Is Toxic "Star Wars" Fandom Imploding?

[jaime]

Yes the Empire was inspired by both the Nazis and the British-but those influences seem to make the Rebels implicitly Americans and thus politically moderate so the idea that the Empire is also based on America and the allies Ewoks represent Vietnamese Communists, even though that was Lucas's intentions, seems a big stretch and pretty not-conveyed by the films.

They dubbed British actors with Americans to make the Empire non-British. There’s a sort of..old-republic British, Rebels And Corellians American, Empire American thing happening. The Empire is heavily ww2 Japanese in its style for the most part. Things get really silly as it goes on tbh. The Empire isn’t really portrayed as particularly fascist beyond its imagery. The idea it has some kind of space-nationalist or racist thing is something grown later by fandom and the sequels. The biggest thing is how the republic simply becomes the Empire, and we know the Republic is full of alien races. The idea it’s because we mostly see humans in it is a nixed...we also mostly see humans in the rebel ranks, particularly at first, and in places like Tatooine. Star Wars just wasn’t thought out that way. Even the ‘humans’ are t humans as such, and come from lots of different planets with no mention of a colonisation phase from one ‘human’ world. Ironically, I think more rebels speak with a Brit accent in ANH than Imperials. So it’s all a silly ‘put the text through a political theory lens’ thing that falls at the first hurdle. It’s all gone ‘what’s a nubian?’ Hasn’t it?

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[suarezguy]

And need I venture into the Christian themes of Star Wars? Self-sacrifice and redemption and forgiveness and monastic ascetism and impulse-control? How does that jive in today's narcissistic and hedonistic era?

Self-sacrifice and impulse control are pretty big parts of most if not all religions and political philosophies (although, oddly enough, narcissism and hedonism also fit in to most political philosophies too) and forgiveness and redemption also pretty broadly shared themes and values.

 

[mos6507]

Self-sacrifice and impulse control are pretty big parts of most if not all religions and political philosophies (although, oddly enough, narcissism and hedonism also fit in to most political philosophies too) and forgiveness and redemption also pretty broadly shared themes and values.

The left has traditionally been about individualism, hence Woodstock and then the 70s being the first me-decade. Star Wars doesn't push that sort of lifestyle. You're all trying to force a square peg through a round hole on this one.

 

[suarezguy]

The far-left/revolutionary left though is anti-individualism, at least communal if not highly collectivist.

 

[mos6507]

The far-left/revolutionary left though is anti-individualist, at least communal if not highly collectivist.

You're getting lost in the weeds. Star Wars isn't left-wing no matter how you slice it. Can left-wingers still enjoy it? Yes. That's why it became such a huge success. Because it doesn't get lost in the weeds and tries to tap into primal truths. It brings people together who otherwise don't see eye to eye.

Fairy tales tend to do that because they operate at more of a dreamscape level than a literal/realistic one.

The best Star Wars moments are the most mystical and abstract, like raising the X-wing. The worst Star Wars moments are the most literal or on-the-nose like the pontificating about arms dealers selling to both sides in The Last Jedi.

 

[fireproof78]

The worst Star Wars moments are the most literal or on-the-nose like the pontificating about arms dealers selling to both sides in The Last Jedi.

Not sure how this is the worst. I thought that TLJ handled it quite well, as well as reflected the moral greyness introduced in ROTS.

 

[Awesome Possum]

Yes the Empire was inspired by both the Nazis and the British-but those influences seem to make the Rebels implicitly Americans and thus politically moderate so the idea that the Empire is also based on America and the allies Ewoks represent Vietnamese Communists, even though that was Lucas's intentions, seems a big stretch and pretty not-conveyed by the films.

No, he compared it because it was a technologically advanced army defeated by a more primitive one.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

I knew you'd go there. In the recent interviews Lucas said that the Empire was the US, not Nazis.

You've got to understand that Lucas is speaking in the present about what his inspiration may have been 40+ years ago. His recollections are colored by all of the cultural change that has taken place between then and now and he also would probably like to take credit for SW being more "woke" than it really was. So much of SW was just Lucas regurgitating his likes (like Kurusawa Hidden Fortress or the Dam Busters).

