French spectators give the movie the worst rating I have ever seen for a blockbuster on allocine.fr which is the main movies review French site.
Star Wars - "The Last Jedi"
- Thread starter Woodsman
- Start date
It just boggles the mind, honestly, what the people at Disney are doing.
It should be pretty clear that with the purchase of Star Wars, Disney wanted to make money, and fast. It happens with every merger, fusion or buy out, first thing in the agenda is to regain the investment as soon as possible.
Secondly, it was a safe bet. With the lack of creativity seen across the movie and music industry, building upon a solid fanbase was undestandable if they lack the skills to come up with stories that could engage the public, as that means taking risks. And as a corporation, they are actually in the business of reducing risk as much as possible.
But that's not happening. They are actually killing the Goose of the Golden Eggs. The movie was awful, the solid above-35 fanbase (with kids to take to the movies) is jumping off the boat, and Disney is depositing its hopes on making millennials and Z's forever fans, trying to replace the Boomers and Gen-Xer's.
And my point is this: its not gonna happen. They have the money power to go extensively with focus groups, researchers, surveys, demographic analysis and so on, and they could have easily figured out that Identity Politics is popular just with a minority. It is kind of reminiscent of the 2016 US election in the sense that they couldn't see the voting preference reality.
But even as they could be aware of this (I'd be surprise if they were not) they decided to go ahead and make a movie so few people would have liked. It speaks volumes of the decision making process and the little respect for the public when agendas need to be put forward, even before their own gains.
And finally, to me the saga is over, this is some kind of new thing with little or nothing in common with the first movies. I am even liking Jar Jar Binks more now.
It should be pretty clear that with the purchase of Star Wars, Disney wanted to make money, and fast. It happens with every merger, fusion or buy out, first thing in the agenda is to regain the investment as soon as possible.
Secondly, it was a safe bet. With the lack of creativity seen across the movie and music industry, building upon a solid fanbase was undestandable if they lack the skills to come up with stories that could engage the public, as that means taking risks. And as a corporation, they are actually in the business of reducing risk as much as possible.
But that's not happening. They are actually killing the Goose of the Golden Eggs. The movie was awful, the solid above-35 fanbase (with kids to take to the movies) is jumping off the boat, and Disney is depositing its hopes on making millennials and Z's forever fans, trying to replace the Boomers and Gen-Xer's.
And my point is this: its not gonna happen. They have the money power to go extensively with focus groups, researchers, surveys, demographic analysis and so on, and they could have easily figured out that Identity Politics is popular just with a minority. It is kind of reminiscent of the 2016 US election in the sense that they couldn't see the voting preference reality.
But even as they could be aware of this (I'd be surprise if they were not) they decided to go ahead and make a movie so few people would have liked. It speaks volumes of the decision making process and the little respect for the public when agendas need to be put forward, even before their own gains.
And finally, to me the saga is over, this is some kind of new thing with little or nothing in common with the first movies. I am even liking Jar Jar Binks more now.
Navigator said:
I haven't seen the movie yet, but what you describe is interesting. Basically, these people are so entrenched in their Hollywood bubble and their wishful thinking that they shoot themselves in the foot!
I think honest business is still kind of a bastion against political correctness and postmodernist nonsense, because wanting people to buy your stuff is quite the reality check. So all this ideological stupidity ends where the rubber hits the road you'd think. Except that large corporations often operate more like bureaucracies and it takes time until they feel the negative impact of bad decisions, and so the nonsense creeps in - first into the HR departments and then everywhere. And suddenly, they start making products based on ideology instead of common sense, and hopefully that will put 'em out of business, and fast! Or maybe they even learn a lesson or two, but that seems unlikely given the extent of the ideological bubble these people seem to live in.
Navigator said:
Oh no!! It's really that bad, yes?
