New Empire vs New rebellion in the sequels: Biggest mistake?

PSW: discuss Star Wars without "versus" arguments.

Moderator: Vympel

User avatar
ray245
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7690
Joined: 2005-06-10 11:30pm

Re: New Empire vs New rebellion in the sequels: Biggest mistake?

Post by ray245 » 2020-06-27 05:12am

The Romulan Republic wrote:
2020-06-27 03:35am
While it is of course true that there are many admirable qualities in a character which are gender neutral, I'm also increasingly skeptical of the argument that one should just write women as men. Because the implication of that is that the only good way to write a woman is to essentially ignore a lot of the issues around sex and gender altogether, and pretend that those issues have no effect on a person's life, experiences, or how they interact with the world around them.
The problem is when a man is writing a woman. Or more specifically, man writing woman leaders. RJ wanted to write a story where from Poe's perspective, Holdo will come across as a bad leader. But the traits she was depicted with from Poe's perspective are all the bad traits one would see in a toxic male leader. Asking a man to portray the negative aspect of a female leader ( even if it is supposed to be from a biased point of view) is opening a can of worms, and in this case, Rian Johnson falls into the trap of his perspective as a male writer, despite his best intentions.

Yes, part of the problem is we have so little women leaders in real life, that it becomes difficult to talk about good vs bad female leaders. But generally speaking, when I think of bad female leaders, I tend to think of leaders like Margret Thatcher. I see Thatcher's actions as trying to embrace some of the worst aspects of masculinity because she is a leader in a nearly all male environment.

Holdo is in a environment which traditionally tends to be extremely male dominated ( see Clone Wars when the whole army is made up of male clone soldiers). Her reminding someone of their demotion, name calling ( or listing someone's flaws if some of you prefer to see it that way) in front of them in an already tense situation comes across as the action of many "tough guy" officers in the military. Which means even if we are not seeing it from Poe's point of view, her very action itself is deeply flawed.

The premise of the issue with Holdo is that there really needs to be more thought in how people writes bad female leaders. In order for the subversion of RJ to work, he needed to think about how does he interplay between good female leadership and bad female leadership. If he really see Holdo's suicide ram as a audience "redemption" for her character, then he's really doing a bad job of "redeeming" her. He is saying actually Holdo is really brave as a leader. Which is fine on its own, but when it is used as a form of subversion of audience expectation, is he saying Holdo is meant to be seen as a coward prior to her final scene? Does it mean the main test of women in military is whether they are actually brave like men?
Humans are such funny creatures. We are selfish about selflessness, yet we can love something so much that we can hate something.

User avatar
Formless
Sith Marauder
Posts: 3850
Joined: 2008-11-10 08:59pm
Location: the beginning and end of the Present

Re: New Empire vs New rebellion in the sequels: Biggest mistake?

Post by Formless » 2020-06-27 07:00am

TRR wrote:Right, Holdo not being perfectly polite and respectful to the guy who got demoted for getting a bunch of people killed and then introduced himself by misrepresenting his rank is clearly pettier behavior than him critiquing her from the start because he wasn't impressed by her speech, introducing himself by misrepresenting his rank, insubordination and conspiring behind her back because he didn't like her tone, launching a mutiny, and getting hundreds of people killed.

And I call that sexist, because part of sexist culture is that women are endlessly critiqued over the most trivial aspects of appearance or tone, and expected to always be deferential and un-threatening to men, and to go to great lengths to sooth their egos, while men are entitled to act out and demand what they want.
And up until now, the only thing I had to say about her appearance was that it was pre-established to be the aesthetic choice of aristocracy and Bourgeois in Star Wars, which isn't even a criticism so much as an observation. Liea also wore the clothing of aristocracy in the original trilogy, but then she was actually royalty, and it was a contrast with her down to earth tone and sarcastic demeanor. If I was going to criticize the clothing choices, I would say that choosing to dress her like rich people dress in Star Wars and then have her insult a guy dressed in the fashion of working class folks like Han just makes her look like a classcist asshole (AKA a Karen, like I said before). That isn't sexism, that's Intersectionality. If you knew anything about Feminism, you would be familiar with the term. In fact, even The Mary Sue, a feminist blog, argues that the movie reduces Poe from a caring and responsible individual to a latino stereotype, then argues that he had a right to ask the questions he asked of Holdo and essentially got shut down for no reason. To quite them directly, "Like diversity, feminism is more than just having women on the screen. The female characters need to have their own individual motivations and meaningful storylines. Admiral Holdo is killed off to complete Poe’s character arc. It’s quite telling how one of the most memorable shots of the film is a woman sacrificing herself after she’s outlived her usefulness to the story." That is a novel argument for this thread, but its proof that you don't have to be a sexist prick to have a problem with this story. Just the opposite, for many reasons this movie is anti-feminist, and this isn't the only feminist critique I have found that rejects the movie's portrayal of women in the film to be less empowering than Disney lets on. Brain Magic's Nichole Flannigan points out several problems with the film's portrayal, including the fact that previously in Star Wars there was no conflict between men and women, but in this film every conflict that isn't between the Resistance and the First Order (and at least one example that is) just so happens to be between a woman and a man, and also repeats The Mary Sue's argument that the women in the film all exist to further the story of a man in some way (even Rey, who mostly just further's Kylo's story arc). Are these writers, both of them female and one of them a noted feminist just being sexist for pointing out the flaws in these characters that Disney touts as powerful female role models? If you say yes, I can just point to literally the entire corpus of The Mary Sue's output and make you look like a fool.

Meanwhile, people have pointed out numerous problems with her demeanor and tone, but that isn't inherently sexism. I would ask you to prove that I and the other people in this thread are motivated by mysogyny, or to retract the accusation. Just because it fits a percieved pattern in your mind does not make it causal or justify the accusation. All it does is further demonstrate an unwillingness on your part to engage with debate and dissent. Further more, I would also point out that it is an Ad Hominim in the strictest sense, in that you are using the accusation as a substitute for a proper argument or rebuttal. I will point this out point blank: I am not impressed, nor intimidated by this blatant (and predictable) power play.

I will also point out that it is you who is misrepresenting the scenes in the movie with your words. People have already posted the video showing the first scene in which Poe interacts with Holdo, complete with a counter showing the number of times each person insulted the other, and the video speaks for itself. Holdo is the first to throw out an insult, while Poe merely asks questions and does not insult her until later in the film. I would also point out that your argument implies that Poe deliberately misrepresented his rank, when an easier reading of the scene is that it was an accident as it was a very recent demotion and happened shortly before a battle in which most of his commanding officers were spaced and the highest ranking officer in the whole Resistance barely survived. Also present evidence that he mutinied solely because he didn't like her tone; the film as I remember it did not show him contemplating mutiny until after he found out about the fuel issues from reading someone else's monitor on the bridge, and when he asked what the hell was going on, literally got silence. Not a response in a tone he didn't care for. No response at all. This was the scene in which he had his first outburst, mind you, so its pretty memorable as the one time he insulted her, and the next time he confronts her its with a gun in hand and at least one bridge officer backing him up.

If you are going to claim things about the movie, present evidence from the goddamn movie to support those claims.
If she was male, I expect there'd be much less need to defend her. There's a reason I brought up George Kirk.
Why does she need to be defended? If she isn't a good leader then her portrayal isn't a good example of female representation, but the opposite! Moreover, there is the point about her not really having her own arc, but being a supporting character in a male character's arc. Again, an argument used by actual feminists on multiple websites. Again, why does this character require defending just because she is female? Does Janeway require defending just because she is female?
Also, the film clearly meant for her to be perceived as a good leader, so they claim that she was portrayed as a stereotype of women being bad leaders is false.
Intent is meaningless. You literally just said that her portrayal can't be sexist because the company says it isn't, ergo the company can't be wrong. Except it can. Death of the Author. Look it up.
You are taking YOUR view, that she is a bad leader, saying its the film's portrayal, calling the film and its defenders sexist based on that, while denying that you are sexist for holding the very view that you then projected onto the film to justify calling it sexist. Its nuts.
I am making an argument that the portrayal is actually sexist and fits a pattern of how Hollywood tends to portray female leaders, with an example from Star Trek. You then read that argument as an accusation (hint: learn to fucking read) and dismiss not only my argument but also my character as sexist simply because... you don't like it.

Learn how to debate like a sane person, TRR, or stop bothering me with your blather.
Right, the "terrible leader" who inherited a complete disaster, a vastly-outnumbered fleet with virtually no fuel, mass desertions and a decapitated leadership, held it together and pulled off an effective escape plan despite an unprovoked mutiny, and ultimately gave her life to protect her people. And the only reason you can give for her being a "terrible leader" is essentially that she wasn't polite and deferential enough toward an entitled male subordinate who showed her zero respect himself. Oh, and that she didn't tell him the plan that only failed when he became aware of it.
Okay, so you want to defend her actions based on her circumstances, that's an actual argument! Congratulations, a stopped clock has to be right at least twice a day after all. Okay, lets play that game.

