MovieChat Forums > redfloone > Replies
redfloone's Replies
That isn't anti-male though is it. That's anti-idiot.
And the "left's agenda" as you keep banging on about isn't to degrade men. It is to help men and women break the bonds that tied them and to evolve, unlike the right's stance of keeping the status quo. IE make another remake/rehash of an old film... like TFA
I'm glad that Luke was a unless hermit. As he pointed out his jedi legacy was one of glorified failure. He had no one left to teach him how to be a real jedi and he never even finished his fast track training. No wonder he was a crappy teacher.
All that stuff about mum, dad and babysitters it bollocks. It shows someone who is trying to dig too deep into what has always been a very shallow franchise. Deep films don't have huge appeal to the masses because you have to start getting specific. Once you get specific you cut out a lot of people that don't fit in that particular box.
How was it anti-male?
Because there were girls in it?
I don't understand why having females in films like this, make (especially American) men so insecure.
Who's Mary Sue?
The depth of characters was in keeping with the originals though.
Luke and Yoda trained for about 5 minutes.
I don't get the obsession with Rey's parents needing to be some one.
The Skywalker family were nobodies 3 generations ago. That's not very far back in terms of family ties. Maybe it is for Americans, I dunno.
Surly though a story where some one comes from nowhere and rises to the top, is a more "American dream" friendly message then, 'she's only special because her parents are special' story?