Post: #1951

Abrams is without a doubt, a male feminist cut from the same cloth as Harvey Weinstein.

Post: #1952

(02-06-2019 06:23 PM)porscheguy Wrote:  Abrams is without a doubt, a male feminist cut from the same cloth as Harvey Weinstein.

I never got Abrams' appeal as a director other than he's a sci-fi geek.

Post: #1953

(02-06-2019 10:26 PM)Kurgan Wrote:  

(02-06-2019 06:23 PM)porscheguy Wrote:  Abrams is without a doubt, a male feminist cut from the same cloth as Harvey Weinstein.

I never got Abrams' appeal as a director other than he's a sci-fi geek.

Something something strong wimminz something something meaningful roles something something I cast ugly fucking neofeminist women as the leads in a show that stupid Gen Xs prior to the dawn of free porn on the Internet had to watch. You know, the Joss Whedon approach to getting pussy, the main difference being that Abrams' affairs and/or predilection for male ass haven't come out yet.

His debut TV shows were Felicity and Alias, in which we learned we didn't want to fuck Keri Russell, and on being given a longer and more covered look than we did in Electra, also discovered we didn't want to fuck Jennifer Garner either.

God save us from people who mean well. -storm

Post: #1954

(02-08-2019 10:02 AM)Paracelsus Wrote:  

(02-06-2019 10:26 PM)Kurgan Wrote:  

(02-06-2019 06:23 PM)porscheguy Wrote:  Abrams is without a doubt, a male feminist cut from the same cloth as Harvey Weinstein.

I never got Abrams' appeal as a director other than he's a sci-fi geek.

Something something strong wimminz something something meaningful roles something something I cast ugly fucking neofeminist women as the leads in a show that stupid Gen Xs prior to the dawn of free porn on the Internet had to watch. You know, the Joss Whedon approach to getting pussy, the main difference being that Abrams' affairs and/or predilection for male ass haven't come out yet.

His debut TV shows were Felicity and Alias, in which we learned we didn't want to fuck Keri Russell, and on being given a longer and more covered look than we did in Electra, also discovered we didn't want to fuck Jennifer Garner either.

Thank you, that made sense to me in regards to his shows.

Post: #1955

Here's a good bit about Star Wars fans and toys from SNL when they're not being hyper-partisan dipshits.

Post: #1956

I did some looking up, Lucas in recent mentioned that the sequel trilogy would have explored the microbiotic worlds and the esoteric (Jay Dyer would have lapped it up). Pretty wild stuff for a mainstream film series

Quote:It was basically all set in a relatively peaceful New Republic, with some pirates and criminal gangs to inject some grounded action to the story... and then a whole lot of real out there concepts, a la Mortis, the Wellspring of Life, and Force priestesses type stuff

Lucas.......no fucks given.

https://twitter.com/LivioRamondelli/stat...5668253696

Post: #1957

Bloody 'ell.
Cause that's just what this franchise needed...

Star Wars 9 Rumors Say Lando Has a Daughter, And the Books Already Set it Up

https://screenrant.com/star-wars-9-naomi...-daughter/

Post: #1958

Quote:Han Solo was killed off in Star Wars: The Force Awakens, while Luke Skywalker died at the end of Star Wars: The Last Jedi. Tragically, Carrie Fisher passed away before the release of The Last Jedi, although previously unseen footage will hopefully allow her story to come to a satisfying close. So, it's easy to understand why Lucasfilm asked Williams to reprise the iconic role of Lando Calrissian.

And just as easy to guess what's going to happen to the character now.

Post: #1959

(02-10-2019 04:39 PM)CynicalContrarian Wrote:  Bloody 'ell.
Cause that's just what this franchise needed...

Star Wars 9 Rumors Say Lando Has a Daughter, And the Books Already Set it Up

https://screenrant.com/star-wars-9-naomi...-daughter/

Eh at least she is hot. I swore they were going to cast Leslie Jones to be Lando's daughter.

Post: #1960

Post: #1961

(02-06-2019 10:26 PM)Kurgan Wrote:  

(02-06-2019 06:23 PM)porscheguy Wrote:  Abrams is without a doubt, a male feminist cut from the same cloth as Harvey Weinstein.

I never got Abrams' appeal as a director other than he's a sci-fi geek.

Abrams does a good high-energy action movie. He gets good performances from actors and shoots in an engaging kinetic style. He's really good at a few writing tricks in particular nostalgia and the mystery box. I would say he is actually good at those things. Not everyone can do nostalgia well or pique curiosity effectively. If you call him a charlatan you can at least call him a good charlatan. So people often enjoy his movies.