Why on earth does Holdo sacrifice the captains of her other two ships? The movie has this theme that "people are more important than material" going on, but... then they have people sacrificing themselves with the ships because? Its not like they turned them around and performed the Holdo Maneuver with the medical ship, they just let it run out of fuel, evacuate the crew to the Raddus... except the captain, because fuck him I guess? Why did he have to die? What purpose does it serve? I know "captain goes down with the ship" is a trope and all, but the intent of the saying is that the captain is supposed to be the last one off the ship, not that he literally has to die with the ship. The captain is also responsible for their crew once they are all off the ship according to naval law and tradition, so... what the fuck? We see in the film that Poe is greatly distressed by the deaths of the other two ship captains, and we know it effects other members of the bridge crew on the Raddus, so why does Holdo not tell the idiots to evacuate with their crew? Or at least attempt a suicide run like she successfully attempts later?

(Again, Hyperspace ramming is just a bad idea in so many ways, but most of all it undermines the chase sequence. They could have proposed using the medical ship that way and then shot down the idea as unlikely, and that would have at least forshadowed that everyone knew why it was unlikely to work; but instead the ramming scene happens with no warning to the audience at all, and no explanation for why it was never tried in a prior movie)

And that's just one problem with her leadership that has nothing to do with Poe. The problems with her handling of Poe are merely more obvious because the film is taking his POV for most of the sequence. Even this problem is witnessed by him, but again, it doesn't just effect him, and in fact the mutiny is proof of that. Again, like people have been saying, we see a member of the bridge crew among the mutineers, showing how bad her mistake with Poe got. She should have either treated him better, or disciplined him harder when he threw an actual tantrum on the bridge, but trying to have it both ways by not dealing with him at all? That's a bad leadership decision in its own right. That is what directly caused the mutiny.

And there is that intersectionality problem I mentioned earlier, wherein the movie is written to make the white woman in a position of authority act rude to the latino man who works for her. And he treats it as rude, so don't tell me it isn't rude. You just keep ignoring their race when talking about the scene, but it is just as relevant as their gender for how the audience views the scene. Point of View matters in story telling. Its a deliberate choice by the filmmaker to portray her decisions through Poe's eyes. Is he entitled? Maybe a little, but as a latino man it has a different connotation than if he were a white man. If it were Finn, it would be a different connotation again because Finn is black. One of the other major Hollywood fallacies about diversity is that its an either-or dilemma, when it actually isn't (Star Trek being a good example of having all the diversity you could ask for without compromise). In this case they sacrificed good representation of racial minorities in favor of what they thought was strong female representation, and that in itself is a mistake.
Funny, I don't recall Holdo constantly pulling rank. I do recall her calling Poe out when he misstated his rank following his demotion.
Psst, TRR, its an example of the pattern, it doesn't have to directly relate to Holdo. Holdo is similar insofar as she is written to exude authority without earning it by her actions, but merely by her demeanor. Namely, having her remind Poe of his current ranks is a power play to show who is in command here, which shouldn't be necessary because they already said she is in command and Poe approached her as his commanding officer. We don't need to be told she is in command three times, its only done to show that she's the boss and he's beneath her, or in other words, to show how "strong" she is without showing her in action. That backfired for reasons unique to this film and have nothing per-say to do with Star Trek. But it is also part of the pattern. If she were written as a male leader, its more likely (but not 100% likely) he would have merely been introduced as the current commanding officer, and then move on to business. A male admiral would be assumed by the writer to be a competent leader until they have to show otherwise; with a female leader it seems to be the opposite, and they work themselves into knots trying to figure out how to portray them as strong leaders without doing anything to earn that. Here's a thought, instead of Poe taking one look at her, commenting that she's not what he expected (which, by the way, primes the audience to pay attention to how she dresses, something you keep coming back to), and then approach her they could have had him say "oh, yeah, I've heard of her from <events XYZ>. We might be in good hands." You know, the same trick Lucas when he revealed that Lando held the rank of General in Return of the Jedi. All we needed to hear was that he earned the rank, and that was that. If they did the same thing with Holdo, she would be established immediately as someone Poe knows should be competent. Then you can do the subversion where her demeanor puts him off somehow (though she still shouldn't stonewall him for no reason), because when the reveal happens that she had a good plan all along, it would bring the audience back to Poe's initial comment, and show that he shouldn't have doubted her based on her demeanor. THAT is how you break the stereotype of women being bad leaders.

By the way, if you can't tell, women can be excellent leaders, IMO. Its just an awful stereotype that I'm rather sick of seeing in fiction, and which seems to effect real politics when you look at the demographics of people in office.
While it is of course true that there are many admirable qualities in a character which are gender neutral, I'm also increasingly skeptical of the argument that one should just write women as men. Because the implication of that is that the only good way to write a woman is to essentially ignore a lot of the issues around sex and gender altogether, and pretend that those issues have no effect on a person's life, experiences, or how they interact with the world around them.
The point of the advice is not to ignore the facts of being female, but rather to get writers to relax when trying to write good female characters. Not only does it highlight to the writer that our admiration of a character is only related to gender insofar as we relate to people we are like ourselves, it also encourages some writers to limit the scope of the character's backstory, as some writers also fall into a trap where a single female character has to represent all women, so they jam too much into their backstory and get a headache in the process. Women are diverse creatures, so this method also teaches new writers that they can gender swap other characters in their story that were going to male characters by default, thus increasing the diversity of their stories with much less effort than they were expecting. A lot of characters are defined by a role in the story rather than by the gender of the character, but a lot of writers don't realize they are using male as a default, or even heterosexual as a default-- and yes, you can use the same trick to introduce more LGBTQ representation as well. You don't have to think "I need to insert a gay character into this story" when you can just say "hey, I got these two characters in a romance, maybe one of them could gender flip to the same sex as the other character?" Its obvious more work has to be put in to make those characters believable, but not nearly as much as a lot of writers assume.
Actually, as I have repeatedly pointed out, the film does give several hints which, in hindsight, show that Poe was in the wrong. The first is his action at the start of the film, getting many people killed in a reckless and unnecessary attack against orders. This demonstrates him impulsiveness, insubordination, and poor judgement. This is reinforced when Legendary OT Hero Leia calls him out and demotes him for it. Holdo, meanwhile, is introduced as a hero of a prior battle.
No, no, and no. None of that foreshadows that Holdo has a plan. Its irrelevant, and does not directly relate to the middle act of the movie at all. On the other hand, as I pointed out later in the post, if Finn and Rose's spaceship had a cloaking device in it, that would foreshadow Holdo's plan. You obviously don't know how foreshadowing works.
Also, of course, there's the fact that when she does try to tell Poe the plan, he doesn't listen, but instead starts ranting that she's a traitor.
She tells him to have hope. She doesn't tell him jack shit about a plan. You obviously don't know how dialogue works.
The film plays on audiences biases and gives limited perspective to keep the misdirection up, but in hindsight there are plenty of signs that Poe is in the wrong, and to say that the film gives no clues is flatly false. And I've demonstrated this point repeatedly. The truth is that the reveal "failed" not because there was no foreshadowing of it, or because Poe was really right, but because the audience (or, rather, a vocal portion of it) did not like the message. Which is also predictable in hindsight. Few people enjoy having their biases pointed out to them, and denial is generally easier and more comforting than self-reflection.
Foreshadowing isn't about who is right and who is wrong. Its about spoiling the plot to the audience and hiding the spoilers in background noise so they have to be clever to notice it. It can also be more blatant if the storyteller wants, such as a Chekov's gun. It isn't fair to make the audience biased by keeping information from them and then saying "Ha ha! Fooled you!" That is why the reveal doesn't work. No one cares what the message is, because it feels like the message is just the writer repeatedly spitting in their eye and calling it filmmaking.
[Oh, you've just got to love this. You admit that "her" plan (which was really at least partly Leia's plan, but I guess we're just ignoring that) only failed because of Poe's mutiny, but blame Holdo for the mutiny, then use that as proof that she's a bad leader- justifying the mutiny which supposedly proves she's a bad leader! What a perfect little circular argument.
You need to look up what "circular reasoning" means. Like I said before, as soon as Poe had that tantrum on the bridge he should have been either thrown in the brig, or Holdo should have had someone brief him on what was actually going on, or both. By doing nothing, yeah, she caused the mutiny.

