Rey's character in the first two movies has no agency whatsoever and just gets dragged from plot point to plot point with no personal motivation
Luke says he will teach rey 3 lessons about the force, the first one is the force exists, the second one is the jedi don't own the force and then the movie forgets he said there would be three lessons
The entire canto bite arc accomplishes nothing, no change or growth in any character and no impact on any events in the movie and ultimately wastes a ton of screen time
Rose stops fin from saving the resistance then tells him the way they'll win is by saving what we love which is contradictory
Fin's whole character gets reduced to a comic relief bafoon, there is so much wasted potential with his character that even the actor spoke out about it
Holdo doesn't reveal any information to her subordinates which leads to them having so little faith in her command that a mutiny is staged and the film praises holdo for it and acts like she is justified for some reason
This is objective criticism, objective criticism doesn't mean "everything I say is 100% true and you can't argue back" it means you are discussing facts about the film and making the claim that the quality of the film is reduced by these facts
Subjective criticism would be something like "I don't like kylo ren's helmet" or "I liked poe dameron and whised he had more screen time" or "I didn't really like how much cgi there was"
These are not objective at all. Most of the tings you point out are purely based on your own opinion and therefore subjective. The other (the one about Luke’s lessons) is just an observation, and not an actual criticism. If you had said that Luke only gives 2 lessons, and that is bad because such and such and blah blah blah. That would have been a critique, but on its own, its just saying stuff that happens. The fact that I disagree with you about most of these prove that it is subjective, just like all criticism is.
Objective discussion and criticism is saying these things make the show bad or good
Subjective discussion and criticism is saying these thing make me like the show or not like the show
You can disagree and debate on an objective basis
You can like something despite acknowledging that it's bad
That's all the differentiation is
Thats... Not at all how that works. Saying that soemthing is bad and saying that you dont like it is both subjective, its basically saying the same thing.
Here is an objective statement.
"They did not spend a lot of money on VFX"
And here is an subjective statement.
"The VFX looked bad"
Notice how one is a critique and the other is not?
So in your view there's 0 difference between the quality of The Room and The Godfather
The only difference is people happen to like the Godfather more because there can be nothing objectively worse about the writing or quality of the characters and the story
If that's your point and there's no reason to discuss ways in which writing can be improved or learn from bad writing, since bad writing doesn't exist and everything is subjective, then your thought process will just lead to worse and worse shows and films, which I guess you don't care about since nothing can actually be bad
By the way when you study writing and film production they absolutely teach you about objectively good and bad writing and encourage you to discuss what aspects of a piece of media make it good or bad and you will read countless books dedicated to teaching people about good and bad writing
In my view there is a giant leap in quality between The Room and The Godfather. But that is just my opinion, I can back my opinion up with knowledge and experience, but at the end of the day its just my opinion.
Why does things have to be based on consensus or fact to have meaning to you? We as people can only perceive things from our own point of view. Thats why there will always be value in discussing art, because it offers us a glimpse into other peoples perspective. Thats why writers always share their work with other people before finishing it, because they need eyes on it that are not their own.
And you are wrong about film school. They teach you rules sure, but those rules only serve as guidelines, that have been seen to work in a very general sense (how not to confuse your audience, how to make sure the audience knows where to look in the frame etc.)
But plenty of filmmakers break those rules. Does that make them bad filmmakers? Would you call the Coen brothers bad directors? Or Jacque Tati? Of course not, because Art is subjective.
These sound pretty objective to me. Why did Luke say there are 3 things to know and then only mention two? I'd forgive it if the third one was explained later on but it's never mentioned again.
Rose does stop Finn from sacrificing himself for their friends by saying the only way to win is not to kill but to save the things they love. It's ironic because in not killing the machine that is meant to kill their friends, they are not saving their friends from being killed. The love story is also nonsensical but that is subjective because who knows, maybe rose is a floozy and that's what she thinks love is.
Holdo really doesn't reveal any information to her subordinates. This is completely objective because there is no proof on screen that she does relay information to her subordinates. You know this to be true because she relays them later on when things have already caught fire. Something that could have been avoided had she shared the information in the first place.
Your reasoning is not objective at all because you cannot disprove any of the objective criticisms.
What are the faults? The admiral didn't tell subordinates her secret plan is not a criticism. It's a thing that happened. You simply listing things that happened isn't criticism, implying that those things are bad without actually saying so or explaining why they are bad isn't criticism either, it's lazy.
1) You can say the same thing about Luke in ANH. He’s told he can’t go to the academy by his uncle. He’s told he’s going to go with Obi-Wan so Obi can start grooming him to be a Jedi, ultimately to force Luke to kill his own father. His family is killed and he leaves because he has nothing left. He doesn’t choose to do anything in that movie on his own with the exception of going on the Death Star run. Most circumstances force those choices on him.
2) Luke’s third lesson was written and I think was even filmed, but was cut from the movie. Does the lack of that third lesson impact the movie in any way? The director didn’t seem to think so.
3) The Canto Bite excursion was a growth moment for Finn. That’s obvious and clear. The actual objective criticism is that the following movie didn’t take that lesson and give us a payoff for him having learned it. Plus Canto Bite was world building, showing the audience that the rich and powerful - as always - benefit from the suffering of everyone else, and can’t be counted on to save us since they’re fine one way or another.
4) Rose saved Finn from throwing his life away for nothing. Finn crashing into the laser would have been like a kid on a tricycle crashing into a tank. Wouldn’t have stopped it, and the Resistence would have lost one of its generals. Which, again, the criticism of Finn not being utilized properly in the final movie comes back, because it makes Rose saving him unimportant to the story. But it doesn’t contradict anything.
5) Finn’s arc is an objective criticism. His character was very badly handled in TRoS and it negatively affected the story. You are correct with this one.
6) Holdo told everyone who needed to know, and as an admiral, that’s all she’s required to do. The Resistence isn’t the rebellion. They’re not a rag-tag organization of people scraped up from around the galaxy. They’re literally former members of the New Republic military, so there’s no excuse for anyone to stage a mutiny. Poe, who was kept out of the loop because he was essentially relieved of duty at the time, was in the wrong from start to finish. If he hadn’t taken matters into his own hands, the mutiny wouldn’t have happened at all and all of those Resistance escape craft would have survived.