Of course, as a writer he's seems to be a hack and as a filmmaker he appears to be severely lacking in creative originality. Abrams movies can be rather empty or muddled once you look past the surface. Abrams might think of himself as Spielberg-lite but he's really more like Michael Bay. Except that Abrams tries to fake real storytelling and drama while Bay just fully embraces the camp and spectacle for entertainment's sake.

Post: #1962

He was also the executive producer of Person of Interest TV series, which if you are willing to excuse some SJW/grrrlpower crap, was actually very good and has one of the most creative plots that I've seen in many years:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Person_of_..._series%29

Post: #1963

(02-13-2019 07:13 PM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  He was also the executive producer of Person of Interest TV series, which if you are willing to excuse some SJW/grrrlpower crap, was actually very good and has one of the most creative plots that I've seen in many years:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Person_of_..._series%29

I watched the first season which was solid. Jim Caviezel and Michael Emerson carry the show. It's a shame those two actors keep such a low profile and don't appear in more films or tv.

LOST (aside from the last season-- a fantastic, thought-provoking show) was also the brainchild of Abrams, who walked away to focus on films around the third season (Cuse and Lindeloff then became the official show runners).

Post: #1964

(02-13-2019 10:34 AM)Blaster Wrote:  

(02-06-2019 10:26 PM)Kurgan Wrote:  

(02-06-2019 06:23 PM)porscheguy Wrote:  Abrams is without a doubt, a male feminist cut from the same cloth as Harvey Weinstein.

I never got Abrams' appeal as a director other than he's a sci-fi geek.

Abrams does a good high-energy action movie. He gets good performances from actors and shoots in an engaging kinetic style. He's really good at a few writing tricks in particular nostalgia and the mystery box. I would say he is actually good at those things. Not everyone can do nostalgia well or pique curiosity effectively. If you call him a charlatan you can at least call him a good charlatan. So people often enjoy his movies.

Of course, as a writer he's seems to be a hack and as a filmmaker he appears to be severely lacking in creative originality. Abrams movies can be rather empty or muddled once you look past the surface. Abrams might think of himself as Spielberg-lite but he's really more like Michael Bay. Except that Abrams tries to fake real storytelling and drama while Bay just fully embraces the camp and spectacle for entertainment's sake.

That's a good explanation, thanks.

Post: #1965

(02-13-2019 10:34 AM)Blaster Wrote:  

(02-06-2019 10:26 PM)Kurgan Wrote:  

(02-06-2019 06:23 PM)porscheguy Wrote:  Abrams is without a doubt, a male feminist cut from the same cloth as Harvey Weinstein.

I never got Abrams' appeal as a director other than he's a sci-fi geek.

Abrams does a good high-energy action movie. He gets good performances from actors and shoots in an engaging kinetic style. He's really good at a few writing tricks in particular nostalgia and the mystery box. I would say he is actually good at those things. Not everyone can do nostalgia well or pique curiosity effectively. If you call him a charlatan you can at least call him a good charlatan. So people often enjoy his movies.

Of course, as a writer he's seems to be a hack and as a filmmaker he appears to be severely lacking in creative originality. Abrams movies can be rather empty or muddled once you look past the surface. Abrams might think of himself as Spielberg-lite but he's really more like Michael Bay. Except that Abrams tries to fake real storytelling and drama while Bay just fully embraces the camp and spectacle for entertainment's sake.

Good visuals are now something that almost anyone can do - the rest are just some ideas.

The story is just severely lacking with Abrams - his idea of the shitty mystery box works only until the public realizes that he doesn't have a clue what is in his mystery box either. That became clear with Lost and even clearer with the current Star Wars crap - the shit started with him and not Rian Johnson. He created the Mary Sue, he rebooted the franchise essentially with shitty plots, he created Emo-Darth-Moron, he destroyed the baddie himself by having the Mary Sue whoop his ass after holding the light saber for one minute. What she gonna do in the third? Whoop his ass again? She could have killed him in the second one as well.

Oh - they are going to reinvent a new villain.

Fuck that crap.

And as for Hollywood - I expect the worst of them. They hardly ever promote the sexually sane ones, so the loving family man with a cutie on the side will be the stark minority. Also a minority will be the more Alpha-ish man like Michael Bay who bangs the girls, but keeps in shape and the girls are not ashamed of fucking him. The #metoo shit has actually also been an attack on all normal heterosexual men working in Hollywood. Everyone knows that girls are throwing themselves at many Hollywood bosses or even underlings for the mere chance of getting noticed or having a role. Now more sane men will walk on egg-shells while the gays and pedophiles will still do their evil shit.

It's either a collection of Game-less Harvey Weinsteins, undercover gays or pedophiles. The last two producers/directors are far more evil since the gays are forcing heterosexual actors to prostitute themselves and the pedos are into far more evil shit.