Well, they've already made 1.23 billion on this film, add in the others along with merchandise, theme park attendance etc... and they've most likely already made their money back.. and they will 'milk' this baby to death, and from the ticket sales so far, they could go at least another 2 to 3 movies... and they expect to put out a film every 2-3 years... same with their purchase of Marvel product line... they 'milk' these critters to death... which is why those superhero films are so dumbed down.... not that they were ever 'smart', but the perversion of the culture seems to be well setup at Disney... and nearly everywhere else... it's just more corporate or codified in Hollywood.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2012/10/30/disney-star-wars-lucasfilm/1669739/
As that article from 2012 says, Lucas received 40 million shares as part of that deal(half cash), making him the largest non institutional shareholder of Disney. So, whether he's a 'bird of a feather' or not, he's making his money back.... as long as he sells out before the market crashes. Another mention in that article is this statement: "This was the only exit strategy he really had. He never wanted to grow the company." Like most fools on the road up the mountain, he was never really determined to get to the top.... never interested in that... as that guy said, he had one monster hit and left town... not a Hollywood guy and wasn't interested in working the product... wasn't that shown in Jar Jar Binks et al?
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2012/10/30/disney-star-wars-lucasfilm/1669739/
As that article from 2012 says, Lucas received 40 million shares as part of that deal(half cash), making him the largest non institutional shareholder of Disney. So, whether he's a 'bird of a feather' or not, he's making his money back.... as long as he sells out before the market crashes. Another mention in that article is this statement: "This was the only exit strategy he really had. He never wanted to grow the company." Like most fools on the road up the mountain, he was never really determined to get to the top.... never interested in that... as that guy said, he had one monster hit and left town... not a Hollywood guy and wasn't interested in working the product... wasn't that shown in Jar Jar Binks et al?
luc said:Navigator said:
Oh no!! It's really that bad, yes?
I just came from the theater and I can confirm that it is bad, but it's hard to say why it's bad. At least with the Jar Jar you have somebody to blame, but here... so many things are bad. There are a lot of good reviews on IMDb, but this one summarizes it very well, I think:
There are some good scenes and elements, but everything was so rushed that it was hard to enjoy even in them. The style of the movie reminds me of the Valerian. It's all made for the children with low attention span. I never liked George Lucas for making the Star Wars too childish, but at least he was making movies for children who can sit still and watch a long scene while the drama and characters slowly develop. But you cannot find that in these new movies. Instead of making these kinds of movies, they should just buy a neurofeedback device for every school in US and train them to watch normal movies. Disney should be forced to pay for them, of course.
But I hope they make some extra movie with Benicio del Toro and his story. For me, he was the bright spot of the movie.
I finally saw it to have an idea.
Well, what I saw is a pure Wall-Disney movie. I mean a movie for children. At a moment I thought I was watching a scene of Narnia. The authors can use all the facilities they want in the scenario, it's for children. So this is a good description:
Except for the character of Luke, he aged, gained another level of mastering, so why not, but of course another facility for the scenario.
Finally the important point remain in the presentation of negative side versus positive side. Where is the disinformation ? This is what our eyes need to see. Will give my opinion after a good night.
Well, what I saw is a pure Wall-Disney movie. I mean a movie for children. At a moment I thought I was watching a scene of Narnia. The authors can use all the facilities they want in the scenario, it's for children. So this is a good description:
Except for the character of Luke, he aged, gained another level of mastering, so why not, but of course another facility for the scenario.
Finally the important point remain in the presentation of negative side versus positive side. Where is the disinformation ? This is what our eyes need to see. Will give my opinion after a good night.
BHelmet
The Living Force
Ellipse said:
Walt Disney has been influencing "children" for generations, and not for the good, IMO. I know I was deeply affected by (don't laugh!) Bambi! shheesh I was like 5 or 6 when it came out - totally traumatized when mommy dies!! Thanks Walt! And all the little coquettish nymphs in other productions had a profound choice on what I saw as sexy and attractive in women.
To me, Disney has always been a major psyop, tool of social engineers. Don't forget the Hannah Montana's - the pure innocent feminine, being turned into Miley Cyrus the whore of babylon. All this adding to the degradation of women and the role model path for impressionable children to follow. Yeah, follow the person you idolized at age 8 or 9 and become a drugged-out skank later in life like Britney! To call it a movie for children, may be true but it downplays the insidiousness of Disney's intent. Disney is highly influential on a subconscious level and would not be so massively ensconced in pop culture if they weren't 4D STS aligned in a big way.
