 minutes ago, Maxx said:

Snip

 

Discovery was shitted because it was set on the Kelvin time line, it was introducing a sister for Spock that was never mentioned until that series, the changes in aesthetics for the whole series that clashed with everything from both the original timeline series, and the kelvin timeline movies, and much more stuff.

The race/sex thing was the usual gaslighting trying to deflect the actual criticims and being reductive that the hate was just because of that.

Link to comment
Posted (edited)
16 hours ago, Maxx said:

I have no clue what your trying to say about janeway and sisko. Janeway isn't beloved, alot of the fanbase hates her. Shes usually at the bottom or near bottom of alot of peoples favorite captains.

 

As well as theirs a bunch of people who hate sisko. Alot of people dont like his take and the way he acts. 

 

But sisko overall is loved agree its just not as universal as you may think. Star trek discovery was getting shitted on purely because she was female and black. Their was a meme rollinv through thr first seasons talking about how it was getting cancelled.. It started before it even premiered, before we had a good sense of the story or writing purely on thr strength of people hating the idea of a black captain. 

 

Does this mean i think the whole fanbase is tnat way? No but their is absolutely a huge section of it that thinks like this 

 

 

Janeway, like Star Trek Voyager, has a lukewarm reception from the fanbase. Janeway usually near the bottom of the Captains list but it's not because she's a woman. It's because Voyager was a disappointment. 

 

A bunch of people hate Sisko, you can miss me with this one. SIsko, like DS9, is well regarded over all. DS9, like TNG before it, took a couple seasons to find it's footing, but hit the mark once it's found it's identity. DS9 is one of most well regarded series in the franchise. 

 

I completely disagree with your take on Discovery and why it was criticized. Discovery took a lot of heat. Michael Burnham's race and gender was not focus of the issues people had with the show. Although there was lot of mockery of the media for making a big deal about Michael Burnham's race and gender. Because, actual Star Trek fans knew about Sisko and Janeway. Discovery, like Enterprise before it, was yet another prequel series. Fan sentiment heavily favored moving forward in the timeline. That was the biggest issue with Discovery prelaunch.

 

The series was supposed to be in the original timeline. Post launch It made a multitude of changes that didn't line up with the original timeline. Burnham's relationship with Spock's family made no sense. Spock wasn't a minor character that hadn't been explored. He was explored in TOS, TNG, and as well as the movies. A character like Burnham would have come up. It's part of the danger of making prequels, you pigeon hole yourself.

 

It further jumbled the issue of the appearance of the Klingons. This already happened with the previous change in appearance 1960s to the 1980s. They gave some lame excuse about them not being changed or them just having shaved heads because their ridges were some sort of sensory organ impeded by hair. It was a joke. Just say you made an artistic choice, take the criticism, and keeping it moving.

 

The in universe technology seemed too advanced for a pre TOS series. The Discovery was flying around through space doing things beyond the Enterprise D's capability. A ship that is 100 years past it in technological capability. Yet it precedes the original Enterprise by a mere decade. Star Trek is full of "techno babble". They put out tech manuals with fictional explanations about how things work. Fans are going to notice technological inconsistencies. Again an issue purely caused by going the prequel route. 

 

TLDR: I basically disagree with everything you said. Saying Star Trek fans were up in arms about Michael Burnham's race and gender is like Putin saying he's trying to De-Nazify the Ukraine... a country with a Jewish president. It's diversionary tactic plain and simple. 

Edited by Darc_Requiem
Link to comment
Posted (edited)

As a fan of Janeway and Voyager I can confirm she is not popular at all. Some people like her, lots of Trek fans do not. 

 

I think she's an absolute badass tho. She's not perfect and makes questionable decisions in the heat of the moment but she does it with her gut and she owns them. I respect it. She's up there with Sisko for me. 

 

She's also not a pussy like Picard and some other Captains can be at times which is part of why she's not terribly popular with Trekkies. 

Edited by RSG3
Link to comment
3 minutes ago, RSG3 said:

As a fan of Janeway and Voyager I can confirm she is not popular at all. Some people like her, lots of Trek fans do not. 

