Star Wars: Episode VII - The Force Awakens (USE SPOILER TAGS!)

[Rodney-2187]

I don't really care why they did any of it, i just know I like what they did.

[spectre08]

Originally Posted by Packerfan75

That's exactly what I was saying. I'm not opposed to female leads, I'm opposed to purposely placing a female lead or anyone else for the sake of being diverse, satisfying groups and appearing to be sensitive. I'm not even say that that's what happened here but if it did or wherever it does then I oppose that. I think it's the ugly side of media that's lost any focus on creativity and is rather more interested in appeasing people's self interests and/or pushing it's own agendas.

if you think hollywood studios give one half a lick about appearing to be sensitive, you are completely out of touch with the reality of that industry

[Infernal King]

Originally Posted by Packerfan75

That's exactly what I was saying. I'm not opposed to female leads, I'm opposed to purposely placing a female lead or anyone else for the sake of being diverse, satisfying groups and appearing to be sensitive. I'm not even say that that's what happened here but if it did or wherever it does then I oppose that. I think it's the ugly side of media that's lost any focus on creativity and is rather more interested in appeasing people's self interests and/or pushing it's own agendas.

You're assuming that white male leads are the default and the casting of any other ethnicity/gender instead is automatically suspicious

[Tony208]

Originally Posted by Packerfan75

That's exactly what I was saying. I'm not opposed to female leads, I'm opposed to purposely placing a female lead or anyone else for the sake of being diverse, satisfying groups and appearing to be sensitive. I'm not even say that that's what happened here but if it did or wherever it does then I oppose that. I think it's the ugly side of media that's lost any focus on creativity and is rather more interested in appeasing people's self interests and/or pushing it's own agendas.

Can't wait till we get past this stage of questioning every non-white male role.

It's a question that doesn't even enter my mind when I'm looking at a movie.

[Infernal King]

Originally Posted by Tony208

Can't wait till we get past this stage of questioning every non-white male role.

It's a question that doesn't even enter my mind when I'm looking at a movie.

I think it says more about the people who do question it all the time than they'd care to admit

[spectre08]

how much the studio cares about the "appearance" of sensitivity on its part being and end at "does this focus group well with 18-34 year old middle income males"

[Rodney-2187]

Originally Posted by infernal king

i think it says more about the people who do question it all the time than they'd care to admit

12c.jpg

[Packerfan75]

Originally Posted by Infernal King

You're assuming that white male leads are the default and the casting of any other ethnicity/gender instead is automatically suspicious

Ah, and you're assuming I'm assuming.

[Infernal King]

Originally Posted by Packerfan75

Ah, and you're assuming I'm assuming.

I just go by what your posts tell me or imply

[Packerfan75]

Originally Posted by Tony208

Can't wait till we get past this stage of questioning every non-white male role.

It's a question that doesn't even enter my mind when I'm looking at a movie.

It wasn't for me either. It's not even a criticism of mine but the subject came up and I gave my opinion.

[Packerfan75]

Originally Posted by Infernal King

I just go by what your posts tell me or imply

The point was to say that I oppose corporate decisions that dictate what the characters should look like out of any other motives than telling the best story possible or sheer creativity.

[Hardback247]

I'm reading some comments on Facebook where they call JJ Abrams "Jar Jar Abrams." Ugh...

[spectre08]

Originally Posted by Packerfan75

The point was to say that I oppose corporate decisions that dictate what the characters should look like out of any other motives than telling the best story possible or sheer creativity.

and again, what the "best story" is and all of the "creativity" for this movie rests 100% with the Disney executives who hired JJ Abrams to execute that vision.

This is not now, nor was it ever at any point JJ Abrams movie.

It's almost like some of you don't understand how these kinds of studio movies work, and how they're different from indies or big name auteurs.

[spectre08]

I don't begrudge or admire Abrams for this



anymore than I begrudge him for this



Directors like him, on movies like these have stylistic control, not creative control, and there's nothing at all wrong with that.

[Packerfan75]

Originally Posted by spectre08

and again, what the "best story" is and all of the "creativity" for this movie rests 100% with the Disney executives who hired JJ Abrams to execute that vision.

This is not now, nor was it ever at any point JJ Abrams movie.

It's almost like some of you don't understand how these kinds of studio movies work, and how they're different from indies or big name auteurs.

I understand it and I still oppose it. Just because I don't agree with something doesn't mean I don't understand it.

[Abby is Q]

This lengthy dialogue on demographics, diversity, feminism, sensitivity, political correctness, and marketing has gotten surprisingly lengthy. I feel like I was part of opening that can of worms. I'm sorry.

It would be so much less complicated if it were the late 60s/early 70s and movies considered female empowerment were exploitation grindhouse movies with lots of cleavage, nudity, and violence. Then we might get classics like Furiosa: She Wolf of the War Boys and Rey in Faster, Padawan! Kill! Kill!

[Packerfan75]

Originally Posted by Abby is Q

This lengthy dialogue on demographics, diversity, feminism, sensitivity, political correctness, and marketing has gotten surprisingly lengthy. I feel like I was part of opening that can of worms. I'm sorry.

It would be so much less complicated if it were the late 60s/early 70s and movies considered female empowerment were exploitation grindhouse movies with lots of cleavage, nudity, and violence. Then we might get classics like Furiosa: She Wolf of the War Boys and Rey in Faster, Padawan! Kill! Kill!

I'm sorry I agreed with you. I started taking some heat like I started it.

Ah, who cares. It's the internet and we're talking about Star Wars. I think it's more the issue that some people don't like it when you touch on subjects that they feel differently about and they don't know how to talk about it without getting personal. I'd prefer those people stop seeking me out because I have no problem discussing different opinions but I'm not here to argue or be insulted because my beliefs are different from theirs. I guess it's just too easy to name call when you don't actually have to face the person. Thankfully there's an ignore list.

[spectre08]

Originally Posted by Packerfan75

I understand it and I still oppose it. Just because I don't agree with something doesn't mean I don't understand it.

why oppose it though? the last time a studio let a director have creative control of a Star Wars movie we got Jar Jar Binks and midichlorians.

I'd say this method is markedly better.

[WhySoBlu?]

Originally Posted by Infernal King

You're assuming that white male leads are the default and the casting of any other ethnicity/gender instead is automatically suspicious

You know, you don't always have to assume the worst of anyone who doesn't agree with you 100%. Just sayin'...

[L-Rouge]

Originally Posted by Hardback247

I'm reading some comments on Facebook where they call JJ Abrams "Jar Jar Abrams." Ugh...

that's been around for some time, unfortunately, mostly by those that shun the new Star Trek, but I guess it's catching..