You also should remember what the early reviews of Star Wars said about it. They mocked it for how old-fashioned it was, for how out-of-touch it was compared to some edgy adult fare like MASH or One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest. So you just can't look at it as "progressive" cinema. The politics are very very tame.

Also, the audience (which included me) at the time did not look at it as a political screed. It was more of a spiritual message, which is why Lucas got anointed in the same pantheon as JRR Tolkien when he participated in Joseph Campbell and the Power of Myth in the 80s. That's what set the stage for him being branded a dream-killer when the prequels came out and the Emperor was shown to have no clothes.

It's just that now people want to retroactively tie the new (more overtly political) films back to the OT to make it seem like it was always thus. Not the case.



She was still a damsel and she still got carried by Luke on that rope swing like something out of an old Errol Flynn movie.

I'm not saying there aren't refreshing elements about Leia, but she's no Ripley or Lara Croft. Her "spunky" qualities were along the same lines as Lois Lane in Superman. It was more of a throwback to Katherine Hepburn screwball comedies.

Nostalgia is a huge part of Lucas' outlook on life. What do you think American Graffiti was about? As much as Lucas was a product of 60s counter-culture, he still had a fondness of the time BEFORE JFK, Vietnam, Kent State, etc... Star Wars' purpose is to be a refuge from politics, similar to how (IMHO) Middle-Earth was a refuge from Tolkien's WWI war trauma.

And need I venture into the Christian themes of Star Wars? Self-sacrifice and redemption and forgiveness and monastic ascetism and impulse-control? How does that jive in today's narcissistic and hedonistic era? Is that "progressive"?



Lucas said he made Star Wars specifically for 12 year old boys. Yes, boys.

That it has crossover appeal probably has more to do with the influence of others around him, but his target demo wasn't anything broader or less conventional than the people making 1930s Flash Gordon.

So you can cherry-pick all you want but the fact is SW plays it both ways, and pound for pound is more on the tradcon end of the spectrum.



I have a BFA in film production so please don't presume.

The problem I have with your analysis is you're starting form a conclusion (SW is progressive) and cherry-picking to prove your point while ignoring any data-points that contradict.

I knew you'd go there. In the recent interviews Lucas said that the Empire was the US, not Nazis.

You've got to understand that Lucas is speaking in the present about what his inspiration may have been 40+ years ago. His recollections are colored by all of the cultural change that has taken place between then and now and he also would probably like to take credit for SW being more "woke" than it really was. So much of SW was just Lucas regurgitating his likes (like Kurusawa Hidden Fortress or the Dam Busters).

You also should remember what the early reviews of Star Wars said about it. They mocked it for how old-fashioned it was, for how out-of-touch it was compared to some edgy adult fare like MASH or One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest. So you just can't look at it as "progressive" cinema. The politics are very very tame.

Also, the audience (which included me) at the time did not look at it as a political screed. It was more of a spiritual message, which is why Lucas got anointed in the same pantheon as JRR Tolkien when he participated in Joseph Campbell and the Power of Myth in the 80s. That's what set the stage for him being branded a dream-killer when the prequels came out and the Emperor was shown to have no clothes.

It's just that now people want to retroactively tie the new (more overtly political) films back to the OT to make it seem like it was always thus. Not the case.



She was still a damsel and she still got carried by Luke on that rope swing like something out of an old Errol Flynn movie.

I'm not saying there aren't refreshing elements about Leia, but she's no Ripley or Lara Croft. Her "spunky" qualities were along the same lines as Lois Lane in Superman. It was more of a throwback to Katherine Hepburn screwball comedies.

Nostalgia is a huge part of Lucas' outlook on life. What do you think American Graffiti was about? As much as Lucas was a product of 60s counter-culture, he still had a fondness of the time BEFORE JFK, Vietnam, Kent State, etc... Star Wars' purpose is to be a refuge from politics, similar to how (IMHO) Middle-Earth was a refuge from Tolkien's WWI war trauma.

And need I venture into the Christian themes of Star Wars? Self-sacrifice and redemption and forgiveness and monastic ascetism and impulse-control? How does that jive in today's narcissistic and hedonistic era? Is that "progressive"?