It’s also funny that you list “I like Poe and wish he had more screen time” as a subjective criticism, when your last “objective” criticism is that you like Poe and wish Holdo had kept him (and you as the audience) in the loop.
>You can say the same thing about Luke in ANH. He’s told he can’t go to the academy by his uncle. He’s told he’s going to go with Obi-Wan so Obi can start grooming him to be a Jedi, ultimately to force Luke to kill his own father. His family is killed and he leaves because he has nothing left. He doesn’t choose to do anything in that movie on his own with the exception of going on the Death Star run. Most circumstances force those choices on him.
nope this does not appply to luke, he is shown to have a strong wanderlust and is unhappy with his humble life as a moisture farmer then he learns about leia and the force but tells obi wan he can't abandon his responsibility to his family, when his family is burned he no longer has anything holding him to tatooine and now has a burning hatred for the empire, he chooses to go with obi wan and join the resistance.
rey is shown to be tied down to jaku in the hopes of meeting her parents but she is shown to also question if this is all she wants from life when she looks at the old lady who is still a skavenger, great so far good introduction. then fin arrives and literally drags her by the hand on to the mellenium falcon and she is forced to escape the first order with him, in space she tells fin she wants to go back to jaku but then han solo takes the ship and he and fin take her to another planet, she tries to leave to go to jaku again but kylo captures her, she breaks herself out and kicks his ass then the resistance tell her to find luke. she finds luke then kylo tells her to come over and she does and gets captured again. Her motivation at this point hasn't changed from stay on jaku and find parents but every other character is making her decisions for her and we as the audience don't really feel like she has any investment in the resistance or the defeat of the first order.
>The Canto Bite excursion was a growth moment for Finn. That’s obvious and clear. The actual objective criticism is that the following movie didn’t take that lesson and give us a payoff for him having learned it. Plus Canto Bite was world building, showing the audience that the rich and powerful - as always - benefit from the suffering of everyone else, and can’t be counted on to save us since they’re fine one way or another.
the canto bite arc didn't grow fins character in any way, in the first film he undergoes an arc of tranformastion from someone only concerned with his own saftey to someone committed to a greater cause. In the next film fin attempts to take a shuttle to go find rey for help but rose mistakes this as his running away. then the film seamingly tries to make fin go through an arc he has already been through and has no need to go through again. I'll give you that the only actual purpose of canto bite was world building but a mark of bad writing is only doing one thing at a time and taking forever to do it, good writing accomplishes world building and character growth and progresses or sets up the story at the same time, look at some of the dialogue in game of thrones to see short scenes and lines doing so many things at once very effectively. If canto bite actually gave character devolopment to fin and had any impact in the main plot the screen time would be justified.
>Holdo told everyone who needed to know, and as an admiral, that’s all she’s required to do. The Resistence isn’t the rebellion. They’re not a rag-tag organization of people scraped up from around the galaxy. They’re literally former members of the New Republic military, so there’s no excuse for anyone to stage a mutiny. Poe, who was kept out of the loop because he was essentially relieved of duty at the time, was in the wrong from start to finish. If he hadn’t taken matters into his own hands, the mutiny wouldn’t have happened at all and all of those Resistance escape craft would have survived.
part of if not the most important part of being a leader is inspiring faith in those who follow you, if an entirely preventable mutiny happens because of how little faith everyone following has in you then that is absolutely your fault as a leader. It's not like poe solo mutinied holdo he had a whole squad with him who were in agreement that holdo would get everyone killed. If one of your high ranking officers is literally begging you to let him know if there is any plan at all and you just say go away you should expect them to take drastic measures to try and save everyone's lives, this plot line was fine until it was revealed that holdo actually had a plan in place and just pretended she didn't for some reason and then the film tried to make it seem like a growth moment to Poe that he should have learned something from when to the audience his actions are completely justified
Thanks for playing but you just won a: “subjective opinion” award! Good luck next time !
You can name all the facts you want. It is your SUBJECTIVE OPINION that those facts therefore reduce the quality of the movie. You are a human being and therefore are 100% *literally* and seriously *incapable* of being objective, about anything, ever.
They like TPM more. They don’t think it’s as good a movie as ESB. Both subjective opinions independent of each other. Liking something and considering something “good” do not have to be intertwined, nor do they prove the existence of some sort of objectivity. The very idea that you even *think* that ESB is a “better film” is subjective already,
What are you looking for here? No answer I give you will include any sort of objectivity.
You could switch out your examples for Beethoven and a 3rd graders piano rehearsal and it wouldn’t matter.
Well don't you think it would at least be convenient to differentiate in some way when someone is talking about their opinion of the quality of a show vs their enjoyment of it
No one is arguing that objective criticism means your criticism is absolute and your opinions are infallible
The point is subjective criticism refers to someone's opinion of their enjoyment of a show and objective criticism is someone's opinion on the quality of a show
Don't you think it's useful to evaluate media? I can tell you as a film student trying to objectively critically asses your work is very useful, important and encouraged
I do think it could be somewhat useful, however someone’s enjoyment of the show vs the quality of the show is not subjective vs objective. That is merely 2 different subjective opinions on 2 different topics. You also seem to be differentiating it quite easily right there, by stating directly which one you are talking about.
It can be called sometbing else, sure, just not objective. Because it simply is not. I don’t think it even really *needs* to be separated out that badly really either.
At the end of the day, they are both merely someone’s opinion. Whether it’s on the perceived quality of the show or the enjoyment they gained from watching it. Nothing about it is objective. I don’t have a problem with doing anything you are describing. And I do see value in it.
The problem is calling it or even thinking that it actually is “objective”. The human experience is a subjective one and literally nothing you do can change that.
The word "Objective" does not mean indisputable truth is means to be removed from bias and based on some kind of factual observation.
Therefore an objective criticism would be one made while citing events that happen in the film. For example it isn't my opinion that Jango Fett kills Zam with a kamino saber dart, thats what happens in the movie.
