"5 Reasons Kathleen Kennedy Needs To Step Down From Lucasfilm" By John Campea

[ichab]

I don't think Kathleen Kennedy is going anywhere. I haven't agreed with every decision, but I'm still happier with her in charge than I was with Lucas. After the umpteenth OT revisions that came with the Blu--Rays, the prequals and his general disregard for the fans I was pretty much done with the franchise.

As to the direction of the franchise, a couple things I think need to happen which have already been mentioned..

1.) Keep it to one film a year and release it in the winter. Let Marvel rule the summer so as not to compete with each other.
2.) Start expanding beyond the OT era. The well is running dry on it. There is tons of great material out there that they can choose from.

 

[Spot261]

No, I don't think calling her a Mary Sue (or being critical of Rose Tico or Admiral Holdo) is inherently sexist either...

Even if one chooses to selectively apply the criticism to her and not male characters?

 

[Mach5]

Even if one chooses to selectively apply the criticism to her and not male characters?

As long as it's the character's actions that are criticized, the gender doesn't play a part. Or at least shouldn't.

 

[Spot261]

Depending on the type of criticism, I suppose.

Mostly the type that seems not to be able to offer any other explanation.

 

[Mach5]

Mostly the type that seems not to be able to offer any other explanation.

Edited the post to be more specific. Many people resent Rose for stopping Finn's kamikaze run, or Holdo for being too secretive. Gender - swap the characters and these resentments don't automatically disappear.

 

[Spot261]

Edited the post to be more specific. Many people resent Rose for stopping Finn's kamikaze run, or Holdo for being too secretive. Gender - swap the characters and these resentments don't automatically disappear.

That's an hypothesis we can't test though, what we can do is compare two comparable circumstances where the main differentiating factor is gender. In this case two very powerful raw force sensitives who were given bare minimal ad hoc training and went on to essentially refine that talent to the point they became major players on the galactic scene.

 

[EnsignRicky]

Ask away

I actually fed you a load of rope on purpose

Didn't really read too much further. Kinda got bored.
I'm done with you.

 

[dahj]

As long as it's the character's actions that are criticized, the gender doesn't play a part. Or at least shouldn't.

But gender does play a part, female characters get routinely criticized for actions that male characters don't and never have. To pretend that's not the case and feign some supposed impartially is frankly bullshit that's ignoring the cultural context we're currently in.

If one finds oneself having to preface a criticism with "I'm not being sexist, but..." that's usually a dead giveaway that one's about to be particularly sexist. And stuff like this...

Many people resent Rose for stopping Finn's kamikaze run, or Holdo for being too secretive. Gender - swap the characters and these resentments don't automatically disappear.

...isn't that far off, as much as you like to think it is.
That's really nice that you think people would have the same problem if these people were men, but there's obviously no way to test that. What we do have is a long history of male lead shows and movies. How many buddy cop movies have one guy going for a suicide run and his partner saving his ass at the last second and finding another way to catch the baddie? How many eyebrows did that raise back in the day? How many cunning, secretive, smart dudes that do an asspull plan they had all along at the last second exist? Did people whinge about [insert favourite detective dude here] waiting to reveal who done it till everybody was in the room at the end? Did Kirk or Picard always fully explain everything to everyone? Were those such massive problems too?

If Holdo was a dude, she would be glorified as a Robau-tier character, but she's not, so her actions get intensely scrutinized. Even if you think that the criticism is valid, to outright dismiss that gender bias could be the reason why that scrutiny is applied here is just being deliberately glib.

Bottom line is, #notallcriticism is just as counterproductive as #notallmen, it's hard to see it as anything than just an attempt to deflect the conversation from the uncomfortable issue of omnipresent sexism that's still dominant in "geek culture" stuff. If you do have a criticism, just lay it out. If people say they notice some gender bias in how you arrived at that criticism, maybe instead of getting defensive and doubling down on it, just pause for a second and consider why your criticism comes off like that. Is that such a difficult thing to do?