People have already said this. When are you planning on listening?
Wow, you can just feel the seething resentment being projected onto the character of Holdo here. Complete with hysterical, paranoid rantings about the female authority figure wanting to strangle you in your sleep.
Oh get a sense of humor, you dumb piece of shit. Do you really think this paragraph is meant to be totally serious when I started making Karen jokes? Or have you just not heard of that meme? Obviously you don't work retail or the service industry. If there is any resentment to anyone in that paragraph, its to idiots in my workplace who refuse to wear masks in public and demand to know why the bullshit we sell costs ten percent more than it does online (no, really, the story I work for can have as much as a ten percent difference between the brick and mortar locations and the online store. Its really stupid, and I blame corporate as much as anyone).

The only other purpose this could have served if I were thinking about it that hard was baiting you into saying something stupid, like you assuming the fighter commander I am referring to is Poe, when I clearly said the fighter commander on the ground, i.e. the mission controller. Moron.
Oh yes, of course the solution is to replace the original character with an old OT character. :roll:

And yeah, the audience would probably be more accepting of this. But it would negate the entire aspect of the Holdo-Poe conflict which is deconstructing entitled toxic masculinity- which is no doubt a big part of the reason why you prefer it.
God, you just can't allow any other interpretation than "this is about toxic masculinity" can you? Even other defenders of the film I've read at least try to tie it into a theme of the film that's actually supported by the text, namely, people learning from failure. In this case, Poe learning from his role in fucking up the escape plan. Of course, that's still in the film, it just comes at the cost of sacrificing all his best qualities from the previous film (and don't get me wrong, I only dislike that he became a pet character in the previous film, but I can see why J.J. liked the performance) while simultaniously making him but heads with a character we have never met before rather than making use of an underused OT character. Yes, I think the OT characters needed to be used in these films, so sue me. Why did it need to be a new character? Answer me that. And besides, he doesn't even learn anything by the end of it, certainly nothing about treating women better, because it was a character trait that came out of nowhere and went nowhere. He was fine with women in the previous film, he was fine with women who weren't Holdo during the sequence (Rose Tico, for instance, who tazed one of his friends just for trying to leave), so I'm pretty sure it wasn't about toxic masculinity. And if it was, like I said, you can't mix Feminism with racism and still be Feminist.
Yes, God forbid that the franchise ever do anything new.
And you end the long chain of Quote Spaghetti with a one liner with no substance. Like clockwork.
"Still, I would love to see human beings, and their constituent organ systems, trivialized and commercialized to the same extent as damn iPods and other crappy consumer products. It would be absolutely horrific, yet so wonderful." — Shroom Man 777
"To Err is Human; to Arrr is Pirate." — Skallagrim
“I would suggest "Schmuckulating", which is what Futurists do and, by extension, what they are." — Commenter "Rayneau"
The Magic Eight Ball Conspiracy.

User avatar
Formless
Sith Marauder
Posts: 3850
Joined: 2008-11-10 08:59pm
Location: the beginning and end of the Present

Re: New Empire vs New rebellion in the sequels: Biggest mistake?

Post by Formless » 2020-06-27 07:04am

The Romulan Republic wrote:And before people inevitably say it:

I am not calling everyone who disagrees with me misogynist.

I am not calling everyone who dislikes Holdo misogynist.

I am not calling everyone who dislikes TLJ misogynist.
No, just everyone who has ever actually argued with you about The Last Jedi.

At what point does your behavior in practice make this a de-facto lie?
"Still, I would love to see human beings, and their constituent organ systems, trivialized and commercialized to the same extent as damn iPods and other crappy consumer products. It would be absolutely horrific, yet so wonderful." — Shroom Man 777
"To Err is Human; to Arrr is Pirate." — Skallagrim
“I would suggest "Schmuckulating", which is what Futurists do and, by extension, what they are." — Commenter "Rayneau"
The Magic Eight Ball Conspiracy.

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 21335
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: New Empire vs New rebellion in the sequels: Biggest mistake?

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2020-06-27 07:20am

If the issue repeatedly comes up, then maybe instead of accusing me of calling everyone who argues with me sexist, people might stop to wonder why so many people who hate The Last Jedi say sexist things.


You posted a lengthy tract whinging about the "Holdos" in real life, fantasizing about how they secretly want to kill you, and belittling a female leader and dismissing her abilities on the basis of appearance. I called you misogynist because you posted a nasty sexist tract, which made it clear to me that your hostility to the character was at least partly based on projecting a hostility toward real life female authority figures. Now, you can whinge and cry about how that mean SJW TRR calls everyone who disagrees with him a misogynist. But that doesn't change the fact that it is a misogynist tract, and that it deserves to be called out as such.

Its the 21st Century. You're not allowed to keep your mouth shut when you see things like that, and I regret the times that I have (far too many of them) more than the times that I've spoken up, even when it lead to a fight.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver

"The greatest enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan."-General Von Clauswitz, describing my opinion of Bernie or Busters and third partiers in a nutshell.

I SUPPORT A NATIONAL GENERAL STRIKE TO REMOVE TRUMP FROM OFFICE.

User avatar
ray245
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7690
Joined: 2005-06-10 11:30pm

Re: New Empire vs New rebellion in the sequels: Biggest mistake?

Post by ray245 » 2020-06-27 07:35am

The Romulan Republic wrote:
2020-06-27 07:20am
If the issue repeatedly comes up, then maybe instead of accusing me of calling everyone who argues with me sexist, people might stop to wonder why so many people who hate The Last Jedi say sexist things.
And we can ignore those sexist criticism of TLJ in this thread. It's not that hard. If we cannot discuss the issues and flaws of TLJ without bringing up issues of sexism, then the misogynists have won. Because they've effectively spoiled any valid discussion of the movie by making this a issue of sexism.
Humans are such funny creatures. We are selfish about selflessness, yet we can love something so much that we can hate something.

User avatar
Formless
Sith Marauder
Posts: 3850
Joined: 2008-11-10 08:59pm
Location: the beginning and end of the Present

Re: New Empire vs New rebellion in the sequels: Biggest mistake?

Post by Formless » 2020-06-27 02:40pm

In the 21'st century, Google exists, and you can always just look up the fucking meme, fucktard[/url, rather than acting like you can judge ... mentality" that makes other women look bad by proximity

And because its a character archetype from memes, there are a bunch of various little things like the haircut that are associated with Karen, but not always. The meme is useful for retail workers who want to tell stories about entitled, asshole customers they've dealt with, but without revealing their real names. Sometimes these stories are about men, in which case there is no consensus about what to call him (sometimes its Chris, sometimes its Kyle, etc.) but its clearly the same meme being invoked, because everyone knows or has met a "Karen" if they work in retail or the service industry. Calling me a misogynist over this shows your ignorance, but more importantly your judgemental attitude that prevents you from discussing this movie without eventually devolving into a histrionic, almost McCarthy like prick who sees misogynists behind every door in the Star Wars fandom. Frankly, the way you overuse the term makes it incapable of truly making a commentary on sexism.

Because, face it, literally every time the sexism angle comes up [on this forum, its you who brought it up in the first place! Its not "so many people in the Star Wars fandom say sexist things" its literally you derailing entire thrads by saying shit like "I read this and my immediate thought is that you, like most Holdo bashers, are projecting onto her resentment you've felt toward women in your own life. Hell, you effectively admit it. I can't prove it, but I'd guess that's probably true for a lot of Holdo bashers." If you can't prove it, don't say it! Because the "usual Holdo bashers" on THIS forum are people like myself, ray245, FaxModem1, Shep (admittedly a case can be made that he's a troll, but I haven't seen any sign he's a mysoginist), and plenty others whose posting history shows no sign of sexist comments. Indeed, the most common problems people bring up with Holdo on this forum are issues to do with her communication skills and military leadership. And if you haven't noticed by now, I emphasize on this forum because THIS is the forum you have chosen to interact with the Star Wars fandom on, and this forum doesn't match the pattern you describe. And when called out on it, don't post examples from elsewhere, just vague references to fans we cannot actually confirm to exist.

And you still haven't answered any of my points or calls for textual evidence in the film of the various claims you have made about it.
"Still, I would love to see human beings, and their constituent organ systems, trivialized and commercialized to the same extent as damn iPods and other crappy consumer products. It would be absolutely horrific, yet so wonderful." — Shroom Man 777
"To Err is Human; to Arrr is Pirate." — Skallagrim
“I would suggest "Schmuckulating", which is what Futurists do and, by extension, what they are." — Commenter "Rayneau"
The Magic Eight Ball Conspiracy.

User avatar
Formless
Sith Marauder
Posts: 3850
Joined: 2008-11-10 08:59pm
Location: the beginning and end of the Present

Re: New Empire vs New rebellion in the sequels: Biggest mistake?

Post by Formless » 2020-06-27 03:04pm

Ghetto edit: AAAAA Goddamnit, I posted that in too much of a hurry to proof read it, and ten minutes later I see that because of one damn url tag being screwed up, half the post doesn't read properly. Here's what its supposed to look like, and if a mod could kindly delete the original I would be grateful.