No idea what Abrams is - he could be the Game-less chump or the other two. Rian Johnson has clear pedo-vibes coming off him - guess that is why they promoted the hell out of them - they prefer the most degenerate to be their figureheads. The most evil ones who have the most to hide will be the most compliant and willing to do anything for the real masters.

Post: #1966

^
"And as for Hollywood - I expect the worst of them. They hardly ever promote the sexually sane ones, so the loving family man with a cutie on the side will be the stark minority."

Yep.
Just watched 'Mortal Engines'.
The vast majority of the male characters were either wankers, weasels or wimps.
While the female characters were all largely 'strong' & 'fierce', yet with just enough emotion to indicate that they are still female.
The only 'nice' male characters, were those who had something direct to offer the fierce females as they went on their journey.

Which is fine for Hollowood to do - upend tropes, switch gender roles as they like.
However, if they expect male audience members to continue to pay for their nonsense.
Their modern efforts & (mostly) modern box office trends are not going to go in their favour.

Post: #1967

< What I love is that Mortal Engines lost 100-150 mio. $+ and was a super-flop. Back in the day they called Waterworld a flop while it broke even with rentals, TV and DVD sales. Now movies like Mortal Engines or Solo bomb with 100 mio. $ each while they try to cater to the SJWs using even Antifa imagery.

The current Robin Hood crap also lost them 50 mio. $+ as they made Robin Hood into an Antifa-bike-lock guy and medieval Europe was depicted as diversity central.

If only your SJWs, radical leftists and feminazis are going to watch the crap, then they will soon have budgets of 30 mio. $ each, because the market cannot support anything else. The Chinese hate the White-Left crap and the men around the world hate it too. The hot women, wives and girlfriends are not going either because the men are not watching it. So who remains is catladies, SJWs and feminazis! Good luck with recouping major investments like the 4 bio. $ of Star Wars with that. And no - they hadn't made their money back yet. They need some 2 bio. $ more and currently they are losing cash.

Post: #1968

Quote:Which is fine for Hollowood to do - upend tropes, switch gender roles as they like.

The obvious problem is that they appear to be losing the ability to create compelling and relatable characters. In order to successfully upend a trope by switching the genders, you have to actually follow through with the story as it might actually play out when the roles are switched. This is especially true if you're not in a blatant superhero fantasy situation.

The reality is that telling a hero journey style story with a female hero is much harder than a male character, because the archetypal story doesn't fit the typical female life experience. It's typical for a boy to have an innate desire to leave home and and take risks to become a hero to earn a place in society. A girl who leaves home in search for adventure is more likely to be a thrill-seeker in search of an alpha to fertilize her eggs and/or save her from a miserable low-status life. A girl on a male hero journey to accomplish something heroic is usually one who has no choice (eg no men want her), and may require of her a bittersweet sacrifice of children and motherhood. Either that, or it's a very atypical woman and the story might be interesting but isn't going to resonate in the archetypal manner of the male hero journey. Another possibility is to make the hero protagonist an older woman who has already had her children and trying to find a place in a society that no longer values her as it once did (perhaps critiquing a society that fails to reward mothers for doing their job).

This obviously is not how filmmakers tend to portray their female heroes. They want young, typical women filling male archetypal roles and it often just doesn't work. Add a tendency to portray them with a feminist chip on their shoulder and something to prove on behalf of their gender and you wind up with a lot of unlikable cunt characters.

Quote:If only your SJWs, radical leftists and feminazis are going to watch the crap, then they will soon have budgets of 30 mio. $ each, because the market cannot support anything else. The Chinese hate the White-Left crap and the men around the world hate it too.

It's easy to point to the international success of Aquaman, the Fast and Furious franchise, and Transformers to see what the average male moviegoer wants to see. It's somewhat amusing to see manlet movie critics scratch their head wondering at the success of Aquaman, with its long convoluted mess of a story and lack of chemistry between the leads. But it's pretty simple: Jason Momoa's Aquaman is a funny caveman alpha and Amber Heard is hot as fuck and only fights with magic conjured using sexy poses. Beyond some generic unversalist and environmentalist messages as well as a minor "girl rebels vs father" plotline, there's no notable SJW shit and no poz. Aquaman has an actual mother and father and both parents play a positive role in the movie. They aren't buffoons or cheating degenerates who hate each other, they don't treat Aquaman badly, or any of the other kind of cynical shit you see in many other movies.

Post: #1969

< Harry Potter is a female archetype kind of hero. But the story was written decades ago and JK Rowling would have changed it tremendously today.

