If it's not a rehash of ANH, it's fucking SJWs and Feminazis shoving their bullshit agendas down everyone's throat.
So much for Star Wars. Rogue One was the last great Star Wars movie.
Yeah, because if the entire cast consists of white males everything is right in the world and of course there's NO agenda there, conscious or otherwise.
What an idiot.
By highly political, I'm talking about the whole casino planet highlighting rich white men getting richer and enslaving children and being cruel to animals for their own benefit - we don't want to see that kind of crap in fantasy movies. Or at least I don't.
A New Hope featured planetary genocide that could easily be compared to nuclear weapons. Hell, Vietnam and Richard Nixon highly influenced the original trilogy.
I mean, you really think there is nothing political about Rebels battling an overbearing, destructive Empire?
Since when is a movie about a rebellion or war between opposing ideologies not political? You are aware, are you not, that when Lucas make the first movie he had the Nixon administration in mind for the Emperor and Empire?
shareNo, he had the Nazis in mind.
shareNazis inspired the design of the Empire, yes.
However, you might want to check before you deny reality:
http://www.history.com/news/the-real-history-that-inspired-star-wars
Richard Nixonshare
Although there are parallels between Emperor Palpatine and dictators such as Hitler and Napoleon Bonaparte, the direct inspiration for the saga’s evil antagonist was actually an American president. According to J.W. Rinzler’s “The Making of Star Wars: Return of the Jedi,” when asked if Emperor Palpatine was a Jedi during a 1981 story conference, Lucas responded, “No, he was a politician. Richard M. Nixon was his name. He subverted the senate and finally took over and became an imperial guy and he was really evil. But he pretended to be a really nice guy.” In a 2005 interview published in the Chicago Tribune, Lucas said he originally conceived “Star Wars” as a reaction to Nixon’s presidency.
Okay, I stand corrected.
shareAnd of course, I'm sure the OP believes that spittle-flecked anti-feminism RAGE has nothing to do with his own agenda.
Also, only those who oppose it consider it even remotely political. There are no partisan sides to an issue of basic human representation in entertainment.
Why can't Leia be a strong character without tearing down men?
Just look at her behavior: She snaps at Han constantly. She insults him and emasculates him many times, even calls him names. Hell, she even insults Chewbacca! The poor guy, who never said an unkind word to Leia, is collateral damage simply because he is Han's co-pilot.
Han is also portrayed as a selfish, socially inept jerk in order to elevate her character.
Why can't this feminazi named George Lucas write a female character without tearing down a man in order to make her appear stronger?
Gonna break it down for you Froggy real simple.
Leia. Is. Well. Written. Or at least in the OT she was.
She's confrontational, rude, fearless, feminine but non too lady like. This is why she is so well loved - she has depth. She has flaws but so do all the main characters and they are all shown to be equals.
Equality as it was known in 1977: Men = Women
Now Rey (et al) is not well written. She's a gender swapped Luke with zero flaws (and don't try to make out one of her endless virtues is a flaw like 'she's too trusting' or some crap) and is superior to all other characters in all respects. This makes her boring and undercuts the movies because she never fails and never needs any help.
Not only is she a bad character she has been written by self proclaimed 'pro diversity' (i.e. Pro discrimination) adherent and been triumphed by an all female story team wearing 'the Force is Female' t-shirts. Then in the sequel they double down on her wonderfulness while also introducing a series of other story lines where men get put in their place by superior women. Now not only do we get badly written women any attempt to criticise these terrible characters is written off as 'Misogyny', which is nothing more than an insult to the true victims of sexual bigotry. This is the kind of politics a lot of us don't want in movies, not allegories for the dangers of a dictatorial regime .
"Diversity" as it is known in 2017: Women > men
What progress we've made.
She's a gender swapped Luke with zero flaws (and don't try to make out one of her endless virtues is a flaw like 'she's too trusting' or some crap) and is superior to all other characters in all respects. This makes her boring and undercuts the movies because she never fails and never needs any help.
Give it a rest Froggy.
Her staying on Tantooi... I mean 'Jakku' is faith/love of her family. That's one hell of a reach to try to call that a flaw.
If by overestimating you mean releasing the bad CGI spaghetti monsters guess who fixes that problem? Rey.
And when she gets captured? Who saves her? Rey.
And that same move or whatever is good enough to defeat someone in armed combat who should have been powerful enough to kill her with a *thought* if not for her plot armour.
Luke is pretty much useless until he makes the shot that takes down the Death Star because that's the point, that's the story Lucas wanted to tell. "Nobody kid from nowhere overshadowed by the cooler characters comes good in the last scene when he wins the day/hits the home run" etc etc. He's the every-man. The relate-able character. The one most of us can see some of ourselves in.
Whereas the 'story' JJA wanted to tell is "I don't want to get bad articles written about me in Salon so I'll just have Rey be perfect and solve all her problems on her own". And that didn't make for a good movie.
Also, she may be a Luke analogue, but she's not a Luke clone. Rey is represented as someone who's already had a hard life, unlike Luke who is represented as a naive and sheltered farm boy who has been raised by adopted family.
Those are two very different characterizations.