Thank you for posting, this is the first I've actually heard a black person's perspective on Finn. I admit, as a white person, I'm not always great at picking out racism unless it's really, really blantant, and it honestly hadn't occurred to me people might have problems with Finn.
The moment people start using dumbass, bullshit phrases like SJW or "liberal Hollywood" I instantly lose all respect for their arguments.
Then you're sidestepping the issue:
I have heard from a large number of black and white fans (in person and social media) about the deliberate racial mishandling of Finn. Some have referred to Finn in ways I will not repeat here, but essentially, they believe he's not only what Liberal Hollywood wants to see in a black male (more often than not), but his minstrel behavior makes him a throwback to film actors such as Lincoln Theodore Monroe Andrew Perry, known to the world as Stepin Fetchit
...and living in utter denial about the sociopolitical leaning of that industry, and how it influences the majority of their productions You can pretend that is not a central player in Hollywood and its members who sell themselves as being open-minded. You can also pretend the complaints about Finn being the result of a racist perception/industry handling of black male characters is not justified, but you are merely contributing to the problem, and resorting to your habit of flaming members (no point in denying what's in the posting history of this board), which should have prevented me from responding to you--thinking you were interested in any mature discussion on the issue.
Talk about taking the air out of the sails. The message of the first two movies is that when you get older, you are useless, and have to be killed so new people can take over.
If anything, the theme of Star Wars' latest trilogy is ageism.
Keep in mind that of the "big three" from the OT, the
male characters were killed off. Long before Carrie Fisher's untimely death (which will influence the use of Leia in episode 9, unless the producers disrespect Fisher by creating their less than convincing, cartoon CGI "actor" as in
Rogue One), this was the plan.
Considering the gross level of Mary Sue/misandry in 2 sequel films so far, the message is clear: male characters are either too stupid, weak, clownish, or are there only to be ignored, holding no sort of position even hinting at equality at all....except on the antagonists side. Unintentionally on the producers' part, that seems like a telling comment, since in the producers' eyes, the moviegoer is supposed to
admire the Resistance, yet its hierarchy and general treatment of men is negative. Finn and Poe (allegedly the part of the new hero "trio" of
Star Wars) are constantly disrespected, led by the nose, shocked into submission, and never rise to any occasion. Its been established that Finn is a throwback clown from the 1940s, but even in his suicide run, his moment is taken from him--by force--by his hollow "love" interest, Rose.
At least if he died, the film would have at least one ounce of the idea that there's sacrifice in war (and it would have provided the producer's best excuse for Finn and Rey never being romantically linked).
And again, this de-evolution of Luke Skywalker--turning him into this horrible, jaded, grumpy old man--the character that was the shining light of hope--he WAS the "New Hope," was just terrible.
The first two movies of this trilogy basically were meant to undo the original story.
All part of the Disney/Kathleen Kennedy mission: to trash the memory of the entire saga's central hero character--a man. In doing so, it not only eliminates the once-important necessity of the religion surrounding the Force in favor of some "do whatever", borderline atheistic world (which is the opposite of why Luke was able to not only understand his greater, personal purpose, but save his father), but hammer it all home that said saga hero (and all males around him) are patently irrelevant.
I realize that the trilogy isn't over. But what could possibly happen in the third movie that will change the above?
Do not expect much. There's no film series in film trilogy in history where the first 2 installments were misguided nonsense, only to be saved by the last chapter.
Kylo turns good? Who really cares? The guy murdered his own father, a legend. Do we really care about him deciding, "ok, I'll be good now?" What could possibly redeem him? And even so, again, all he is, is a whiny hipster.
True, and no one needs to see Darth Watered Down turn from evil, as we had the ultimate example of that in the OT with Vader when the concept of redemption mattered most--against the backdrop of the worst run of evil the galaxy had ever experienced. Vader was central to helping the Empire come to power and destroying an ancient order--completely sending the Force into what had been a state of perpetual imbalance.
There was
weight in his character--from Kenobi's story (to Luke) in ANH, to his own dedication to the idea of the Force, even though he was the one to corrupt its influence in the very fabric of life. Kylo has no trait of that, no grand backstory even hinted at (the way Vader's was laid out by Obi-Wan in ANH, all stretching of the truth aside) and (in part) exists to be an enemy roughly around the same age as the so-called heroes (as if that was necessary; it certainly was not in the OT or PT)