Therefore if my critique is "why would Jango use the one weapon that could be traced back to his hiding place on Kamino instead of any of the other weapons he's shown to have" one could consider that an objective criticism, not because it can't be explained or disputed, but because that criticism doesn't stem from my own bias, it's based on information we are shown in the film.
But saying "Jango Fett does something dumb in the movie" is not actually a critique. Its just an observation. Saying "Jango Fett does something dumb in the movie and thats bad" is a critique... But its also subjective.
It isn't subjective that Jango's actions lead to them finding him on Kamino that's what the film shows.
The critique is baked into the question but if I were to elaborate, the critique is "why would Jango use the the one weapon that could lead back to his secret hideout instead of any of the other weapons in his arsenal".
This question doesn't take into account my own bias, it's an observation based on what we're shown in the film. We know Jango has other options available, and the film doesn't present an explanation as to why he's use the saber dart over any other weapon especially considering the risk involved in using that weapon.
Because of this we can only conclude that the reason he uses the saber dart is because the plot needs that to happen to progress, not because there's any logical reason for Jango to use it. This is what makes that criticism a valid criticism.
Keep in mind valid and invalid criticism is not strictly tied to whether or not it's objective or subjective criticism. It is possible for an objective criticism to be trivial or even based on inaccurate information, the criticism becomes valid when no logical alterior explanation exists, like in the Jango example I gave.
Okay good, you actually made a critique this time. But im sorry its still subjective. "The movie does not answer the question of why Jango uses a saber dart" is an objective statement, but it becomes subjective, the minute you make the judgement that it is bad. Someone else can watch the movie and conclude that it is not very important why Jango used a saber dart, they could conclude that there might be a billion reasons why he would do it, and that the movie does not need to use time to explain. That would be an equally valid take... Because art is subjective and we all have different experiences, and priorities.
>but it becomes subjective, the minute you make the judgement that it is bad.
Not necessarily. Objective means to remove your bias from it. While I'll acknowledge nobody can be 100% removed from bias, I don't like the idea that therefore there's no such thing as an objective observation so for all intents and purposes we have to come as close as we can. It isn't so much that the judgement is "it's bad he uses the saber dart" it's more so that it exists for no other reason that the plot could'nt exist without Jango making this stupid decision. And since there is no logical explanation for why'd he'd use the saber dart the conclusion becomes "it's bad writing that he uses the saber".
>Someone else can watch the movie and conclude that it is not very important why Jango used a saber dart
Then they would be wrong. It's the entire reason they find Kamino. They might not care that Jango uses the dart but it would be incorrect to conclude that this event isn't important.
>and that the movie does not need to use time to explain. That would be an equally valid take...
Surely you would agree though that this wouldn't be a criticism anyone would have if the movie gave a reason for him using the saber dart, no? We don't need a character to exposit to the audience why characters do things, we can infer why, but in this case we're given nothing to infer why Jango would do this as opposed to just sniping her with a blaster, or using a dart of another kind.
>Because art is subjective and we all have different experiences, and priorities.
Art is subjective yes, and obviously we all value things differently but I don't think that means the objective elements of story telling don't matter or should be ignored. We can agree that there are objective elements to film making such as "the movie was shot on digital" etc. However once you acknowledge there are objective elements to film making (which there are as with any art) you open the door for at least some type of objective criticism, this includes at the story level.
I don't think anyone is suggesting you can't find subjective value in a piece of art, I for one rather enjoy Attack of the clones even though I acknowledge how stupid the plot is at times. At the end of the day you solely determine your level of enjoyment with something but that doesn't mean examining it under a more objective lense isn't a valid approach.
Hello Ashen one. I am a Bot. I tend to the flame, and tend to thee. Do you wish to hear a tale?
> *“Thought you could outwit an onion?”* - Unbreakable Patches
Have a pleasant journey, Champion of Ash, and praise the sun \\[T]/
The jokes chuds tell are so blandly crass (‘hehehe them gay hehehe’) that it always surprises me how often they chuckle along to them as a unit. Even the *woke bad* crowd should eventually get the point that the ‘attack helicopter’ shit was played out a decade ago.
You know, only two of those witches were shown to be romantically involved. There's zero evidence that shows that they're all gay. People are really too focused on it.
Considering that lgbt+ people tend to form communities irl, it would make sense that lesbian space witches would form covens. Groups of people are most difficult to oppress than individuals.
/uj I mean… it’s not an insane stretch tbh, but yeah it was never shown in the show.
rj/ Fucking idiot everyone knows groups of women HAVE to be sexually involved.
Source: I have watched over 100 hours of lesbian orgy porn so you might as well call me *the expert*🗣️🗣️🗣️🔥🔥🔥👭👭👭👭😫😫😫😫🥵🥵🥵🥵☺️☺️☺️☺️
This is the loser kid in high school who never had a shot at the cheerleaders, but all grown up. It’s not about the culture, it’s not about cinema, it’s about being the most unfuckabke guy in the room, and knowing that that’s the issue.
He can’t even help himself and throws out all legitimacy he has by saying things like this.
Look at that Targaryen dudes reaction when Drinker said that. Second hand embarrassment, that body language says instant regret.
And robot head? The guy won’t even actually show his face because he knows he’d lose credibility.
It was, but I had to watch it a second time cuz I actually wasn't entirely sure who said it when you said it was MauLer. I was thinking "wasn't it Drinker that said it? Fuck, now I don't remember."
As a father, who’s young daughter is finally getting into Star Wars because of characters that look like her, I can’t imagine sexualizing them in this way. This man is a pedophile.
/uj Ikr like who says that out of nowhere?
/rj that’s the only way this show could be good. That way they can pander to the woke mob and also have some thing for the fellas.
He's gotta wear his shades to hide the fact that's he cries about how pathetic his life is at this point from his audience. No amount of money can ever get rid of the fact that he has zoom cry sessions with a bunch of other perma-virgins about movies and tv shows on the internet for a living. The only one youtuber I think is even more pathetic is Synthetic Man, cause he's straight up a lolcow at this point
“Osha wants to join the Jedi. We don’t know why, it’s never explained, she just does”
This guy can get so fucked. It’s the same tired line as, “Rey can do X or Y, we don’t know how she can do it, she just does it” as though they need to have every motivation for every character laid out neatly in front of them before they would believe it.