 

I think she's an absolute badass tho. She's not perfect and makes questionable decisions in the heat of the moment but she does it with her gut and she owns them. I respect it. She's up there with Sisko for me. 

 

She's also not a pussy like Picard and some other Captains can be at times which is part of why she's not terribly popular with Trekkies. 

I think Janeway suffered from bad writing mostly and Voyager was boring as fuck until the good writers from Deep Space 9 came over after the first two seasons or so.  But God damn that show was SOOOO DUULLLL that they had to get Jerry Ryan in a sexy jumpsuit just to get guys to watch it.  I think most of the hate from her comes from how droll she was the first two seasons and how the writers didn't give her much of a personality until after those seasons. 

 

Sisko is my favorite Captain, mostly because he had to make hard choices against some villians and he was always A MAN OF GREAT TESTICULAR FORTITUDE.  He also had a great villains, and Dukat is by far my favorite MAGNIFICIANT BASTARD trope I have seen used in a show.

 

Link to comment
Posted (edited)
29 minutes ago, J-ride said:

I think Janeway suffered from bad writing mostly and Voyager was boring as fuck until the good writers from Deep Space 9 came over after the first two seasons or so.  But God damn that show was SOOOO DUULLLL that they had to get Jerry Ryan in a sexy jumpsuit just to get guys to watch it.  I think most of the hate from her comes from how droll she was the first two seasons and how the writers didn't give her much of a personality until after those seasons. 

This is every Trek tho. Those first 1 or 2 season tend to be AWFUL. Next Gen didnt start to find itself until halfway through Season 2 and while DS9 is rather strong throughout, the first 2 seasons are pretty dull to compared to the rest of the show. Like its not great when I'm most invested in Quarks schemes and Odos babysitting then i am the actual issue of the episode lol. No one liked season 1 Kira and she kinda sucks for a lot of Season 2 as well. 

Edited by RSG3
Link to comment
17 hours ago, Darc_Requiem said:

Janeway, like Star Trek Voyager, has a lukewarm reception from the fanbase. Janeway usually near the bottom of the Captains list but it's not because she's a woman. It's because Voyager was a disappointment. 

 

A bunch of people hate Sisko, you can miss me with this one. SIsko, like DS9, is well regarded over all. DS9, like TNG before it, took a couple seasons to find it's footing, but hit the mark once it's found it's identity. DS9 is one of most well regarded series in the franchise. 

 

I completely disagree with your take on Discovery and why it was criticized. Discovery took a lot of heat. Michael Burnham's race and gender was not focus of the issues people had with the show. Although there was lot of mockery of the media for making a big deal about Michael Burnham's race and gender. Because, actual Star Trek fans knew about Sisko and Janeway. Discovery, like Enterprise before it, was yet another prequel series. Fan sentiment heavily favored moving forward in the timeline. That was the biggest issue with Discovery prelaunch.

 

The series was supposed to be in the original timeline. Post launch It made a multitude of changes that didn't line up with the original timeline. Burnham's relationship with Spock's family made no sense. Spock wasn't a minor character that hadn't been explored. He was explored in TOS, TNG, and as well as the movies. A character like Burnham would have come up. It's part of the danger of making prequels, you pigeon hole yourself.

 

It further jumbled the issue of the appearance of the Klingons. This already happened with the previous change in appearance 1960s to the 1980s. They gave some lame excuse about them not being changed or them just having shaved heads because their ridges were some sort of sensory organ impeded by hair. It was a joke. Just say you made an artistic choice, take the criticism, and keeping it moving.

 

The in universe technology seemed too advanced for a pre TOS series. The Discovery was flying around through space doing things beyond the Enterprise D's capability. A ship that is 100 years past it in technological capability. Yet it precedes the original Enterprise by a mere decade. Star Trek is full of "techno babble". They put out tech manuals with fictional explanations about how things work. Fans are going to notice technological inconsistencies. Again an issue purely caused by going the prequel route. 