In the 21'st century, Google exists, and you can always just look up the fucking meme, fucktard, rather than acting like you can judge the character of a person you have never met in real life based on a series of obvious jokes whose reference you clearly don't get.

Karen is an archetype of antagonist in memes who, among other things, embodies:

1. classism, manifesting in antagonism towards retail and service industry workers

2. white privilege and first world problems, manifesting in petty complaints about the same and other minor issues in others

3. anti-vaxxers

4. racist women who will call the cops on black people just for being in the same park as her (based on a real life incident!)

5. various forms of entitlement white women in general seem to display, as a sort of "crab mentality" that makes it hard to take other people seriously who actually do need special treatment.

And because its a character archetype from memes, there are a bunch of various little things like the haircut that are associated with Karen, but not always. The meme is useful for retail workers who want to tell stories about entitled, asshole customers they've dealt with, but without revealing their real names. Sometimes these stories are about men, in which case there is no consensus about what to call him (sometimes its Chris, sometimes its Kyle, etc.) but its clearly the same meme being invoked, because everyone knows or has met a "Karen" if they work in retail or the service industry. Calling me a mysoginist over this shows your ignorance, but more importantly your judgemental attitude that prevents you from discussing this movie without eventually devolving into a hystrionic, almost McCarthy like prick who sees misogynists behind every door in the Star Wars fandom.

Because, face it, literally every time the sexism angle comes up on this forum, its you who brought it up in the first place! Its not "so many people in the Star Wars fandom say sexist things" its literally you derailing entire threads by saying shit like "I read this and my immediate thought is that you, like most Holdo bashers, are projecting onto her resentment you've felt toward women in your own life. Hell, you effectively admit it. I can't prove it, but I'd guess that's probably true for a lot of Holdo bashers." If you can't prove it, don't say it! Because the "usual Holdo bashers" on THIS forum are people like myself, ray245, FaxModem1, Shep (admittedly a case can be made that he's a troll, but I haven't seen any sign he's a mysoginist), and plenty others whose posting history shows no sign of sexist comments. Indeed, the most common problems people bring up with Holdo on this forum are issues to do with her communication skills and military leadership. And I emphasize THIS FORUM because this is the forum you have chosen to interact with the Star Wars fandom on, not Youtube, not Spacebattles, not anywhere else. And if you are referring to youtubers, you can at least name channels that act the way you are talking about, like ray245 namedrops RLM when he talks about that aspect of fandom. Its not hard.

And you still haven't answered any of my points or calls for textual evidence in the film of the various claims you have made about it.
"Still, I would love to see human beings, and their constituent organ systems, trivialized and commercialized to the same extent as damn iPods and other crappy consumer products. It would be absolutely horrific, yet so wonderful." — Shroom Man 777
"To Err is Human; to Arrr is Pirate." — Skallagrim
“I would suggest "Schmuckulating", which is what Futurists do and, by extension, what they are." — Commenter "Rayneau"
The Magic Eight Ball Conspiracy.

channel73
Redshirt
Posts: 25
Joined: 2020-06-27 06:36pm

Re: New Empire vs New rebellion in the sequels: Biggest mistake?

Post by channel73 » 2020-06-27 07:04pm

I pretty much hate the Sequel Trilogy but I tend to think it was still somewhat salvageable before TLJ came out. The main reason goes back to the title of this thread: it wasn't until TLJ that it became truly clear that the ST would be a complete rehash of the OT.

People might not remember, but back in 2015, many people tended to be a lot more forgiving of TFA being an ANH clone, because of 3 reasons:

(1) TFA was basically a reaction to the Prequels. For most of the first decade of the 21st century, before the people who watched the Prequels as kids became adults, the loudest voice on the Internet was the faction of fans (including myself) who grew up with the OT and didn't like the Prequels.

(2) Unlike the Prequels, TFA felt like it actually had great characters that had amazing chemistry together. The early scene in TFA where Poe and Finn escape together on the TIE fighter depicts amazing chemistry between these two characters, exchanging quips while running from laser blasts.

(3) People accepted the logic that TFA - and only TFA - would be a rehash of the OT, in order to "get Star Wars back on track".

If you look back at some of the threads in this forum when TFA first came out, the idea that the entire Sequel Trilogy would be an Empire vs. Rebels rehash wasn't necessarily taken as a given. Remember that TFA was frustratingly vague when it came to world building - all we knew for sure was that at least one planet (or one star system) where a major New Republic fleet was stationed had been destroyed. When I first saw that I didn't interpret it to necessarily mean that the entire New Republic had been destroyed. I assumed that in subsequent movies we would see huge New Republic fleets with Capital Ships fighting against the First Order.

But then in TLJ, all of a sudden in the opening crawl we get "The First Order Reigns" and Rey is like "they've taken over the whole Galaxy!". That is the point where I pretty much checked out. When I saw that I literally just stopped caring.

Lots of people complain about lots of things over TLJ - Luke being an elderly depressing asshole, Canto Bight, etc. There's a lot I didn't like in TLJ, and some things I thought were really well done - but the one thing I just could never really get over was that TLJ cemented the idea that the New Republic was completely destroyed (almost as an after-thought) and we were 100% back to Rebels vs. Empire mode. (I think in TLJ they even start calling it the Rebels/Rebellion instead of Resistance sometimes.)

TLJ was the first Star Wars movie I ever saw where I didn't really love it or hate it. I just didn't really care... it somehow made me stop caring about Star Wars because it was just repeating Empire vs. Rebels. At least Phantom Menace did something entirely different.

See, even though TFA was more of a rip-off of the OT, I was willing to let TFA slide because of the context surrounding the release of that film. I understood Disney was just reacting to the Prequels and wanted to play it as safe as possible with their first new Star Wars movie, while introducing us to the new cast. So I was able to forgive things like the existence of a stupid "Resistance" when clearly the New Republic should have been the good guy organization. I was able to forgive this, because I was just like, okay Disney, we get you want to establish that we're back to OT-style action/adventure fun. Just please don't fuck me with Episode 8 and 9. Of course, that's exactly what they did. Episode 8 comes along and "the First Order Reigns". Boorrrring.....

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 21335
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: New Empire vs New rebellion in the sequels: Biggest mistake?

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2020-06-28 12:28am

What claims, exactly, do you feel I've made that require further evidence? Give me specific scenes, and I'll look for clips. I cannot and will not answer some vague accusation of lack of evidence, short of telling you to re-watch the whole movie (which I strongly encourage).

I'm also going to point out that none of my criticism of you or your post was based on the use of the term "Karen", and that trying to characterize it that way is a trap, as it is a term which has become used primarily to criticize racist and entitled white women, and if you can paint me as objecting to it, you can therefore paint me as defending white privilege/criticizing the protests.

I called you (nobody else, just you) a misogynist based on:

a) Your hysterical rantings against female authority figures, which were not limited to the use of the term "Karen".

b) Your admission that you identified Holdo with women you found despicable in the real world.

c) Your repeated dismissal of Holdo's fitness to lead on the basis of trivialities of her tone and her feminine appearance.

I stand by that statement. The fact that you used a popular term for entitled white women to try to legitimize your rant does not change that, in my view. However, that criticism is directed specifically at you, not at ray, Faxmodem, or even Shep (despite his far Right views on various subjects). I'm sure that there are others to whom it would apply, but I have not named anyone here, because I did not feel that I was justified in doing so.

Further, while I do accuse you, specifically, of misogyny, the constant refrain from you and others that I must be calling specific posters here sexist simply because I discuss sexism as an issue is, of course, ridiculous. Any number of topics are discussed on this board, not just ones which are widely-held views by the members of this forum. There is no rule on this board that one can only discuss a topic if one is criticizing a poster on this board, and nobody else is held to that standard when discussing an issue, because its absurd. You're essentially attacking me for supposedly calling various posters here misogynist, and then saying that I can only discuss the issue if I'm attacking specific posters on this board. The real goal, of course, is to silence any discussion of the topic at all.

As for it usually being me who brings up sexism on this board... hey, I'd love it if other people called this shit out more often. But if they don't, I will.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver

"The greatest enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan."-General Von Clauswitz, describing my opinion of Bernie or Busters and third partiers in a nutshell.

I SUPPORT A NATIONAL GENERAL STRIKE TO REMOVE TRUMP FROM OFFICE.

User avatar
Gandalf
SD.net White Wizard
Posts: 15536
Joined: 2002-09-16 11:13pm
Location: A video store in Australia

Re: New Empire vs New rebellion in the sequels: Biggest mistake?

Post by Gandalf » 2020-06-28 12:44am

NecronLord wrote:
2020-06-26 11:37pm
The Romulan Republic wrote:
2020-06-26 04:26pm
NecronLord wrote:
2020-06-26 06:46am
And that's why her kamikaze run doesn't inspire admiration of the character. She does it, but it's clear that it's being done without much thought about how it would be clever going into it.
Well, its also because she dared to disagree with fan-preferred character Poe, and because of knee-jerk sequel bashing, and, yes, because of sexist biases.
I can't speak for everyone, but I far preferred her over Poe in Episode 8; Poe is such a manchild that he is telling 'yo mama' jokes. She should have had him locked up immediately.