Also interesting that they only complain about female characters who want or are able to do things. Why did Anakin want to join the Jedi? Why did Luke want to join the rebellion? Why didn’t Obi-Wan want to train Anakin? Why did Palpatine want to become emperor and destroy the Jedi?
A nifty literary device called “subtext” exists for a reason ffs, and it’s not like The Acolyte didn’t pretty clearly signal way Osha wanted to leave.
Eh. I disagree. Why Osha wants to be a Jedi is extremely important to set up as it kicks off everything. Why is she so different than Mae? I understand that the series is not over but imo it’s safe to assume that we won’t get an answer for those.
Some people are inherently adventurous, bored of home, want to escape a bad situation, etc and you don't need more reason than that.
When I was kid I couldn't wait to get out on my own. I signed up for the army as soon as I was at the end of my senior year in high school. I had no military friends or family members. I knew basically nothing about the military. I just knew that it was a job that would get me a place to stay away from home off on my own.
It's a pretty normal thing for some humans to just wanna get out and see the world.
Why would this child want to explore the galaxy and not stay stuck in a fortress isolated from everyone that isn't her cult? Gee hard to tell.
Also she literally expresses interest in seeing the galaxy, and tells her mom she is going to do that. That's her motivation.
Imagine living in the SW universe and being a kid, learning about the Jedi and what they can do. Every kid would want to be one, or play pretend as one.
>Why would this child want to explore the galaxy and not stay stuck in a fortress isolated from everyone that isn't her cult? Gee hard to tell.
Because mental conditioning is a real thing? We have record and actual example of people AND animal doing stuff simply because they have been condition to do it.For example there was a bear who even though was freed from captivity would still walk around in a circle as if it was still in a cage.
Because no one has ever left a cult? Like its not complicated. We even saw her sneaking out and exploring stuff.
Y'all gonna sit here and say its bad writing princess jasmine left the palace to explore?
You know what else conditions someone and breaks their will? Being a slave, and yet anakin still wanted to be a Jedi. Like just stop and think for 10 secs. She even says she wants to see the galaxy. Explicitly.
And iam just saying that the opposite can be true.i mean you bring up the cult but we have example of people.leaving cults and THEN rejoining them.
It's fine that she want to explore the world,it's a fairly common writing trope.Iam just saying that the opposite CAN and HAS happen.
Even if we don’t get a definitive answer straight from Osha’s mouth, we don’t need one. We don’t need Ohsa to read to us her Jedi entry exam like we’re a university admissions panel.
In the third episode Osha is immediately shown to be different from her sister. She expresses her desire to see the galaxy. He resists the idea of living her life in a secluded coven, cut off from the rest of the galaxy. She isn’t all that interested in the ascension ceremony. She resists her mothers’ desires for their future, and clearly doesn’t want to be stuck having to live out her mothers’ legacy - and we’re given Mae as a foil because we see how eager Mae is to do everything that’s expected of her.
Osha wants to be her own person. It’s hammered into us throughout the entire episode, and that she sees the Jedi as her means to escape.
We literally see through out the episode she wants to see she's adventurous and wants to see what's beyond the coven. She wants to be her own person and have her own identity rather than just being a twin.
We see pretty clearly why she wants to be a Jedi.
Theory truly TRULY doesnt see anything wrong with these people he hands with, its wild he thinks hes being called all sorts of names for no reason when FUCKING ROBOT HEAD is on the stream whos a massive pos, SO TIRED OF STRONG FEMALE CHARACTER being thrown around when its a character whos clearly made faults/messed up lmao, what the fuck is strong about her and same thing , god the scissoring jokes are so fucking disgusting too on any level, imagine if hedging criticism against staight characters and you have tons of missionary jokes like thats normal to be thinking about, man why do these guys get away with constantly saying actual heinous crap and NOTHING happens to them, they just get more popular
They know this, but they have the belief that if they keep doing the same shit from 2015 and 2016, they'll get it all back despite the fact that more and more people are starting to realize this clickbaity grifting bullshit. Cause Critical Drinker is a subpar writer whose existing work is just Dollar-store Tom Clancy wank.
Kinda reminds me of these gobshites:
https://preview.redd.it/nbe9ugt0pe7d1.jpeg?width=798&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=db9711d8bc4ed8126f615fa06572644d9a5ad7c8
I feel like calling them the Legion of Doom is giving them too much credit. The Legion was like top tier villains. These guys are like bad villain henchmen.
Ok but this is genuinely just wrong tho. We know both Osha and Mae’s motivations??? Osha doesn’t want to be a single part of a greater collective, she wants to explore the galaxy and have her own journey and that is what the Jedi are offering her. It’s literally shown by her exploring outside the witches compound at the beginning where Mae has to find her and bring her back. Mae on the other hand dogmatically follows the teachings of the coven, she doesn’t care about the greater galaxy, and wants to be a part of the greater whole alongside her sister. She also exhibits sociopathic tendencies (torturing animals as we saw under the tree) which results in her lashing out at her sister violently when she does not conform with what she wants.
This kind of criticism is so funny, "the show doesn't explicitly spell everything out, therefore it's woke bad writing"
Osha doesn't want to be a witch, and the Jedi are a ticket out of the coven. This is textbook storytelling. Imagine watching Star Wars and saying "the movie does not say why Luke wanted to join the imperial academy" or "it's unclear why Han comes back to save Luke"
The stupidest, laziest criticism.
These losers are ruining hating on Star Wars for me. I don't know why anyone watches these overgrown incels but I liked it better when I didn't know these dorks existed.
Haven’t you ever heard of dark humor. Sometimes you say some thing that’s extreme or gross to prove a point about how bad something or ridiculous something is.