BHelmet said:
Sure and now more than ever. I don't know exactly the story behind, but we can imagine that Walt was with good intentions when he started is first drawing but you meet friends who see your talent and propose to finance you. And if you have some kind of success, some of those friends who joined have their own agenda in mind perhaps linked to the gov.
So back to Star Wars 8 (now in the top 10 of all time success). Here's the message I see: you are perhaps a young male, a bit lost so you can be part of the negative side. You'll have doubts but look, it's cool. The new model is Kylo Ren, Luke failed and is part of the past. Choose the STS path.
If you're a young women and so you identify to Rey then look at what is the STO side. You have to be bird with super powers to help other and you will have to use laser sabers as the STS side. Yeah, it's just unreachable, we know.
So for me, the PTB take back full control of the original movie and essentially promote the STS path. Kylo Ren being more charismatic than the smooth Rey and the target being teenagers.
Stupid Sh#t sells, as Marvel knows, as the entire industry, media, DC puppet show, religions etc demonstrate... Disney has already milked this to make its money back, so it's all gravy now... and that train doesn't stop until a new train hits the tracks.... and I don't see one... as the tracks are so crowed by crap and controlled by those making it... only complete failure drains the swamp.... and most of the disgruntled fans will say, like in sports, "wait till next season". ;) Most have aged out of it... current crop will do the same... and DIsney will look for the next product to exploit... the show goes on until the final curtain falls.
This analysis was also insightful, I found:
I think this might be an example of the trickle-down effect of Jordan B Peterson, and perhaps even SOTT; people applying the fruit of modern philosophy and intelligent reduction to reach conclusions about why the world is as it is.
I think this might be an example of the trickle-down effect of Jordan B Peterson, and perhaps even SOTT; people applying the fruit of modern philosophy and intelligent reduction to reach conclusions about why the world is as it is.
Ruth
The Living Force
3D Student said:
I wasn't aware that 'the force' was supposed to be either a male or female archetype. Maybe I missed out on some of my 'programming'?
The one thing I enjoyed about this movie is that it didn't take itself seriously. In fact, I think it poked fun at itself, a reasonable amount of the time, and I think that was refreshing. What it did with 'good' and 'evil' has call into question polarity. In effect, black and white thinking.
We have nobodies, being (and becoming) somebodies. Then and now, it seems. Anakin Skywalker, well, where was he from? Quite the nobody, perhaps.
We have heroes acting like idiots and arses (Luke Skywalker), and tantrum throwing pouting, adult toddlers (Kylo Ren) who may fight well, and look good without their shirts off, but really, he's ends up quite a pathetic looser, but potentially redeemable, perhaps like Anakin Skywalker, whom he models himself on, who knows?
We have female leaders being arrogant, not telling people their plans, and getting people killed, all while being 'feminine' and failing to act as fast as they can, there for getting more people killed (Vice Admiral Holdo). But she gives them a serve in the end. Those star ships can be lethal weapons when flown intentionally badly.
Supreme Leader Snoke - Yes, this is what I look like after spending a life time bathing in toxic waste - It's because I represent everything bad, evil and awful. Yuck.
The female lead (Rey), "I have the tenacity of a yapping terrier" (watch out Luke Skywalker.)
And the other positive female lead - Princess Leia - Trying to get all her 'chicks' to safety....
General Hux - 'I'm such a sycophant, flunky' caricature.
Actually, I enjoyed it and it was because it didn't take itself too seriously.
Incidentally, the most unlikable and annoying character (for me) was Vice Admiral Holdo. General Hux was one of my favorites as was Poe. This is because they weren't trying to be anything 'complicated', just themselves even if it was a caricature. What's interesting for me is both of these characters 'knew their minds'. One was a sycophant, the other a mutinous rebel.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Erx5fEMFMJk
Woodsman said:
I don't buy the idea that they put lalalaland in the movie because they live in. I think, at the opposite, they perfectly know what they do and I see a parallel with the fake news campaign. I think the movie is a probe to see how many people are ready to buy a lalalaland (I mean all incoherences in the movie) and so are ready to receive fake news. How the the fruit is ripe and how far they can push.