But no one comes out looking very smart from the writing.
Which does raise the question of why the hell Leia is in charge of military stuff, as opposed to something like a political wing of the Resistance.

Leia's alleged leadership led to such shitty discipline that Poe felt everyone owed him everything, even after losing a bunch of people and equipment. I guess Skywalker hubris isn't limited to Luke and Anakin.
"Oh no, oh yeah, tell me how can it be so fair
That we dying younger hiding from the police man over there
Just for breathing in the air they wanna leave me in the chair
Electric shocking body rocking beat streeting me to death"

- A.B. Original, Report to the Mist

"I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately."
- George Carlin

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 21335
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: New Empire vs New rebellion in the sequels: Biggest mistake?

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2020-06-28 01:04am

Meta reason: because she's one of the beloved OT heroes.

In-universe: because she has literally decades of experience at this shit, and the Resistance is short on leadership and resources in general. However, one gets the sense that Leia by TLJ had been so worn down by losing almost everything she cared about that it was starting to affect her judgement, or at least that's my takeaway.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver

"The greatest enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan."-General Von Clauswitz, describing my opinion of Bernie or Busters and third partiers in a nutshell.

I SUPPORT A NATIONAL GENERAL STRIKE TO REMOVE TRUMP FROM OFFICE.

User avatar
ray245
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7690
Joined: 2005-06-10 11:30pm

Re: New Empire vs New rebellion in the sequels: Biggest mistake?

Post by ray245 » 2020-06-28 11:59am

The Romulan Republic wrote:
2020-06-28 01:04am
Meta reason: because she's one of the beloved OT heroes.

In-universe: because she has literally decades of experience at this shit, and the Resistance is short on leadership and resources in general. However, one gets the sense that Leia by TLJ had been so worn down by losing almost everything she cared about that it was starting to affect her judgement, or at least that's my takeaway.
Also because the main OT trio with direct military command experience, Han and Luke are either dead or in exile.
Humans are such funny creatures. We are selfish about selflessness, yet we can love something so much that we can hate something.

User avatar
Vendetta
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 10813
Joined: 2002-07-07 04:57pm
Location: Sheffield, UK

Re: New Empire vs New rebellion in the sequels: Biggest mistake?

Post by Vendetta » 2020-06-28 06:26pm

Formless wrote:
2020-06-27 02:14am
So with Holdo, it honestly gets annoying that for most of the movie the audience is only shown Poe's point of view for a good long while, so that no matter how much you dislike him, it appears like he has a point. Every character he interacts with during this sequence of the movie seems to agree with him. Finn goes with his plan as a matter of course-- Poe is the guy who got him into the Resistance after all-- but Rose goes along with the plan if only because of her tendency towards hero worship. When the mutiny first gets pitched, even bridge officers go along with his plan. How is the audience, who only sees things from this perspective, supposed to know that ultimately Poe is the one who is wrong?
The audience is possibly supposed to be intelligent enough to connect the dots between the character's behaviour and the outcome it produces and recontextualise everything they thought they knew in the light of the new information they have at the end.

It's pretty common in cinema. Finding out that the character we thought we were supposed to root for is actually the problem. You know, like Tyler Durden.

Seems to have been an overestimation of the capabilities of the average Star Wars viewer though.

User avatar
tezunegari
Jedi Knight
Posts: 667
Joined: 2008-11-13 12:44pm

Re: New Empire vs New rebellion in the sequels: Biggest mistake?

Post by tezunegari » 2020-06-28 07:04pm

Vendetta wrote:
2020-06-28 06:26pm
Formless wrote:
2020-06-27 02:14am
So with Holdo, it honestly gets annoying that for most of the movie the audience is only shown Poe's point of view for a good long while, so that no matter how much you dislike him, it appears like he has a point. Every character he interacts with during this sequence of the movie seems to agree with him. Finn goes with his plan as a matter of course-- Poe is the guy who got him into the Resistance after all-- but Rose goes along with the plan if only because of her tendency towards hero worship. When the mutiny first gets pitched, even bridge officers go along with his plan. How is the audience, who only sees things from this perspective, supposed to know that ultimately Poe is the one who is wrong?
The audience is possibly supposed to be intelligent enough to connect the dots between the character's behaviour and the outcome it produces and recontextualise everything they thought they knew in the light of the new information they have at the end.

It's pretty common in cinema. Finding out that the character we thought we were supposed to root for is actually the problem. You know, like Tyler Durden.

Seems to have been an overestimation of the capabilities of the average Star Wars viewer though.
Except there are hints in the movie that Tyler Durden is not real or at least something fishy is going on.
Like the fact that the payphone Tyler calls the narrator on has a "no incoming calls" sign.
Or the car scene when he tries to get the narrator to let go? He sits at the wheel but leaves the car from the passenger's side before dragging the narrator out of the driver's side. And Durden, the narrator, and the two passengers in the rear were explicitly shown to buckle in their seat belts before the crash.
Those can be either seen as editing or prop errors at first, but when watching the movie again they become obvious hints.

With Poe and Holdo? I don't remember anything like that. Nothing that foreshadows Poe being wrong.
Not even a hint.
No mentioning or implication of a cloak, or a spy hunt, or that Holdo actually has a plan.

If there are moments or hints before the big reveal by Leia telling Poe about Krait on the transport, please point them out to me.

The only hint of the plan we get is at 00:27:00 in the scene exactly before the FO arriving and Leia realising that they are being tracked.

To me, that meant the plan to find a base and call for aid went out of the airlock the moment the FO arrived.
The Resistance can only fly away in a straight line and try to keep far away enough for the FO weapons to be harmless.

The only information that changes that is Krait being close by and having an old abandoned Rebel base.
But that piece of information is only given at the twist reveal.
"Bring your thousands, I have my axe."
"Bring your cannons, I have my armor."
"Bring your mighty... I am my own champion."
Cue Unit-01 ramming half the Lance of Longinus down Adam's head and a bemused Gendo, "Wrong end, son."
Ikari Gendo, NGE Fanfiction "Standing Tall"

User avatar
Formless
Sith Marauder
Posts: 3850
Joined: 2008-11-10 08:59pm
Location: the beginning and end of the Present

Re: New Empire vs New rebellion in the sequels: Biggest mistake?

Post by Formless » 2020-06-28 09:28pm

The Romulan Republic wrote:What claims, exactly, do you feel I've made that require further evidence? Give me specific scenes, and I'll look for clips. I cannot and will not answer some vague accusation of lack of evidence, short of telling you to re-watch the whole movie (which I strongly encourage).
Can't you just read my fucking posts rather than asking me to spell it out for you more than once?

You claim right here that Poe misrepresented his rank:
Right, Holdo not being perfectly polite and respectful to the guy who got demoted for getting a bunch of people killed and then introduced himself by misrepresenting his rank
That implies Poe deliberately lied about his rank when, as I said, the alternative reading is that he misstated that rank out of habit. The demotion was recent, and came right before a chaotic and ruinous battle; introducing himself by his old rank is hardly a shocking mistake. This seems critical to your reading of Poe as having an "entitled" attitude, which is critical to your reading of the entire sequence as being about "Toxic Masculinity":
But it would negate the entire aspect of the Holdo-Poe conflict which is deconstructing entitled toxic masculinity- which is no doubt a big part of the reason why you prefer it.
You provide no evidence for this reading besides constantly restating over and over how you think we are "supposed" to read his behavior. Worse, the "entitlement" claim requires us to assume that he is not justified in asking Holdo for this information, and that Holdo's refusal to give him that information is justified when the movie makes no effort to even explain why she is doing it. Which numerous people take issue with, directly challenging the reading by challenging a key assumption of it. It seems as if Holdo's behavior is whats unjustified. This is the basis for the entire debate between you and everyone else in this thread. We can get rid of all the quote spaghetti, because this claim is the big one.

It isn't the only one, though, because there is also the claim you made about Holdo saying there is a plan and Poe ignoring her and throwing a tantrum, because in my memory-- and apparently I am not alone in remembering it this way-- all Holdo said was to "have hope". Which is something people usually say when they have no plan, or have a plan they know is unlikely to work. Now I actually don't own a copy of The Last Jedi, because I don't buy products I consider dogshit. Its a waste of time and money. But I do remember this quite well, because when I saw TLJ in the theater I was extremely annoyed at hearing it after Rouge One overused the word "hope" as well. And I liked Rouge One, but I still found the claim "Rebellions/Revolutions are built on Hope" to be the most Disney thing I'd ever heard. It was stupid, and made Jyn Urso look like an idiot in front of the entire Rebel Alliance council. I still like her, but when they rejected her argument, I was like "yeah, what were you expecting?" But the film was also written to prove her right, so imagine my annoyance when they doubled down on the "Rebellions run on Hope" theme in The Last Jedi! And from the mouth of a character I was already annoyed with!