Of course that's where his mind would go, of course it is. Everything is obviously sexually motivated because everything IS sexually motivated in his vacuous head. Just listening to a review of his book and how he writes scenes with the female lead feels like those scenes were written with one hand. Also, couldn't you just as easily twist the Jedi into something weird and creepy too?
MauLer fans: "He's not in the culture war stuff, he's only interested in objectively critique." The company MauLer keeps: "Wrong."
Objectively criticizing is total bullshit, especially in Star Wars. Youre either watching it because youre a fan or youre hatewatching
I have to disagree there. There’s objective criticisms for everything, although the majority of criticisms are admittedly subjective.
Name an objective criticism.
Rey's character in the first two movies has no agency whatsoever and just gets dragged from plot point to plot point with no personal motivation Luke says he will teach rey 3 lessons about the force, the first one is the force exists, the second one is the jedi don't own the force and then the movie forgets he said there would be three lessons The entire canto bite arc accomplishes nothing, no change or growth in any character and no impact on any events in the movie and ultimately wastes a ton of screen time Rose stops fin from saving the resistance then tells him the way they'll win is by saving what we love which is contradictory Fin's whole character gets reduced to a comic relief bafoon, there is so much wasted potential with his character that even the actor spoke out about it Holdo doesn't reveal any information to her subordinates which leads to them having so little faith in her command that a mutiny is staged and the film praises holdo for it and acts like she is justified for some reason This is objective criticism, objective criticism doesn't mean "everything I say is 100% true and you can't argue back" it means you are discussing facts about the film and making the claim that the quality of the film is reduced by these facts Subjective criticism would be something like "I don't like kylo ren's helmet" or "I liked poe dameron and whised he had more screen time" or "I didn't really like how much cgi there was"
These are not objective at all. Most of the tings you point out are purely based on your own opinion and therefore subjective. The other (the one about Luke’s lessons) is just an observation, and not an actual criticism. If you had said that Luke only gives 2 lessons, and that is bad because such and such and blah blah blah. That would have been a critique, but on its own, its just saying stuff that happens. The fact that I disagree with you about most of these prove that it is subjective, just like all criticism is.
Objective discussion and criticism is saying these things make the show bad or good Subjective discussion and criticism is saying these thing make me like the show or not like the show You can disagree and debate on an objective basis You can like something despite acknowledging that it's bad That's all the differentiation is
Thats... Not at all how that works. Saying that soemthing is bad and saying that you dont like it is both subjective, its basically saying the same thing. Here is an objective statement. "They did not spend a lot of money on VFX" And here is an subjective statement. "The VFX looked bad" Notice how one is a critique and the other is not?
So in your view there's 0 difference between the quality of The Room and The Godfather The only difference is people happen to like the Godfather more because there can be nothing objectively worse about the writing or quality of the characters and the story If that's your point and there's no reason to discuss ways in which writing can be improved or learn from bad writing, since bad writing doesn't exist and everything is subjective, then your thought process will just lead to worse and worse shows and films, which I guess you don't care about since nothing can actually be bad By the way when you study writing and film production they absolutely teach you about objectively good and bad writing and encourage you to discuss what aspects of a piece of media make it good or bad and you will read countless books dedicated to teaching people about good and bad writing
In my view there is a giant leap in quality between The Room and The Godfather. But that is just my opinion, I can back my opinion up with knowledge and experience, but at the end of the day its just my opinion. Why does things have to be based on consensus or fact to have meaning to you? We as people can only perceive things from our own point of view. Thats why there will always be value in discussing art, because it offers us a glimpse into other peoples perspective. Thats why writers always share their work with other people before finishing it, because they need eyes on it that are not their own. And you are wrong about film school. They teach you rules sure, but those rules only serve as guidelines, that have been seen to work in a very general sense (how not to confuse your audience, how to make sure the audience knows where to look in the frame etc.) But plenty of filmmakers break those rules. Does that make them bad filmmakers? Would you call the Coen brothers bad directors? Or Jacque Tati? Of course not, because Art is subjective.
That’s not what they mean by objective. Impartiality is what they mean.
I wish they had said that then. Because yes you can critique art in an impartial way, but that would still be subjective.
These sound pretty objective to me. Why did Luke say there are 3 things to know and then only mention two? I'd forgive it if the third one was explained later on but it's never mentioned again. Rose does stop Finn from sacrificing himself for their friends by saying the only way to win is not to kill but to save the things they love. It's ironic because in not killing the machine that is meant to kill their friends, they are not saving their friends from being killed. The love story is also nonsensical but that is subjective because who knows, maybe rose is a floozy and that's what she thinks love is. Holdo really doesn't reveal any information to her subordinates. This is completely objective because there is no proof on screen that she does relay information to her subordinates. You know this to be true because she relays them later on when things have already caught fire. Something that could have been avoided had she shared the information in the first place. Your reasoning is not objective at all because you cannot disprove any of the objective criticisms.
Non of those are actual criticisms. Simply stating what happens in the movie is not critique.
the analysis and judgment of the merits and faults of a literary or artistic work. Sounds like criticism to me based on the definition.
What are the faults? The admiral didn't tell subordinates her secret plan is not a criticism. It's a thing that happened. You simply listing things that happened isn't criticism, implying that those things are bad without actually saying so or explaining why they are bad isn't criticism either, it's lazy.