Lucas said he made Star Wars specifically for 12 year old boys. Yes, boys.

That it has crossover appeal probably has more to do with the influence of others around him, but his target demo wasn't anything broader or less conventional than the people making 1930s Flash Gordon.

So you can cherry-pick all you want but the fact is SW plays it both ways, and pound for pound is more on the tradcon end of the spectrum.



I have a BFA in film production so please don't presume.

The problem I have with your analysis is you're starting form a conclusion (SW is progressive) and cherry-picking to prove your point while ignoring any data-points that contradict.

Wonderful. On-point, accurate post.

 

[Mirror Tuvix]

Han is the Obi Wan of episode VII. Hence his ‘it’s all true’ speech. Even his killing of the gangster smugglers is like Obi’s moment Mos Eisley. One last flash of the old ...extended in Hans case through the Cantina battle, some fancy flying, and planting bombs in a base. It’s like a condensed greatest hits.
I think the pacing is off largely through the choices made in the second film, rather than the first. It’s not the affront some people make out, elsewhere, but it does land some of the audience in having to hope JJ does better.

I think the next trilogy is gonna be an interesting thing...with no OT components to pull on (they will run out of characters to break and kill) I wonder how it will fare.

I'm aware that the Resistance began as a faction of the New Republic, the point was their desperate wartime predicament doesn't lend itself well to much other than survival (but moreover, the narrative inertia was driving Rey to Luke at the end of TFA, and the film was mandated to be 130 mins, plus credits- not a lot of supplemental time allotted.)

Han goes down for Ben. And for Leia. The two aren't mutually exclusive. Considering the only substantive scene with Leia and Han is Leia saying "get our son back" - Leia's imploring cannot be so easily dismissed as to Han's motivation.

There are parallels between Han and Obi, but there are also clear limits to that comparison. These types of mythic stories all have mentor figures. Rey gets Han in film 1 and Luke in film 2. Luke got Obi in film 1 and Yoda in film 2. I don't see any issue in Rey having a mentor in each film. (And as I mentioned, there wasn't much more she could learn from Han.)

As to the pacing, TLJ has a slower and more psychodrama-based middle part, just as in Empire.

TLJ deviates a bit from formula in that it invites thought - i.e. why did Johnson decide to do x, y and z? Poe's arc seems perfectly clear, but many complained, "what was the point of Finn's arc?" It was to show the naive Finn a wider view of the world, and give him the choice of joining the struggle, as opposed to his previously narrower motivation of devotion to Rey. Once he committed, Rose was there to remind him that heroic self-sacrifice isn't always the best way to help your comrades. (I cite this as an example of pointless things in Last Jedi that really aren't so pointless.)

 

[fireproof78]

TLJ deviates a bit from formula in that it invites thought - i.e. why did Johnson decide to do x, y and z? Poe's arc seems perfectly clear, but many complained, "what was the point of Finn's arc?" It was to show the naive Finn a wider view of the world, and give him the choice of joining the struggle, as opposed to his previously narrower motivation of devotion to Rey. Once he committed, Rose was there to remind him that heroic self-sacrifice isn't always the best way to help your comrades. (I cite this as an example of pointless things in Last Jedi that really aren't so pointless.)

Pretty much. Which is often my experience at the movies. Things that are dismissed as pointless or purposeless to others are often the things I find the most enjoyable in a film. I struggle with the constant drum beat that everything must have a purpose and be spelled out. I'd rather having something that invites thinking regarding it and pursuing different ideas, rather than the dismissal that the production team did for the sake of doing it with no thought applied. I find that to be a gross oversimplification, at best.

 

[mos6507]

TLJ doesn't really have a point on its own other than to attempt to undo everything that was setup in the prior movie, sometimes to the brink of self-parody. Episode IX has to now look at the thesis (Force Awakens) and antithesis (Last Jedi) and decide what to do with these two polar opposites. It either continues the retcon approach of Last Jedi (which is unlikely) or try to nullify Last Jedi and swing breathlessly back to thesis (which is a possibility, but leaves you with a gaping incoherent hole in the middle) or blend the two into synthesis.