So yes, please, if I am misremembering the scene, post it instead of insisting Holdo indicated the existence of a plan no one else remembers her alluding to. It would immensely help your cause if Holdo did actually do something in good faith, after appearing to do so many things in bad faith throughout the middle act.
[I called you (nobody else, just you) a misogynist based on:

a) Your hysterical rantings against female authority figures, which were not limited to the use of the term "Karen".
Look, dipshit, if I had a problem with female authority figures, why the hell would I also have a problem with Hollywood frequently depicting female authority figures as terrible leaders? Why would I claim that its a sexist stereotype that I wish would go away?

The answer is that I don't, I was ranting about assholes with terrible communication skills, LIKE YOU, apparently.
b) Your admission that you identified Holdo with women you found despicable in the real world.
I already explained how Karen isn't always a female character, dipshit. YOU for instance, are a Karen. Her gender is incidental, but because you can't imagine any interpretation of the film where Holdo is bad at her job or Holdo is bad example of female representation, any attack on her must be motivated by sexism!

Learn to read.
c) Your repeated dismissal of Holdo's fitness to lead on the basis of trivialities of her tone and her feminine appearance.
And this is why I demand you answer my points rather than making pointless accusations (i.e. stop with the Ad Hominim attacks). I have done much more than address her tone, and only once touched on her appearance so as to show that it creates an intersectionality problem from an actual Feminist perspective. You refuse to acknowledge them because of one paragraph where I actually praise Janeway by comparison, despite you claiming I hate female authority figures.

And look, about Holdo's appearance? Holdo isn't a real woman. She's played by a woman, but she's a fictional character written by a man and starring in a movie directed and produced by men. Her appearance was chosen by men to have a specific effect on the audience. By having Poe say "she isn't what I was expecting" the filmmaker is deliberately priming the audience to take a closer look at how she is dressed. Purple hair, a general lack of military attire (which, in fairness, is completely normal for rebel characters), fashion choices suggesting she's from this universe's upper class (which subconsciously primes long time fans to see her relationship with Poe in a different light than merely "man VS woman"), etc. She isn't what we expect. That some people take that the next step and say "I can't take a character with purple hair seriously" is exactly why the filmmaker dyed her hair purple! If it were a woman in real life choosing to dye their hair purple to make a fashion statement, I would respect that, and honestly I watch to much anime to care. But that's just me not taking the filmmaker's bait. But people aren't being sexist for taking the bait. The writer and filmmaker might be sexist for using a woman's appearance as a trick to make people see her in a less flattering light, but that's the difference between the kind of sexism you are looking for and the kind of sexism I am seeing in the actual film. You think the audience is the problem, but aren't seeing the bigger picture that everything in the film is artificial, a narrative illusion of reality designed by men to make millions of dollars and make statements approved by a multi-billion dollar corporation that desperately needs people to forget how much of the entertainment market they now own.

In summary, Holdo's appearance can be analyzed without it being inherently sexist. Because movies are entertaining falsehoods, everything in them is fair game for commentary and analysis. No one is commenting on the appearance of Poe or Finn because the film didn't call attention to it. I have seen people compare Luke to a hermit or hobo, because like Holdo the film is calling attention to his behavior and appearance. Mark Hammil wants you to see Luke as a bitter old hermit. Its his take on Obi-Wan, if Obi-Wan was angry about his past failures. And people are free to hate that interpretation of Luke's character; It wasn't the character Mark Hamill was expecting to play, but he's a professional so he did what he was told. Just because I call Holdo a Karen doesn't mean I think the actor is a Karen. I don't know, I've never met her. She played the character the way the director told her to play the character. I don't have to like that character either, but its not sexist to hate the portrayal because... its fiction! Dumbass.
"Still, I would love to see human beings, and their constituent organ systems, trivialized and commercialized to the same extent as damn iPods and other crappy consumer products. It would be absolutely horrific, yet so wonderful." — Shroom Man 777
"To Err is Human; to Arrr is Pirate." — Skallagrim
“I would suggest "Schmuckulating", which is what Futurists do and, by extension, what they are." — Commenter "Rayneau"
The Magic Eight Ball Conspiracy.

User avatar
Galvatron
Decepticon Leader
Posts: 6376
Joined: 2002-07-12 12:27am
Location: Kill! Smash! Destroy! Rend! Mangle! Distort!

Re: New Empire vs New rebellion in the sequels: Biggest mistake?

Post by Galvatron » 2020-06-28 11:58pm

All I know is this: we definitely need more PSW threads to get derailed and turned into flame wars about misogyny. It just doesn't happen enough.

User avatar
Vendetta
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 10813
Joined: 2002-07-07 04:57pm
Location: Sheffield, UK

Re: New Empire vs New rebellion in the sequels: Biggest mistake?

Post by Vendetta » 2020-06-29 04:17am

Formless wrote:
2020-06-28 09:28pm
In summary, Holdo's appearance can be analyzed without it being inherently sexist. Because movies are entertaining falsehoods, everything in them is fair game for commentary and analysis
If you're going to analyse her appearance as a function of the movie though you need to determine what it communicates to the audience and why.

In Holdo's case, her appearance is part of the trick that makes you not realise Poe is the problem at first, because she doesn't look "serious business". It's easier to fall into the perspective he has that she's the Unreasonable Authority Figure stopping the Maverick Hero Who Gets Things Done. Because that's an amazingly common movie trope it's easy to fall for the expectations tied to it, where the hero proves himself right by Getting Things Done in the end, even when the maverick hero just got chewed out by a different authority figure who we are more primed to think of as reasonable for exactly the same reasons.

That's also why Holdo couldn't have been a preexisting character, because following Poe on his journey of realising how he fucked up and growing as a character requires us to be in his perspective and any lingering sympathy for the Unreasonable Authority Figure would prevent that.


(PS: You have also misidentified the Karen. Poe wants to talk to the manager and thinks none of the rules apply to him.)

User avatar
ray245
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7690
Joined: 2005-06-10 11:30pm

Re: New Empire vs New rebellion in the sequels: Biggest mistake?

Post by ray245 » 2020-06-29 04:57am

Vendetta wrote:
2020-06-29 04:17am
If you're going to analyse her appearance as a function of the movie though you need to determine what it communicates to the audience and why.

In Holdo's case, her appearance is part of the trick that makes you not realise Poe is the problem at first, because she doesn't look "serious business". It's easier to fall into the perspective he has that she's the Unreasonable Authority Figure stopping the Maverick Hero Who Gets Things Done. Because that's an amazingly common movie trope it's easy to fall for the expectations tied to it, where the hero proves himself right by Getting Things Done in the end, even when the maverick hero just got chewed out by a different authority figure who we are more primed to think of as reasonable for exactly the same reasons.

That's also why Holdo couldn't have been a preexisting character, because following Poe on his journey of realising how he fucked up and growing as a character requires us to be in his perspective and any lingering sympathy for the Unreasonable Authority Figure would prevent that.

(PS: You have also misidentified the Karen. Poe wants to talk to the manager and thinks none of the rules apply to him.)
Although the history of Star Wars has repeatedly given us female authority figures in civilian dress. Leia in ANH, Mon Mothma in ROTJ. Amidala in TPM. Mon Mothma in Rogue One.

I didn't even think much about Holdo's appearance because I was so used to female leaders appearing in civilian dress in Star Wars.
Humans are such funny creatures. We are selfish about selflessness, yet we can love something so much that we can hate something.

User avatar
Formless
Sith Marauder
Posts: 3850
Joined: 2008-11-10 08:59pm
Location: the beginning and end of the Present

Re: New Empire vs New rebellion in the sequels: Biggest mistake?

Post by Formless » 2020-06-29 05:35am

Vendetta wrote:
2020-06-29 04:17am
If you're going to analyse her appearance as a function of the movie though you need to determine what it communicates to the audience and why.

In Holdo's case, her appearance is part of the trick that makes you not realise Poe is the problem at first, because she doesn't look "serious business". It's easier to fall into the perspective he has that she's the Unreasonable Authority Figure stopping the Maverick Hero Who Gets Things Done. Because that's an amazingly common movie trope it's easy to fall for the expectations tied to it, where the hero proves himself right by Getting Things Done in the end, even when the maverick hero just got chewed out by a different authority figure who we are more primed to think of as reasonable for exactly the same reasons.