 

TLDR: I basically disagree with everything you said. Saying Star Trek fans were up in arms about Michael Burnham's race and gender is like Putin saying he's trying to De-Nazify the Ukraine... a country with a Jewish president. It's diversionary tactic plain and simple. 

In terms of janeway or sisko.. I wasnt the one bringing them up. But the idea they are universally loved is wild. 

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, RSG3 said:

This is every Trek tho. Those first 1 or 2 season tend to be AWFUL. Next Gen didnt start to find itself until halfway through Season 2 and while DS9 is rather strong throughout, the first 2 seasons are pretty dull to compared to the rest of the show. Like its not great when I'm most invested in Quarks schemes and Odos babysitting then i am the actual issue of the episode lol.

Yeah this is pretty true next gen, ds9, voyager all took time to find their voices. 

Link to comment
27 minutes ago, Maxx said:

In terms of janeway or sisko.. I wasnt the one bringing them up. But the idea they are universally loved is wild. 

No you didn't bring them up and no where did I saw they were universally loved. I said Janeway criticisms were about her character not her gender and that Sisko was well regarded. 

Link to comment
11 minutes ago, Darc_Requiem said:

No you didn't bring them up and no where did I saw they were universally loved. I said Janeway criticisms were about her character not her gender and that Sisko was well regarded. 

Ive seen Janeway criticized specifically for being a woman, and that her characters flaws are because...shes a woman. Ive seen this many times for years.

 

Most just don't like her character tho yea.

Link to comment
10 minutes ago, Darc_Requiem said:

No you didn't bring them up and no where did I saw they were universally loved. I said Janeway criticisms were about her character not her gender and that Sisko was well regarded. 

Sisko also was a legit badass and was before everything became about identity politics and muh fee fees.  I really dislike everything boiling down to talking points for the convenience of a political narrative. 

It's really sad that everything has to pander to the bitchmade daycare generation these days and it really what is hurting most fandoms.

Link to comment

I just watched Book of Boba Fett S1.

 

Pros:

 

I dont know much about the character, but to me it was kinda interesting to see Boba try to rule justly despite being a hard bounty hunter. I guess he wants to to protect the sand people indirectly. Nice to see Sand people as not 100% EVIL all the time.

 

Action including the train heist and the final battle

 

Music

 

Unlike Obi Wan this doesnt drag as much due to shorter episode lengths.

 

 

Cons:

Ep 5/6 feel like Mandalorian eps. While I like those characters, this is boba's show lol. Also, Grogu going back to Din so soon after going to Luke seems anticlimactic.

 

The cyborg enforcers seemed cool. Its a shame we didnt get more character/backstory to them.

 

The guy with the light blue skin and red eyes seems to have a Vader/Obi Wan relationship with Boba. I'm assuming he is from a cartoon or comic book?  Maybe they could have built up to him more?

 

Overall: Not the greatest thing ever, but solid.  

7/10.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
On 7/15/2022 at 11:24 PM, DangerousJ said:

The guy with the light blue skin and red eyes seems to have a Vader/Obi Wan relationship with Boba. I'm assuming he is from a cartoon or comic book?  Maybe they could have built up to him more?

Cad Bane is bounty hunter that debuted during the clone wars. He was considered the number one bounty hunter in the galaxy after Jango was murdered by Mace. 
 

He purposely only takes high risk missions as he feels anything else isn’t worth his time or the credits. 

Link to comment

Finally finished Kenobi last night. While all the actors and actresses we're fantastic, some cool action scenes and they had some great character moments for nearly every named character, I can't say I enjoyed it. 

 

I had to binge it in chunks instead of watching week to week due to trying to keep my D+ pin out of the hands of a ever present nephew. But I can say this felt like the weakest Star Wars love action show, mostly because it felt too safe. The Vader stuff was great as usual but as a whole I didn't feel this one. Still a good show but I am not likely going to come back to this one. 