Really, the best way to reconcile the tonal shift between TFA and TLJ is to reach for synthesis. What form that would take, I don't know, but if done right, it could go a long way to making The Last Jedi more fulfilling upon repeated viewings, because you'd know it's not the final word.

I was actually willing to walk into The Last Jedi with the expectation that it was going to be Star Wars for grownups (whatever that may be) but I think Rian's priorities were out of whack. He seemed more interested in trolling audience expectations and forgot that the foundation of a movie is presenting characters you can care about. So far, neither TFA nor TLJ have really given me reason to care about any of the new characters. They just failed to deliver in two totally different ways.

 

[Awesome Possum]

I'm aware that the Resistance began as a faction of the New Republic, the point was their desperate wartime predicament doesn't lend itself well to much other than survival (but moreover, the narrative inertia was driving Rey to Luke at the end of TFA, and the film was mandated to be 130 mins, plus credits- not a lot of supplemental time allotted.)

Han goes down for Ben. And for Leia. The two aren't mutually exclusive. Considering the only substantive scene with Leia and Han is Leia saying "get our son back" - Leia's imploring cannot be so easily dismissed as to Han's motivation.

There are parallels between Han and Obi, but there are also clear limits to that comparison. These types of mythic stories all have mentor figures. Rey gets Han in film 1 and Luke in film 2. Luke got Obi in film 1 and Yoda in film 2. I don't see any issue in Rey having a mentor in each film. (And as I mentioned, there wasn't much more she could learn from Han.)

As to the pacing, TLJ has a slower and more psychodrama-based middle part, just as in Empire.

TLJ deviates a bit from formula in that it invites thought - i.e. why did Johnson decide to do x, y and z? Poe's arc seems perfectly clear, but many complained, "what was the point of Finn's arc?" It was to show the naive Finn a wider view of the world, and give him the choice of joining the struggle, as opposed to his previously narrower motivation of devotion to Rey. Once he committed, Rose was there to remind him that heroic self-sacrifice isn't always the best way to help your comrades. (I cite this as an example of pointless things in Last Jedi that really aren't so pointless.)

So many of the complaints are really about how the characters had development instead of being static. You're seeing all of the new characters actually earning the title of the new heroes of the saga. They aren't just assigned it because the plot demands it. Poe grows from a hotshot pilot to a leader. Finn goes from a guy fleeing war with an interest in saving his friend to a hero willing to take a stand. Rey goes from someone seeking her place in the world to finding it and becoming a symbol of hope in her own right. Luke himself goes from the real man who couldn’t bear the weight of being a legend to actually becoming a legend and inspiring the entire galaxy to fight back. In one move, he defeated Kylo Ren and showed the First Order that he has many weaknesses that someone like Hux can exploit, saved the Resistance and let everyone know the Jedi are back.

 

[mos6507]

Poe grows from a hotshot pilot to a leader.

Hadly. He was emasculated from start to finish.

Finn goes from a guy fleeing war with an interest in saving his friend to a hero willing to take a stand.

He goes on a lengthy and pointless detour only to fall into a cliche' sacrifical scenario in a movie that was supposed to be about subverting cliche's, and after his big moment you have a groaner of a line from Rose Tico. It's like Rian knew some old fashioned heroism was obligatory but his heart sure wasn't in it, so it comes out hackneyed in the extreme.

Rey goes from someone seeking her place in the world to finding it and becoming a symbol of hope in her own right.

Rey force-skyped Kylo, had a Tarantino moment with him slashing up red guards, and moved a few rocks.

Meanwhile, the Resistance spent the entire movie running away and suffered enough attrition that the remnants all fit into the Falcon.

I don't see heroism here. I see gross incompetence.

The downer of Empire was made up by the fact that Luke was willing to fail out of his love of his friends. His heart was in the right place.

In The Last Jedi I don't even know what either side is really fighting for anymore. It seems to be little more than some petty oedipal drama between Kylo and his mom and uncle with the galaxy as collateral damage.

The worst part of this was epitomized when Hux walks into the room and sees Snoke cut in two and says "what haaaapened here?"

That's pretty much how I felt watching it. What the hell are anybody's motives?