That's also why Holdo couldn't have been a preexisting character, because following Poe on his journey of realising how he fucked up and growing as a character requires us to be in his perspective and any lingering sympathy for the Unreasonable Authority Figure would prevent that.
While I agree that this is probably closer to the intended reading of the film, that is where it becomes relevant whether or not Poe actually grows after this revelation. The intended reading is meaningless if they fail to follow through with it as the film goes on. Poe has to demonstrate that he has grown through his actions. So the first problem, then, is that he's too quick to jump on the bandwagon once its finally explained to him how Liea and Holdo planned to get out of this situation. He immediately says that their plan could work. Thus it appears like the only reason he didn't think of it is that no one told him they had cloaking devices aboard... and he didn't know they had cloaking devices because Holdo stonewalled him! It doesn't look like a Maverick Hero getting put in his place for making awful assumptions about his superiors based on looks, it looks instead like... well, an authoritarian message that you should not question your superiors for any reason, or else you will be punished.

It also matters that once they land on Krait, he defaults to a plan that closely mirrors the plan he had in the beginning of the movie, sending out rickety old speeders that are literally falling apart on a risky, ill-conceived plan to fight the First Order's walkers with insufficient armament to say the least. Obviously, this happened because the filmmaker needed an action sequence after the longest and least dynamic chase sequence in the history of cinema, but they still should have thought about its implications for Poe's character. Instead they focus solely on Finn's character arc, hurting Poe's in the process. Because of Poe's plan on Krait, Finn feels compelled to try and sacrifice his life just like Poe's bomber squadron willingly sacrificed their lives previously. Others in the suicide charge also die as they are easy pickings for the walkers guns. And Rose Tico definitely sacrificed her own safety to save Finn from his attempted sacrifice. The only change we see in Poe is that after Luke's Force hologram shows up to stall for time, Poe is now willing to consider retreating rather than standing his ground. But he is able to come up with an escape plan more out of luck than knowledge, as he figures Luke got in somehow, therefore there must be a secret exit they can use. Except Luke didn't get in, he's a Force hologram! And even following the crystal dog creatures didn't work, because the tunnel exit was blocked and only a dog-sized creature could crawl between them. They all survived purely because of Rey magically being at the right place at the right time, because that's how the Force works I guess. Poe never gets a chance to show that he's fighting smarter or taking more calculated risks than before because so much time was taken up by no less than three (if not four) character arcs competing for screen time in the movie, and Poe's chances of showing what he has learned gets dashed at every turn so the filmmaker can focus on other characters getting the glory. And at no point is the lesson he learned validated either, because their time on Krait turns out to be a disaster that they narrowly survive-- and only a few of them at that. So Poe is not only never redeemed properly, but the crew of a ship three kilometers long that could easily have been in the thousands (plus the crews of its escorts) is reduced to a crew able to fit on the Falcon (a cargo transport no larger than a tugboat). By the end of the film Holdo's success is undermined, and Poe's failures are compounded. What lesson are we supposed to take from that? Because I don't think it properly communicates the intended lesson at all.
(PS: You have also misidentified the Karen. Poe wants to talk to the manager and thinks none of the rules apply to him.)
Eh, I'd say they are both Karens, in different ways. Poe wants to speak to the manager, Holdo smugly treats people like shit because she can. More seriously, though (because the Karen stuff was never supposed to be taken that seriously) its an idiot plot featuring characters with insufferable character traits, and that's ultimately why I hated it. I don't want to have to take sides, its just that in these conversations certain people tend to lionize one of them and force me to explain why I think they are actually an asshole, and the person they lionize is usually Holdo because... well, take a guess. The answer can be drawn with three black circles. I don't see a need to defend Poe as a character, I only think that the position Holdo put him in was one where a calm, rational person couldn't do much differently than Poe did. The biggest thing I think he actually did wrong was to contact Maz and then follow through with whatever crazy thing popped out of her head... when she was in the middle of a protracted gunfight! Like, what the hell man, can't you see that she's busy? Its a holographic call and everything! Wait until she's shot the bad guys, then call her back. The fuel reserves can wait five minutes, and if she's still shooting at people then, call someone who isn't in a life or death confrontation at the moment. Its one of the weirdest things I have ever seen in a movie.
ray245 wrote:
2020-06-29 04:57am
Although the history of Star Wars has repeatedly given us female authority figures in civilian dress. Leia in ANH, Mon Mothma in ROTJ. Amidala in TPM. Mon Mothma in Rogue One.

I didn't even think much about Holdo's appearance because I was so used to female leaders appearing in civilian dress in Star Wars.
I've noticed that a lot of people on Youtube who comment on the character focus on the dyed hair, which is actually unique to this character. In fact, the only other Star Wars character I can think of whose hair was dyed an artificial color is Sabine from Rebels. I find that interesting, because in America, dying your hair an unnatural hair color is often seen as unprofessional and immature regardless of the person's sex. The dress code of many workplaces prohibit it, as well as other body modifications like nose rings, and tattoos are often expected to be covered up. Is it unfair? That depends (piercings are often a legitimate safety concern) but in many cases, yeah, I would say so. Does that mean people are going to leave the theater and just forget all the negative associations they've made over their life regarding appropriate attire at the workplace? No.
"Still, I would love to see human beings, and their constituent organ systems, trivialized and commercialized to the same extent as damn iPods and other crappy consumer products. It would be absolutely horrific, yet so wonderful." — Shroom Man 777
"To Err is Human; to Arrr is Pirate." — Skallagrim
“I would suggest "Schmuckulating", which is what Futurists do and, by extension, what they are." — Commenter "Rayneau"
The Magic Eight Ball Conspiracy.

User avatar
ray245
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7690
Joined: 2005-06-10 11:30pm

Re: New Empire vs New rebellion in the sequels: Biggest mistake?

Post by ray245 » 2020-06-29 05:47am

Formless wrote:
2020-06-29 05:35am
I've noticed that a lot of people on Youtube who comment on the character focus on the dyed hair, which is actually unique to this character. In fact, the only other Star Wars character I can think of whose hair was dyed an artificial color is Sabine from Rebels. I find that interesting, because in America, dying your hair an unnatural hair color is often seen as unprofessional and immature regardless of the person's sex. The dress code of many workplaces prohibit it, as well as other body modifications like nose rings, and tattoos are often expected to be covered up. Is it unfair? That depends (piercings are often a legitimate safety concern) but in many cases, yeah, I would say so. Does that mean people are going to leave the theater and just forget all the negative associations they've made over their life regarding appropriate attire at the workplace? No.
It's Star Wars! People have odd and strange hairstyle that are seen as completely acceptable. Padme had her make-up on nearly all the time and it's seen as completely formal and appropriate. If Star Wars was a "hardcore or serious" Sci-fi movie where everyone is wearing military uniforms all the time, I can see Holdo's dress and hairstyle as odd. But given that we had the famous Leia buns in the very first Star Wars movie, Holdo's hair don't really standout at all.

If RJ thinks Holdo hairstyle is meant to be taken negatively, I think he really do not understand Star Wars as well as he thought he did.
Humans are such funny creatures. We are selfish about selflessness, yet we can love something so much that we can hate something.

User avatar
Formless
Sith Marauder
Posts: 3850
Joined: 2008-11-10 08:59pm
Location: the beginning and end of the Present

Re: New Empire vs New rebellion in the sequels: Biggest mistake?

Post by Formless » 2020-06-29 06:01am

ray245 wrote:
2020-06-29 05:47am
It's Star Wars! People have odd and strange hairstyle that are seen as completely acceptable. Padme had her make-up on nearly all the time and it's seen as completely formal and appropriate. If Star Wars was a "hardcore or serious" Sci-fi movie where everyone is wearing military uniforms all the time, I can see Holdo's dress and hairstyle as odd. But given that we had the famous Leia buns in the very first Star Wars movie, Holdo's hair don't really standout at all.

If RJ thinks Holdo hairstyle is meant to be taken negatively, I think he really do not understand Star Wars as well as he thought he did.
Uh, Ray, I gotta point this out... it actually worked. People don't like the purple dye job. Its frequently cited as one of the reasons they find it hard to take her seriously when the issue of her appearance comes up. Now I'm completely non-plusssed by it myself, but many Star Wars fans apparently can't get over it because its not like the Liea buns, which were a product of the times (the movie was filmed in the 70's, remember), or the Royal Naboo makeup, which Padme didn't actually wear. Her body double did. And it was to set the atmosphere of Naboo, showing that its an exotic location with unique customs. Plus she's royalty, so she can wear whatever she feels like. Queen isn't usually a job, but a title. "Admiral" is a job, so that sets different expectations here. And again, I think RJ knew that and used an unnatural hair color on purpose, to invoke all those real world connotations, much the same way George Lucas gave Han Solo cowboy-like attire to make people see him like an old west gunslinger, or had the Jedi dress in robes because robes have mystical connotations in fairy tales (never mind that everyone in the middle ages wore cloaks because of rain).
"Still, I would love to see human beings, and their constituent organ systems, trivialized and commercialized to the same extent as damn iPods and other crappy consumer products. It would be absolutely horrific, yet so wonderful." — Shroom Man 777
"To Err is Human; to Arrr is Pirate." — Skallagrim
“I would suggest "Schmuckulating", which is what Futurists do and, by extension, what they are." — Commenter "Rayneau"
The Magic Eight Ball Conspiracy.