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Rey isn't a Mary Sue. It's utterly ridiculous to single her out from the other able heroes in Star Wars. But, yeah, she's a woman, so...

so, I guess to some it is.

 

[Mach5]

Bottom line is, #notallcriticism is just as counterproductive as #notallmen, it's hard to see it as anything than just an attempt to deflect the conversation from the uncomfortable issue of omnipresent sexism that's still dominant in "geek culture" stuff.

Sure, but don't we still need a neutral environment to judge and criticize everyone's actions without bias?

I've personally always been a vocal critic of Captain Janeway's actions, and went as far as far as calling some of them (like helping the Borg assimilate Species 8472) worthy of court martial. I've expressed that opinion numerous times over the years and never been accused of sexism, but I feel that, if Voyager were a contemporary show (in the "cultural context we're currently in"), I could have been.

We have an "Ocean's Eight" movie coming out soon... I'm pretty excited to see it, but what if it ends up sucking, the way Ocean's 12 sucked? Should the critics walk on egg shells, until they're certain the air is clear and it's okay to trash it?

I didn't hate Holdo, or Laura Dern's portrayal of her, but I didn't think she was a flawless character either. For one, she did not inspire authority the way Captain Janeway or General Leia did. Also, she made a martyr out of herself without having a plausible reason for it (autopilot or a droid could have done the job). Her most controversial move, keeping the Crait plan to herself, I did not have a problem with, although a simple throwaway line like "We may have a mole" would have went a long way.

 

[Trekkin]

How many buddy cop movies have one guy going for a suicide run and his partner saving his ass at the last second and finding another way to catch the baddie?

It stands out as a particularly silly criticism here, because the movie goes out of its way to paint Finn’s ‘sacrifice’ as being completely pointless.

Because what would Finn’s suicide run have achieved? Sure, that one cannon is gone. Just like Poe managed to destroy one ship at the start. Meanwhile, Finn’s dead and the FO is still camped outside. The FO has access to resources, whilst he allies Leia banked on for rescue won’t even answering her calls.

Hell. Without Finn, the Resistance would have never followed the Vulptex to what ended up being the escape tunnel. They’d just have to hope Rey could get herself to them on...Force luck? alone. Assuming the besieging and now twiddling-their-thumbs FO didn’t notice her sooner, and concentrate all their forces on shooting her out of the sky. Or just follow her, preventing her from opening up the base.


But yeah. Apparently having ‘Pick your battles’ as one of your themes, is some nonsensical feminist ‘Mary Sue’ pushing.

autopilot

Where do people keep pulling this from? It’s never even established as an option.

droids

Poor Threepio. A main character for 6 movies, and we still don’t count you as a person like the human characters. Even though you obviously are sapient, feel pain, and understand/fear mortality.

Oh, and had the latest movie kinda half-assedly codify that you’re a member of an abused slave race, deserving of greater rights and more humane treatment. Like not getting conscripted into a suicide run.

 

[Mach5]

It stands out as a particularly silly criticism here, because the movie goes out of its way to paint Finn’s ‘sacrifice’ as being completely pointless.

It really was, but then again, charging the First Order walkers with those rusty speeders seemed pretty ridiculous in the first place.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

I'm not convinced that Holdo had decided to martyr herself at the outset, and at this point I believe she put off the decision until there was no other option. When the transports were launched to go down to Crait, they thought that they were effectively cloaked. She probably had no specific plan at that point, but wanted to stay flexible until the transports had safely made it down. Staying flexible and adapting to circumstances might not have been something that droids could reliably do.

In TCW era at least, droids routinely had their memories erased for security reasons, which kept them from becoming advanced problem solvers; it was said of R2 for example that despite it being against standard procedure, Anakin preferred not to routinely wipe his memory. (Sorry, I don't remember which episode that was in.)