Link to comment

https://thedirect.com/article/star-wars-next-show-donald-trump

 

https://www.empireonline.com/tv/news/andor-star-wars-take-trumpian-world-fiona-shaw-exclusive/

 

Spoiler

Star Wars' Next Show Will Criticize Donald Trump Politics, Reveals Actor

 

While Star Wars is a sci-fi fantasy franchise packed with action and humor, those are only the trimmings. At its core, Star Wars is a narrative based on family, politics, and religion; and despite the complexity of those topics, it's one of the many reasons why the franchise has resonated with audiences for generations. That tradition looks to continue with Disney+'s new Star Wars show, Andor

Set to debut on September 21, Andor is a Rogue One spin-off prequel starring Diego Luna who's reprising his role as Rebellion operative, Cassian Andor.

But while the 2016 Star Wars film was a sacrificial war tale, the 12-episode season of Andor has been described as both a spy-thriller and a refugee story and one that will take on real-world politics. 

Star Wars Andor Tackling Donald Trump Era Politics

 

Not only is Andor Diego Luna's return to that galaxy far, far away, but it's also a homecoming for Rogue One writer Tony Gilroy who served as the Disney+ show's creator and executive producer and was reportedly instrumental in its commentary on politics. 

In talking with Empire, Andor actress Fiona Shaw revealed that Gilroy has "written a great, scurrilous [take] on the Trumpian world" and that events in the series reflect what's happening in the world today:

“Tony has written a great, scurrilous [take] on the Trumpian world. Our world is exploding in different places right now, people’s rights are disappearing, and Andor reflects that. [In the show] the Empire is taking over, and it feels like the same thing is happening in reality, too.”

While Lucasfilm's latest Disney+ series, Obi-Wan Kenobi, was set ten years after the events of Revenge of the Sith, Andor picks up fourteen years after the 2005 film and is expected to be one of the most comprehensive analyses of the Empire at its peak. 

But with the Empire in full force, as Shaw noted, people will be struggling as those in authority, and the government itself, are the main threat.

Under such circumstances, the lines between right and wrong are often blurred, and that's something Shaw claimed Gilroy explores in the series:

"I was impressed by Tony’s social-realist intentions. He’s created a whole new morality. It’s very deep and humane – there is grief, mourning, hope, fear. It’s not just primary colours here.”

Even though Andor is Tony Gilroy's second Star Wars project, political themes are nothing new for the writer, director, and producer whose resume includes House of Cards and the Bourne films; and even though Star Wars is no stranger to politics, neither is Gilroy, who noted Andor "comes from the same place" as his other projects:

"Andor comes from the same place as everything else that’s come out of this office. Clayton, the BournesThe Devil’s Advocate, now this… It’s all full-on drama.”

As to what the finished project will look like, particularly given Andor's echoes of this "Trumpian world," Cassian Andor's own Diego Luna promises that it will be "insanely ambitious, dark and real" and described Gilroy's pitch as "sick:"

“Even as Tony was pitching me, I was like, 'This is amazing. You are sick.’”

Rebellions are Still Built on Hope

Within the Star Wars filmography, Rogue One: A Star Wars Story stands apart from the rest. Less mythical, grounded, and shockingly dark, Rogue One's power is in the fact that its entire ensemble cast sacrificed their lives in a chance to stop the Empire.

To add to the story, there needs to be a reason; it certainly sounds like Andor has found that reason in Tony Gilroy's tale. 

Following the release of Rogue One in 2016, American politics have increasingly become more divided and volatile, while desperation, instability, and outright war know no border. 

While humanity is often drawn to storytelling and entertainment as a means of escape during such times, stories are often a way to provide understanding, perspective, and even inspiration. 

From what Fiona Shaw and Diego Luna shared, fans can expect a reflection of our real world in a way that's both real, ambitious, and relatable. This sort of Star Wars project is something fans have long wanted to see, particularly in terms of the darker side of the Rebellion and the Empire.

No doubt anticipation for Andor is on the rise; but along with the grit and commentary, a Star Wars story also needs hope. Despite its tragic ending, Rogue One was still able to inspire and provide a sense of hope; and considering the state of the world now, here's hoping that Andor will do the same. 

The first three episodes of Andor are set to premiere on Disney+ on September 21. 

 

 

Welp, to the trash with this show, lol.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
  • Create New...
Stage Select