User avatar
tezunegari
Jedi Knight
Posts: 667
Joined: 2008-11-13 12:44pm

Re: New Empire vs New rebellion in the sequels: Biggest mistake?

Post by tezunegari » 2020-06-29 06:03am

Vendetta wrote:
2020-06-29 04:17am
(PS: You have also misidentified the Karen. Poe wants to talk to the manager and thinks none of the rules apply to him.)
I disagree. He actually IS entitled to approach her to ask for orders/the plan and follows protocol by trying to ask her first.
Her response to him approaching her is unprofessional.

In our modern military, a subordinate has the right to ask a superior for orders, or clarification, or to point out flaws in the orders received.
Poe is doing exactly that. Approaching his superior to request information about how they'll proceed.
He's actually entitled to do so by real-life standards (which we have to apply due to lack of information telling us otherwise).

A "Karen" usually acts on perceived entitlement. The whole "the customer is always right" thing is the reason in retail.
What a "Karen" perceives as their right usually is just goodwill from the company that is squandered by being demanding and unfriendly.

The first time Poe approaches Holdo, he requests orders or at least a rough outline of what to do.
As he was part of the "welcome speech" I have to assume that he is part of the command staff. Otherwise, why include him?
And if he is part of the Command Staff... knowing the plan would be essential in case the current Command gets spaced (again).
POE: Vice Admiral? Commander Dameron. With our current fuel consumption... there is a very limited amount of time... That we will stay out of range of those Star Destroyers.

AMILYN HOLDO: Very kind to make me aware. (to Larma D'acy) Let's get me those fuel projections.

POE: And we need to shake them before we find a new base, so... What's our plan?

AMILYN HOLDO: Our plan, captain? Not commander, right? Wasn't it Leia's last official act to demote you? Because of your dreadnought plan... Where we lost our entire bombing fleet?

POE: "Captain." "Commander." You can call me whatever you like. I just want to know what's going on.

AMILYN HOLDO: Of course you do. I understand. I've dealt with plenty of trigger happy flyboys like you... You are impulsive. Dangerous. And the last thing we need right now. So stick to your post... and follow my orders.
She never gives him any orders.
Or makes any further statement to the crew to keep up morale.

Right after the loss of the last escort ship and implied hours without any orders or information from command:
POE: She in there?
LARMA D'ACY: The Admiral's banned you from the bridge. Let's not have a scene.
POE: No, let's. Holdo?
LARMA: You're not allowed in here.
HOLDO: Flyboy.
POE: Cut it, lady. We had a fleet, now we're down to one ship, and you've told us nothing! Tell us that we have a plan! That there's hope!
HOLDO: When I served under Leia, she would say, hope is like the sun. If you only believe in it when you can see it....
POE: You'll never make it through the night.
HOLDO: Yes.
POE: Are you fueling up the transports? You are. All of them? We're abandoning ship? Is that.... That's what you got? That's what you brought us to? Coward! Those transports ships are unarmed, unshielded. We abandon this cruiser, we're done. We don't stand a chance. No, you are not just a coward, you are a traitor.
HOLDO: Get this man off my bridge.
1) See how Holdo addresses Poe? Unprofessionally. While Poe is confrontational, he at least stays somewhat professional and uses her name.
2) Poe again asks for reassurance that the situation is not lost. Which, again, in the modern military would be his right to do.
3) Instead of plain out telling Poe to leave, as he got banned from the bridge by her, she tells him to have faith in her without any proof which gives him enough time to see the fueling of the transports (but lacking the outline of the plan, he comes to the wrong conclusion).

All she had to do was to say "There's a plan but I don't trust you. Now leave the bridge" or simply "Security! Put him in the brig".

All her actions imply that she expects Poe to follow her without complaint even when he lacks orders.
And when he snaps and finally demands information... she tries to feed him platitudes instead of responding in plain words.
A later novel tried to explain her talking around a topic instead of responding in plain words as a character trait she has.
Which is not a good thing for a military leader to have.

Also, her whole demeanor changes from confrontational (when Leia is not present) to friendly in the whole "I like him" scene with Leia.
Such a change from confrontational to friendly is known to happen in managers handling subordinates and suddenly having to respond to their superiors.
"Bring your thousands, I have my axe."
"Bring your cannons, I have my armor."
"Bring your mighty... I am my own champion."
Cue Unit-01 ramming half the Lance of Longinus down Adam's head and a bemused Gendo, "Wrong end, son."
Ikari Gendo, NGE Fanfiction "Standing Tall"

User avatar
ray245
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7690
Joined: 2005-06-10 11:30pm

Re: New Empire vs New rebellion in the sequels: Biggest mistake?

Post by ray245 » 2020-06-29 06:10am

Formless wrote:
2020-06-29 06:01am
Uh, Ray, I gotta point this out... it actually worked. People don't like the purple dye job. Its frequently cited as one of the reasons they find it hard to take her seriously when the issue of her appearance comes up. Now I'm completely non-plusssed by it myself, but many Star Wars fans apparently can't get over it because its not like the Liea buns, which were a product of the times (the movie was filmed in the 70's, remember), or the Royal Naboo makeup, which Padme didn't actually wear. Her body double did. And it was to set the atmosphere of Naboo, showing that its an exotic location with unique customs. Plus she's royalty, so she can wear whatever she feels like. Queen isn't usually a job, but a title. "Admiral" is a job, so that sets different expectations here. And again, I think RJ knew that and used an unnatural hair color on purpose, to invoke all those real world connotations, much the same way George Lucas gave Han Solo cowboy-like attire to make people see him like an old west gunslinger, or had the Jedi dress in robes because robes have mystical connotations in fairy tales (never mind that everyone in the middle ages wore cloaks because of rain).
It worked for some people, and many of the comments and criticism of Holdo's appearances tends to come from sexists and misogynists. This is where I do believe a fair degree of criticism of Holdo is partly to do with sexism, as anything seen as even a little flameboyant is frowned upon due to sexism, homophobia and etc. But I don't think the main criticism of Holdo comes from that. Holdo's appearance is just a convenient excuse by sexist to jump onboard the Holdo-bashing train.
Humans are such funny creatures. We are selfish about selflessness, yet we can love something so much that we can hate something.

User avatar
Formless
Sith Marauder
Posts: 3850
Joined: 2008-11-10 08:59pm
Location: the beginning and end of the Present

Re: New Empire vs New rebellion in the sequels: Biggest mistake?

Post by Formless » 2020-06-29 06:21am

But... like I said, these negative connotations of unnatural hair colors applies to both men and women, since unnatural hair color is associated with the Punk movement. A male character with purple hair and the same overall attitude as Holdo would almost certainly receive similarly negative comments about his hair being a strange, unnatural hair color. So its not sexist or motivated by sexism per-say. When there are other cultural phenomena at work besides sexism, we need to at least consider what else is going on and not jump to convenient conclusions.

Of course, had they made Holdo an alien this wouldn't be an issue for anyone, but nope. She's human.
"Still, I would love to see human beings, and their constituent organ systems, trivialized and commercialized to the same extent as damn iPods and other crappy consumer products. It would be absolutely horrific, yet so wonderful." — Shroom Man 777
"To Err is Human; to Arrr is Pirate." — Skallagrim
“I would suggest "Schmuckulating", which is what Futurists do and, by extension, what they are." — Commenter "Rayneau"
The Magic Eight Ball Conspiracy.

User avatar
ray245
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7690
Joined: 2005-06-10 11:30pm

Re: New Empire vs New rebellion in the sequels: Biggest mistake?

Post by ray245 » 2020-06-29 06:46am

Formless wrote:
2020-06-29 06:21am
But... like I said, these negative connotations of unnatural hair colors applies to both men and women, since unnatural hair color is associated with the Punk movement. A male character with purple hair and the same overall attitude as Holdo would almost certainly receive similarly negative comments about his hair being a strange, unnatural hair color. So its not sexist or motivated by sexism per-say. When there are other cultural phenomena at work besides sexism, we need to at least consider what else is going on and not jump to convenient conclusions.

Of course, had they made Holdo an alien this wouldn't be an issue for anyone, but nope. She's human.
Yes that is true. But the ones that spend more time having issues with her appearances rather than her other actual flaws generally tends to have some issues in sexism, or engage in some really petty name-calling. In my personal experience anyway.
Humans are such funny creatures. We are selfish about selflessness, yet we can love something so much that we can hate something.

Post Reply