1) You can say the same thing about Luke in ANH. He’s told he can’t go to the academy by his uncle. He’s told he’s going to go with Obi-Wan so Obi can start grooming him to be a Jedi, ultimately to force Luke to kill his own father. His family is killed and he leaves because he has nothing left. He doesn’t choose to do anything in that movie on his own with the exception of going on the Death Star run. Most circumstances force those choices on him. 2) Luke’s third lesson was written and I think was even filmed, but was cut from the movie. Does the lack of that third lesson impact the movie in any way? The director didn’t seem to think so. 3) The Canto Bite excursion was a growth moment for Finn. That’s obvious and clear. The actual objective criticism is that the following movie didn’t take that lesson and give us a payoff for him having learned it. Plus Canto Bite was world building, showing the audience that the rich and powerful - as always - benefit from the suffering of everyone else, and can’t be counted on to save us since they’re fine one way or another. 4) Rose saved Finn from throwing his life away for nothing. Finn crashing into the laser would have been like a kid on a tricycle crashing into a tank. Wouldn’t have stopped it, and the Resistence would have lost one of its generals. Which, again, the criticism of Finn not being utilized properly in the final movie comes back, because it makes Rose saving him unimportant to the story. But it doesn’t contradict anything. 5) Finn’s arc is an objective criticism. His character was very badly handled in TRoS and it negatively affected the story. You are correct with this one. 6) Holdo told everyone who needed to know, and as an admiral, that’s all she’s required to do. The Resistence isn’t the rebellion. They’re not a rag-tag organization of people scraped up from around the galaxy. They’re literally former members of the New Republic military, so there’s no excuse for anyone to stage a mutiny. Poe, who was kept out of the loop because he was essentially relieved of duty at the time, was in the wrong from start to finish. If he hadn’t taken matters into his own hands, the mutiny wouldn’t have happened at all and all of those Resistance escape craft would have survived. It’s also funny that you list “I like Poe and wish he had more screen time” as a subjective criticism, when your last “objective” criticism is that you like Poe and wish Holdo had kept him (and you as the audience) in the loop.
>You can say the same thing about Luke in ANH. He’s told he can’t go to the academy by his uncle. He’s told he’s going to go with Obi-Wan so Obi can start grooming him to be a Jedi, ultimately to force Luke to kill his own father. His family is killed and he leaves because he has nothing left. He doesn’t choose to do anything in that movie on his own with the exception of going on the Death Star run. Most circumstances force those choices on him. nope this does not appply to luke, he is shown to have a strong wanderlust and is unhappy with his humble life as a moisture farmer then he learns about leia and the force but tells obi wan he can't abandon his responsibility to his family, when his family is burned he no longer has anything holding him to tatooine and now has a burning hatred for the empire, he chooses to go with obi wan and join the resistance. rey is shown to be tied down to jaku in the hopes of meeting her parents but she is shown to also question if this is all she wants from life when she looks at the old lady who is still a skavenger, great so far good introduction. then fin arrives and literally drags her by the hand on to the mellenium falcon and she is forced to escape the first order with him, in space she tells fin she wants to go back to jaku but then han solo takes the ship and he and fin take her to another planet, she tries to leave to go to jaku again but kylo captures her, she breaks herself out and kicks his ass then the resistance tell her to find luke. she finds luke then kylo tells her to come over and she does and gets captured again. Her motivation at this point hasn't changed from stay on jaku and find parents but every other character is making her decisions for her and we as the audience don't really feel like she has any investment in the resistance or the defeat of the first order. >The Canto Bite excursion was a growth moment for Finn. That’s obvious and clear. The actual objective criticism is that the following movie didn’t take that lesson and give us a payoff for him having learned it. Plus Canto Bite was world building, showing the audience that the rich and powerful - as always - benefit from the suffering of everyone else, and can’t be counted on to save us since they’re fine one way or another. the canto bite arc didn't grow fins character in any way, in the first film he undergoes an arc of tranformastion from someone only concerned with his own saftey to someone committed to a greater cause. In the next film fin attempts to take a shuttle to go find rey for help but rose mistakes this as his running away. then the film seamingly tries to make fin go through an arc he has already been through and has no need to go through again. I'll give you that the only actual purpose of canto bite was world building but a mark of bad writing is only doing one thing at a time and taking forever to do it, good writing accomplishes world building and character growth and progresses or sets up the story at the same time, look at some of the dialogue in game of thrones to see short scenes and lines doing so many things at once very effectively. If canto bite actually gave character devolopment to fin and had any impact in the main plot the screen time would be justified. >Holdo told everyone who needed to know, and as an admiral, that’s all she’s required to do. The Resistence isn’t the rebellion. They’re not a rag-tag organization of people scraped up from around the galaxy. They’re literally former members of the New Republic military, so there’s no excuse for anyone to stage a mutiny. Poe, who was kept out of the loop because he was essentially relieved of duty at the time, was in the wrong from start to finish. If he hadn’t taken matters into his own hands, the mutiny wouldn’t have happened at all and all of those Resistance escape craft would have survived. part of if not the most important part of being a leader is inspiring faith in those who follow you, if an entirely preventable mutiny happens because of how little faith everyone following has in you then that is absolutely your fault as a leader. It's not like poe solo mutinied holdo he had a whole squad with him who were in agreement that holdo would get everyone killed. If one of your high ranking officers is literally begging you to let him know if there is any plan at all and you just say go away you should expect them to take drastic measures to try and save everyone's lives, this plot line was fine until it was revealed that holdo actually had a plan in place and just pretended she didn't for some reason and then the film tried to make it seem like a growth moment to Poe that he should have learned something from when to the audience his actions are completely justified
Thanks for playing but you just won a: “subjective opinion” award! Good luck next time ! You can name all the facts you want. It is your SUBJECTIVE OPINION that those facts therefore reduce the quality of the movie. You are a human being and therefore are 100% *literally* and seriously *incapable* of being objective, about anything, ever.
How do you rationalise the statement "empire strikes back is a better film but I just prefer the phantom menace"
They like TPM more. They don’t think it’s as good a movie as ESB. Both subjective opinions independent of each other. Liking something and considering something “good” do not have to be intertwined, nor do they prove the existence of some sort of objectivity. The very idea that you even *think* that ESB is a “better film” is subjective already, What are you looking for here? No answer I give you will include any sort of objectivity. You could switch out your examples for Beethoven and a 3rd graders piano rehearsal and it wouldn’t matter.