Plus, Holdo may have seen it as her responsibility to safely oversee the transports from the cruiser. Anyway, when things went south, she had to do something desperate, and that's when she made the decision to sacrifice herself by hyperspace jump.

Otherwise, why wait to jump until the transports are being fired on? If the plan was always to jump into hyperspace through Snoke's ship, why not do it as soon as all transports are launched? Putting the First Order ships in complete disarray would give the transports maximum chances to safely make it down. No, given that she was evidently overseeing the transports' progress, it seems to me that the decision would have to have been made to do the suicide jump only after it was clear that the cloaking was no longer working. Again, appreciating the potential for a variety of contingencies, that might not be the sort of thing that they'd trust a droid to effectively make decisions regarding.

 

[Mach5]

Where do people keep pulling this from? It’s never even established as an option.

Hard to believe a fancy hyperspace-capable cruiser wasn't capable of piloting itself, but whatever.

Poor Threepio. A main character for 6 movies, and we still don’t count you as a person like the human characters.

Fair point. Droids in the SW universe definitely seem sentient, but are all of them? The level of sophistication probably varies depending on a function they were built for.

 

[Trekkin]

Even the Battle droids in the prequels/TCW showed a fairly disturbing amount of personality. Aware enough to frequently want to flee in terror, but without the ability to actually do so.

They’re also gleefully homicidal. But nonetheless, their sheer terror in the face of inescapable suicidal orders gets played for laughs a lot.

I don’t know if it was wise for Solo to tear open that can of worms. Personhood and dehumanisation, the morality and implications of building a labour race, etc might be a bit out if it’s element. Clone Wars sorta tackled it with the Clones, but see above Battle droids.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

I think the intent was that L3 was comic relief, with a subtext about how women's lib wasn't going over very well in the real world. That was one of the aspects of Solo that worked best for me.

 

[dahj]

Sure, but don't we still need a neutral environment to judge and criticize everyone's actions without bias?

Well that would be swell, if only people didn't keep insisting on dragging their bias into their criticism. which they do, and because geek stuff has historically been male dominated there's still a lot of gender bias in the geek criticism, and a lot of sexism and misogyny from the fanbases and the media.

Which is why I don't appreciate when discussing such issues is being trivialized and dismissed with #notallcriticism.

Should the critics walk on egg shells, until they're certain the air is clear and it's okay to trash it?

I really don't think the two issues, one of how sexism still affects how women are perceived in media and consequently in real life, and the issue of whether or not a big blockbuster will officially be declared shit or the shit, are equally important. Personally I couldn't care less about the second one. But hey, that's just my bias showing.

But yeah. Apparently having ‘Pick your battles’ as one of your themes, is some nonsensical feminist ‘Mary Sue’ pushing.

No no no, let's not talk about the themes and character's journeys, let's talk about tiny mechanical details, like why didn't Holdo explain herself to a random douche she just met who just got demoted for insubordination. Because that's the really important stuff that needs criticism and scrutiny, right?

 

[Mach5]

I really don't think the two issues, one of how sexism still affects how women are perceived in media and consequently in real life, and the issue of whether or not a big blockbuster will officially be declared shit or the shit, are equally important.

It is important, when the "this movie is important for women" narrative is being written, like in the case of the Ghostbusters reboot. Men have attacked that movie for various reasons, A LOT of which was misogyny and racism (Leslie Jones was being bullied in social media), but there was also legitimate criticism that was being dismissed as biased, at least at first (Half in the Bag buried the movie and got no hate for it*).

*[ETA] turns out they did get some hate for it

 

[dahj]

like in the case of the Ghostbusters reboot. Men have attacked that movie for various reasons, A LOT of which was misogyny and racism (Leslie Jones was being bullied in social media), but there was also legitimate criticism that was being dismissed as biased

That's an odd hill to defend the cause of "legitimate criticism" you've chosen there...

 

[Mach5]

That's an odd hill to defend the cause of "legitimate criticism" you've chosen there...

How so? I myself haven't seen it, mind you.