Rey and Kylo are empty fanbois who know of the force as an abstract but have no real vision for what they want to do with it other than to sort of cosplay the role of black and white hat. It seemed like Rian was indicting Star Wars fandom for being too far removed from the point of Star Wars, but he wasn't able to fully articulate or express what the point really is, as he was too busy presenting bumbling protagonists and antagonists.

That's what I mean by "antithesis". It was the anti- Star Wars movie.

 

[Awesome Possum]

Hadly. He was emasculated from start to finish.

No, that’s absurd. This seems to be a recurring theme. You think that any man being subordinate to a woman in any way is emasculation. It comes off as extremely insecure and a little sexist. There are women in command positions in the US military, are men who serve under them emasculated? I don’t think so, I doubt a single one of them think so. Poe disobeyed orders and got people killed, then started a mutiny because he wasn’t included in a decision he had no authority in making. If you don’t see that as a bad thing you need to take a step back and think. Poe would end up in a military prison for the rest of his life if he served in reality.

He goes on a lengthy and pointless detour only to fall into a cliche' sacrifical scenario in a movie that was supposed to be about subverting cliche's, and after his big moment you have a groaner of a line from Rose Tico. It's like Rian knew some old fashioned heroism was obligatory but his heart sure wasn't in it, so it comes out hackneyed in the extreme.

That was the point, it was meant to show that Poe was wrong from the beginning and should accept and respect the chain of command. He’s in a military and unlike GI Joe, you have to follow orders for it to be functional. Poe should have been more concerned with saving the Resistance instead of fighting the First Order. It’s the difference between winning a single battle and winning the war.

Rey force-skyped Kylo, had a Tarantino moment with him slashing up red guards, and moved a few rocks.

Luke stacked some rocks, did some CrossFit with Yoda on his back and had a hallucination before running off to fight Vader against the wishes of both his teachers.

Meanwhile, the Resistance spent the entire movie running away and suffered enough attrition that the remnants all fit into the Falcon.

Yeah, bad things happen.

I don't see heroism here. I see gross incompetence.

Sounds like a personal problem, I saw heroism in the face of overwhelming odds.

The downer of Empire was made up by the fact that Luke was willing to fail out of his love of his friends. His heart was in the right place.

The Last Jedi showed a new generation of heroes earning their place. We aren’t told they’re the hero, they grow and develop into heroes.

In The Last Jedi I don't even know what either side is really fighting for anymore. It seems to be little more than some petty oedipal drama between Kylo and his mom and uncle with the galaxy as collateral damage.

Yeah, it’s symbolism. You claim to know a lot about film but fail to understand that they are more than just the plot, they mean something. Star Wars is a drama about the impact of a single family on the galaxy. Kylo is just the end result of it. He’s an angry young man who is incapable of controlling himself on any level. It’s a major flaw for him in the story, one that Luke exploited in the last fight. He’s Vader with all the power but none of the focus. It’s even symbolized in his lightsaber with instead of being smooth and even is jagged and looks like a greater danger to himself than others. This is probably going to be his downfall since Hux is a slimy shit who seems eager to bump Kylo off when he gets the opportunity. If you actually find this to be a problem then you’re missing the entire point of the story,

The worst part of this was epitomized when Hux walks into the room and sees Snoke cut in two and says "what haaaapened here?"

That was humor, it seems to be a difficult concept for some.

That's pretty much how I felt watching it. What the hell are anybody's motives?

And that’s your opinion. I was able to follow everyone’s motives. You seem to have issues following how characters weren’t just static. You should want characters to grow and not just be told who and want they are. It makes them more realistic and interesting.

Rey and Kylo are empty fanbois who know of the force as an abstract but have no real vision for what they want to do with it other than to sort of cosplay the role of black and white hat. It seemed like Rian was indicting Star Wars fandom for being too far removed from the point of Star Wars, but he wasn't able to fully articulate or express what the point really is, as he was too busy presenting bumbling protagonists and antagonists.

Well Rey and Kylo are symbolic of the fandom. Rey being a more creative and introspective fan and Kylo being more about being obsessed with the movies, he literally has a Vader collection. TLJ shows that they are drawn together and work well together, but Kylo’s obsessions ruin it for him. Fandom wasn’t being attacked, it’s just showing that it can be unhealthy when taken to extremes. Which is ironically something that happened in real life with some fans actually starting to resemble Kylo themselves in temperment.