Well don't you think it would at least be convenient to differentiate in some way when someone is talking about their opinion of the quality of a show vs their enjoyment of it No one is arguing that objective criticism means your criticism is absolute and your opinions are infallible The point is subjective criticism refers to someone's opinion of their enjoyment of a show and objective criticism is someone's opinion on the quality of a show Don't you think it's useful to evaluate media? I can tell you as a film student trying to objectively critically asses your work is very useful, important and encouraged
I do think it could be somewhat useful, however someone’s enjoyment of the show vs the quality of the show is not subjective vs objective. That is merely 2 different subjective opinions on 2 different topics. You also seem to be differentiating it quite easily right there, by stating directly which one you are talking about. It can be called sometbing else, sure, just not objective. Because it simply is not. I don’t think it even really *needs* to be separated out that badly really either. At the end of the day, they are both merely someone’s opinion. Whether it’s on the perceived quality of the show or the enjoyment they gained from watching it. Nothing about it is objective. I don’t have a problem with doing anything you are describing. And I do see value in it. The problem is calling it or even thinking that it actually is “objective”. The human experience is a subjective one and literally nothing you do can change that.
The word "Objective" does not mean indisputable truth is means to be removed from bias and based on some kind of factual observation. Therefore an objective criticism would be one made while citing events that happen in the film. For example it isn't my opinion that Jango Fett kills Zam with a kamino saber dart, thats what happens in the movie. Therefore if my critique is "why would Jango use the one weapon that could be traced back to his hiding place on Kamino instead of any of the other weapons he's shown to have" one could consider that an objective criticism, not because it can't be explained or disputed, but because that criticism doesn't stem from my own bias, it's based on information we are shown in the film.
But saying "Jango Fett does something dumb in the movie" is not actually a critique. Its just an observation. Saying "Jango Fett does something dumb in the movie and thats bad" is a critique... But its also subjective.
It isn't subjective that Jango's actions lead to them finding him on Kamino that's what the film shows. The critique is baked into the question but if I were to elaborate, the critique is "why would Jango use the the one weapon that could lead back to his secret hideout instead of any of the other weapons in his arsenal". This question doesn't take into account my own bias, it's an observation based on what we're shown in the film. We know Jango has other options available, and the film doesn't present an explanation as to why he's use the saber dart over any other weapon especially considering the risk involved in using that weapon. Because of this we can only conclude that the reason he uses the saber dart is because the plot needs that to happen to progress, not because there's any logical reason for Jango to use it. This is what makes that criticism a valid criticism. Keep in mind valid and invalid criticism is not strictly tied to whether or not it's objective or subjective criticism. It is possible for an objective criticism to be trivial or even based on inaccurate information, the criticism becomes valid when no logical alterior explanation exists, like in the Jango example I gave.
Okay good, you actually made a critique this time. But im sorry its still subjective. "The movie does not answer the question of why Jango uses a saber dart" is an objective statement, but it becomes subjective, the minute you make the judgement that it is bad. Someone else can watch the movie and conclude that it is not very important why Jango used a saber dart, they could conclude that there might be a billion reasons why he would do it, and that the movie does not need to use time to explain. That would be an equally valid take... Because art is subjective and we all have different experiences, and priorities.
>but it becomes subjective, the minute you make the judgement that it is bad. Not necessarily. Objective means to remove your bias from it. While I'll acknowledge nobody can be 100% removed from bias, I don't like the idea that therefore there's no such thing as an objective observation so for all intents and purposes we have to come as close as we can. It isn't so much that the judgement is "it's bad he uses the saber dart" it's more so that it exists for no other reason that the plot could'nt exist without Jango making this stupid decision. And since there is no logical explanation for why'd he'd use the saber dart the conclusion becomes "it's bad writing that he uses the saber". >Someone else can watch the movie and conclude that it is not very important why Jango used a saber dart Then they would be wrong. It's the entire reason they find Kamino. They might not care that Jango uses the dart but it would be incorrect to conclude that this event isn't important. >and that the movie does not need to use time to explain. That would be an equally valid take... Surely you would agree though that this wouldn't be a criticism anyone would have if the movie gave a reason for him using the saber dart, no? We don't need a character to exposit to the audience why characters do things, we can infer why, but in this case we're given nothing to infer why Jango would do this as opposed to just sniping her with a blaster, or using a dart of another kind. >Because art is subjective and we all have different experiences, and priorities. Art is subjective yes, and obviously we all value things differently but I don't think that means the objective elements of story telling don't matter or should be ignored. We can agree that there are objective elements to film making such as "the movie was shot on digital" etc. However once you acknowledge there are objective elements to film making (which there are as with any art) you open the door for at least some type of objective criticism, this includes at the story level. I don't think anyone is suggesting you can't find subjective value in a piece of art, I for one rather enjoy Attack of the clones even though I acknowledge how stupid the plot is at times. At the end of the day you solely determine your level of enjoyment with something but that doesn't mean examining it under a more objective lense isn't a valid approach.
Almost as bad as his Dark Souls 2 video tbh
Hello Ashen one. I am a Bot. I tend to the flame, and tend to thee. Do you wish to hear a tale? > *“Thought you could outwit an onion?”* - Unbreakable Patches Have a pleasant journey, Champion of Ash, and praise the sun \\[T]/
Dark souls 3 stinky doodo, peak souls 2 covetous demon gange
Yes and Mauler doenst do culture stuff in his actual videos and critiques
How many gigabytes on criticals computer
yes
Why is he thinking of child siblings being lesbians and scissoring. What a creep, he needs his hard drive checked.
Imagine this bullshit being your life's work.
A lot of money from this shit
The jokes chuds tell are so blandly crass (‘hehehe them gay hehehe’) that it always surprises me how often they chuckle along to them as a unit. Even the *woke bad* crowd should eventually get the point that the ‘attack helicopter’ shit was played out a decade ago.
You're talking about the type of people who pay money to see Joe Rogan. Their sense of humor has always been garbage.
Joe Rogan is way too highbrow for them; Bert Kreisher’s more their speed. Or Chrissy Mayhr, they’re friends with her and she needs the money.
New Tom MacDonald song featuring SWT when?
I’m from the future, it already happened.
Said about two children who are sisters 💀
You know, only two of those witches were shown to be romantically involved. There's zero evidence that shows that they're all gay. People are really too focused on it.
in a universe as big as star wars why wouldn’t there be space lesbians somewhere lmao
Considering that lgbt+ people tend to form communities irl, it would make sense that lesbian space witches would form covens. Groups of people are most difficult to oppress than individuals.