Still - he gets shit done around him - his parents die to save him, the super-wizard Gandalf takes a liking to him and becomes his mentor, he is not overly special, skilled or has much resolve. He is a normal competent wizard who things happen to. His sports skills are also something that he is born with - a natural skill that he hardly needs to hone as his dad had the same abilities. Things happen to him and Potter could have been a female hero and the story would have been the same.

Compare it to male heroes and it's all a mix of work, trials, difficulties, then finally ascension to the top - Luke Skywalker or the Pug/Milamber character of the Reymond Feist book series. The male hero is also born with great talent and promise, but he needs to work his ass off to become the greatest wizard/prophet/warrior. It's not enough to be born and have shit happen to him.

Post: #1970

For Harry Potter it's also probably notable that most of the story (including the archetypal Special World) is spent at school age in modern-like school environments, structured and more comfortable for girls. The story also starts before puberty at an age when boys and girls are more similar. Still, Harry Potter still has a fairly archetypal structure. It's been years since I've read them. I'm not prepared to do a thorough analysis, but I'm pretty sure Harry struggles quite a bit over the course of the story and isn't a passive protagonist or a Sue.

I think I should point out that there's nothing wrong with girls finding appeal in the male hero journey. Humans are highly adaptable creatures and both sexes often find it useful to behave in a manner more stereotypical of the opposite gender. I think it's reasonable to think of Harry Potter as the male hero journey adapted to be as compelling as possible for a female audience. You could probably make Harry Potter female without losing much from the story, but certain angles wouldn't work as well (Quidditch star works much better as a male character).

It's also worth noting that the "hero journey" as a base storytelling structure is highly adaptable. You can adapt many of the tropes to a female-oriented story that is technically a "hero journey" by making the adventure elements more metaphorical than real. In Mean Girls, the archetypal "special world" is "Girl World" (in a high school) and that metaphorical place is where the character's adventures happen. Obviously the type of Hero Journey we're actually talking about are male adventure stories where the special world is much more literal. Moana would be an example of a more classic adventure story where what would normally be a boy protagonist is replaced with a girl.

Post: #1971

(02-15-2019 08:43 AM)Blaster Wrote:  The obvious problem is that they appear to be losing the ability to create compelling and relatable characters....

Yep.
If it's not a trite mash-up of two or three well established properties.
It's a poor rehash / replication of what has been done before.

Even in fashion. There have been no distinctive or creative new trends.
It's all just a sad rehash or sad mash-up of what has taken place before.
Emo is a sad replication of Goth & Hipster is a sad mash-up of Emo & 'lumber jack'.

Post: #1972

The "strong female characters" are essentially ruining strong female characters.

Essentially it's propaganda which will make most of those movies unwatchable and akin to Stalinist crap in the future. People will watch it not because of a compelling story, but to dissect the underlying idiotic message of it all.

Once you start out with a feminist social justice framework, then it's all downhill from there. Women tend to become Mary Sues, men become weak and incompetent, White men are evil, non-White non-Christian men become saints and good etc. Especially the underlying male-female dichotomy strikes both men as well as women as odd and strange. Heck - the Aliens 2 space marines with female soldiers were more realistic depictions of femininity than the stupid crap shown in the latest Star Wars movies.

Post: #1973

(02-10-2019 07:05 PM)eradicator Wrote:  Eh at least she is hot. I swore they were going to cast Leslie Jones to be Lando's daughter.

But don't you get it? It's just a stealth gender-flip whether she's hot or not. They couldn't give him a son because they feel duty-bound to stack the cast with women.

Post: #1974

(02-17-2019 05:28 AM)questor70 Wrote:  

(02-10-2019 07:05 PM)eradicator Wrote:  Eh at least she is hot. I swore they were going to cast Leslie Jones to be Lando's daughter.

But don't you get it? It's just a stealth gender-flip whether she's hot or not. They couldn't give him a son because they feel duty-bound to stack the cast with women.

You know, I actually like girls with a bit of brass to them. The sort who enjoy B-Movies, hiking, and guns. And these "Strong Empowered Female Characters" are ruining them. They're not strong, they're just aggressive and rude, and they mistake that for strength because men step out of the way of an angry woman...

...or they just fade away and stop returning their calls. The woman thinks she's won, and her empowerment worked. There's nothing worse than an argumentative woman.

These films teach the brassy girls that they can't submit to a man; that the way to get his attention is to argue, to be unpleasant. They don't hit the girly-girls as hard (they're being ruined through their vanity by gay fashion designers), it's specifically targeted at the sort of girls I like.

Pisses me off man.

Post: #1975

Razorfist summed it up during one of his livestreams "Did you ever think it was possible, that one day you would see the inside of the Millenium Falcon and just cringe?"