I think a lot of your complaints are somewhat based on confusion about character motives, but you’re getting caught up on the fact that a lot of the movie is more symbolic than previous films. The whole Canto Bight sequence isn’t about the mission being a failure and waste of time, it’s to show Finn the stakes. Rose and DJ are really examples of who he can become, Rose is a diehard member of the Resistance and concerned with the average person, DJ is only concerned with himself and willing to take money from either side. He’s who Finn could become if he continued to run away from the fight.

That's what I mean by "antithesis". It was the anti- Star Wars movie.

To some degree it is and I honestly think that’s a good thing. Star Wars for lack of a better word is pretty simple and straightforward. It’s not a complaint, it’s just the nature of the story Lucas wanted to tell. But that kind of storytelling doesn’t really work well anymore, audiences are generally able to guess enough of the tropes to see where the story is going. It’s why the prequels were so boring, there were just six hours of setup for Anakin becoming Darth Vader and nothing really mattered. The sequels are at least trying something different. It’s not only a Star Wars film, but it’s a meta commentary on Star Wars itself, what it represents and it’s fandom. TLJ is more of a weird art film than an action movie, I think that makes it better because I like a movie that makes me think about what it means with well rounded characters who represent something greater. It’s about failure and using it as a learning tool, it’s about our heroes being people who have flaws and how they can rise to be the hero we do need, and it’s getting over the past, not by tearing it down and killing it, but using it to build something greater. It actually questions whether anything good came from the Rebels beating the Empire, but showing that the same mistake won’t happen again. There is a lot going on in the movie, maybe more than it should have been for a popcorn movie. I understand the desire to just be entertained, but I find it to be a better movie for trying something new and being about something other than lightsaber fights.

 

[Trekkin]

*sniggers* ‘Emasculated.’

So much for the ‘feminist’ girls with purple hair being the delicate snowflakes.

 

[Jinn]

There are women in command positions in the US military, are men who serve under them emasculated?

Only when they have to follow orders

 

[JD]

There are parallels between Han and Obi, but there are also clear limits to that comparison. These types of mythic stories all have mentor figures. Rey gets Han in film 1 and Luke in film 2. Luke got Obi in film 1 and Yoda in film 2. I don't see any issue in Rey having a mentor in each film. (And as I mentioned, there wasn't much more she could learn from Han.)

We already know Mark Hamill is coming back, so I think there's a pretty good chance Luke will still be Rey's mentor in IX, just in ghost form now.

 

[Awesome Possum]

We already know Mark Hamill is coming back, so I think there's a pretty good chance Luke will still be Rey's mentor in IX, just in ghost form now.

I think he may have a more active role. When Obi-Wan was about to let Vader kill him, he said that he'd become more powerful. Maybe there is something to it, which would explain why Yoda was able to summon lightning. Yoda described beings as being luminous instead of made of flesh. The Force is connected to all life, but what if all life is the Force. Yoda is a part of the Force thats calls himself Yoda and Luke is a part of the Force that calls himself Luke, their bodies just the form they take. When a Jedi with the proper training dies, they're able to maintain their personality instead of just merging into the rest of the Force. If the body doesn't truly matter to a Jedi, losing it shouldn't be an issue for them. Yoda can summon lightning because he always could. The Force Ghosts aren't all that they are, they can be anywhere and everywhere. They take the form of a ghost for face to face communication for the convenience of the living. Luke is probably going to spend the next movie both helping Rey and torturing Kylo's conscience.

 

[JD]

Sounds good to me.

 

[Trekkin]

Back when we weren’t sure what Ahsoka’s situation was in Rebels, I used to amuse myself imagining that she was a Force Ghost making an unending mission of haunting and annoying Anakin into redemption.

I mean, it explains why he’s so uncharacteristically snippy at the start of ANH! And his about-face between ROTJ and ESB (both the fatalistic plunge his goals take between the two, and his eventual redemption) make so much more sense! A nattery ghost was chipping away at him the entire time.