The EU wouldn't be the EU if it was just the movies.
Is Toxic "Star Wars" Fandom Imploding?
- Thread starter Locutus of Bored
- Start date
I must say I was pretty poisonous when it came to Star Trek: Enterprise and the last two TNG movies. I also hold ill will towards the last two Abrams/Orci Star Trek films. The lousiness of those productions [my opinion] are quite provocatory. I still love the franchise overall and look to give future productions an honest shot for my affections.
I sincerely disagree. It is not a sense of entitlement. At least not on my part. More a sense of frustration built up over the long term. My philosophy is simply that I do not feel we are beholden not to have standards and that each new project should expand boundaries and justify it's existence by doing more than just treading water. I mean how many times are they going to use TWoK as the basis for their movies? I don't believe it is out a sense of entitlement that I look for new generations to be able to experience variety and relevance when enjoying new Star Trek adventures.
As an old school fan I am willing for my beloved franchise to leave me in the dust as long as I got the sense that it was a case of me not keeping up as opposed to TPTB looking to hedge bets and play things safe by not rocking boats. Risk should, to some degree, be their business … at least as a means to an end in telling fresh and contemporary stories in a bold and engaging way for new generations of fans.
:RANT MODE OFF:
What does any of that have to do with STAR WARS? This thread is about Star Wars fandom.
That’s entitlement.
My point is simply that it is a bit specious to point a finger specifically at one group regarding the toxicity of its fandom while "toxicity" within fandom is actually a truism of across the board therefore there is an implication of hypocrisy. The root of fandom after all is fanatic. To that end I employed an example of myself so as not to risk offending anyone.
Again, disagree. Having "standards" is not "entitlement." In fact, I would say the respective downturns in quality for both the SW and ST franchises stems from too many "fans" being too undiscerning which perpetuates the downturn. Hollywood is forever questing to find the minimums required. That means they purposely lowering the quality until they find that sweet spot between what is the least acceptable quality and least amount of cost to attain acceptable levels of profit. So when fans remain silent they are supporting a system that by design promotes a decline. After all, if the fans don't care why should the producers.
That's not how Hollywood works. For the most part they don't give a damn what you have to say about their show. All they care about is whether you watch it or not. Therefore, if you want to apply your standards to signal Hollywood that they need to do better, then you should simply stop watching, not go online and complain about it all.
That's now how Hollywood studios tend to see it. If something is risky that puts profit at risk.
Holding ill will towards the films themselves is not (necessarily) the issue. It's when that ill will moves on to the people who make it, wishing them harm and all manner of hostility, that's not OK. Treating the films as though they have some how damaged a franchise also is not very rational, as Star Wars and Star Trek have obviously endured multiple poor outings.
Regardless of personal expectations, the fact of the matter is that not every film is for every fan. I don't care for TWOK or ROTS as films, but I don't hold them to any sort of personal animosity. I just don't watch them. Period. It isn't worth the outrage, blood pressure rising or anxiety to me.
I enjoy Star Wars. A lot. I still enjoy the Disney era because it means more Star Wars and ideas that I wouldn't have thought of period. I can say all I want about the PT or ST and how I wouldn't do it that way. That's not the point. The point isn't for them to do it my way. The question becomes can I engage with the product as produced. If yes, great. If not, oh well. Always another.
Your "standards" are your subjective opinion and personal tastes, they're far from universal. You'll find that many people, perhaps the majority of people are enjoying the films and actually see them as a major improvement over what we've gotten over the last few years from Star Wars. But no, you shouldn't expect the movies to live up to your personal tastes.
Star Trek is much more rooted in science than Star Wars, it might not always be accurate, but it does try to use scientific concepts to explain things like war drive and transporters. Star Wars on the other hand, has never once, in the movies and TV series at least, explained how things like blasters or hyperdrives work.
The midi-chloirans didn't really explain that much, all it did was give them quick way to show how poweful Anakin was.
Not every fan is attacking people on the internet just because they didn't like the last movie in the franchise, that is where the become toxic.
Completely disagree, I've really enjoyed the latest output from both franchises, and have been pretty happy with most of the other big franchises too.[/QUOTE]
There have only been two Abrams/Orci Star Trek films, Trek XI and STID. Orci had no involvement at all with Beyond.
Gary Whitta (writer of Rogue One) addresses TLJ backlash:
Nice that someone with some sway in the creative process who might be able to help put certain fans’ complaints into perspective.
I disliked The Last Jedi. I thought it was a poorly made film. It's boring, messy, too long, lacked verisimilitude, had tonal problems and couldn't even stick to the courage of its own convictions.
There's a lot of legitimate criticism of the movie that I think gets lumped in with the "toxic" complaints about it. I agree with the author of the OP article that the extremists should be ignored, but I don't think most of the dislike is coming from them.
I think most people who didn't like the film don't know who Rian Johnson is, have never heard of Kathleen Kennedy and are unaware there's a "backlash". They just know they watched a really boring movie and have probably never posted on the internet about it because SW isn't that important to them.
There's a lot of legitimate criticism of the movie that I think gets lumped in with the "toxic" complaints about it. I agree with the author of the OP article that the extremists should be ignored, but I don't think most of the dislike is coming from them.
I think most people who didn't like the film don't know who Rian Johnson is, have never heard of Kathleen Kennedy and are unaware there's a "backlash". They just know they watched a really boring movie and have probably never posted on the internet about it because SW isn't that important to them.
True, legitimate criticism gets lumped together with toxic complaints when people aren't paying attention and when people want to make a false equivalence. You could also say that each individual down-vote looks like any other.
There are many legitimate criticisms of the film. @Locutus of Bored has posted some. I have issues with the film too, though I've also defended it.
By the way, there are no scare-quotes needed around the word toxic. It's not just supposedly toxic, it is toxic.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scare_quotes
The scare-quotes are applicable.
Why?
Because it's not a word I would normally use.