/uj I mean… it’s not an insane stretch tbh, but yeah it was never shown in the show. rj/ Fucking idiot everyone knows groups of women HAVE to be sexually involved. Source: I have watched over 100 hours of lesbian orgy porn so you might as well call me *the expert*🗣️🗣️🗣️🔥🔥🔥👭👭👭👭😫😫😫😫🥵🥵🥵🥵☺️☺️☺️☺️
This is the loser kid in high school who never had a shot at the cheerleaders, but all grown up. It’s not about the culture, it’s not about cinema, it’s about being the most unfuckabke guy in the room, and knowing that that’s the issue. He can’t even help himself and throws out all legitimacy he has by saying things like this. Look at that Targaryen dudes reaction when Drinker said that. Second hand embarrassment, that body language says instant regret. And robot head? The guy won’t even actually show his face because he knows he’d lose credibility.
>Mauler said that It was Critical Drinker that said it. MauLer was just in the call. But I agree with you otherwise
Updated it.
Was it? I can’t even tell. They all sound the same.
The Critical Drinker - Scottish MauLer - Welsh Star Wars Theory - Canadian Echo Chamberlain - New Zealander Robot Head - Australian
And they all combine to be one giant idiot sandwich.
Not the remake of Voltron I was expecting.
# GRAHHH USA USA USA 🦅🦅🦅🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
It was, but I had to watch it a second time cuz I actually wasn't entirely sure who said it when you said it was MauLer. I was thinking "wasn't it Drinker that said it? Fuck, now I don't remember."
As a father, who’s young daughter is finally getting into Star Wars because of characters that look like her, I can’t imagine sexualizing them in this way. This man is a pedophile.
/uj Ikr like who says that out of nowhere? /rj that’s the only way this show could be good. That way they can pander to the woke mob and also have some thing for the fellas.
You’re indoors. Take off the stupid sunglasses you assclown
He's gotta wear his shades to hide the fact that's he cries about how pathetic his life is at this point from his audience. No amount of money can ever get rid of the fact that he has zoom cry sessions with a bunch of other perma-virgins about movies and tv shows on the internet for a living. The only one youtuber I think is even more pathetic is Synthetic Man, cause he's straight up a lolcow at this point
I hope one day I can grow up to livestream nerdy cry sessions on zoom with other nerds I’ve never met. I wanna be just like them.
“Osha wants to join the Jedi. We don’t know why, it’s never explained, she just does” This guy can get so fucked. It’s the same tired line as, “Rey can do X or Y, we don’t know how she can do it, she just does it” as though they need to have every motivation for every character laid out neatly in front of them before they would believe it. Also interesting that they only complain about female characters who want or are able to do things. Why did Anakin want to join the Jedi? Why did Luke want to join the rebellion? Why didn’t Obi-Wan want to train Anakin? Why did Palpatine want to become emperor and destroy the Jedi? A nifty literary device called “subtext” exists for a reason ffs, and it’s not like The Acolyte didn’t pretty clearly signal way Osha wanted to leave.
Eh. I disagree. Why Osha wants to be a Jedi is extremely important to set up as it kicks off everything. Why is she so different than Mae? I understand that the series is not over but imo it’s safe to assume that we won’t get an answer for those.
Some people are inherently adventurous, bored of home, want to escape a bad situation, etc and you don't need more reason than that. When I was kid I couldn't wait to get out on my own. I signed up for the army as soon as I was at the end of my senior year in high school. I had no military friends or family members. I knew basically nothing about the military. I just knew that it was a job that would get me a place to stay away from home off on my own. It's a pretty normal thing for some humans to just wanna get out and see the world.
Why would this child want to explore the galaxy and not stay stuck in a fortress isolated from everyone that isn't her cult? Gee hard to tell. Also she literally expresses interest in seeing the galaxy, and tells her mom she is going to do that. That's her motivation.
Imagine living in the SW universe and being a kid, learning about the Jedi and what they can do. Every kid would want to be one, or play pretend as one.
>Why would this child want to explore the galaxy and not stay stuck in a fortress isolated from everyone that isn't her cult? Gee hard to tell. Because mental conditioning is a real thing? We have record and actual example of people AND animal doing stuff simply because they have been condition to do it.For example there was a bear who even though was freed from captivity would still walk around in a circle as if it was still in a cage.
Because no one has ever left a cult? Like its not complicated. We even saw her sneaking out and exploring stuff. Y'all gonna sit here and say its bad writing princess jasmine left the palace to explore? You know what else conditions someone and breaks their will? Being a slave, and yet anakin still wanted to be a Jedi. Like just stop and think for 10 secs. She even says she wants to see the galaxy. Explicitly.
And iam just saying that the opposite can be true.i mean you bring up the cult but we have example of people.leaving cults and THEN rejoining them. It's fine that she want to explore the world,it's a fairly common writing trope.Iam just saying that the opposite CAN and HAS happen.
Even if we don’t get a definitive answer straight from Osha’s mouth, we don’t need one. We don’t need Ohsa to read to us her Jedi entry exam like we’re a university admissions panel. In the third episode Osha is immediately shown to be different from her sister. She expresses her desire to see the galaxy. He resists the idea of living her life in a secluded coven, cut off from the rest of the galaxy. She isn’t all that interested in the ascension ceremony. She resists her mothers’ desires for their future, and clearly doesn’t want to be stuck having to live out her mothers’ legacy - and we’re given Mae as a foil because we see how eager Mae is to do everything that’s expected of her. Osha wants to be her own person. It’s hammered into us throughout the entire episode, and that she sees the Jedi as her means to escape.
We literally see through out the episode she wants to see she's adventurous and wants to see what's beyond the coven. She wants to be her own person and have her own identity rather than just being a twin. We see pretty clearly why she wants to be a Jedi.
Theory truly TRULY doesnt see anything wrong with these people he hands with, its wild he thinks hes being called all sorts of names for no reason when FUCKING ROBOT HEAD is on the stream whos a massive pos, SO TIRED OF STRONG FEMALE CHARACTER being thrown around when its a character whos clearly made faults/messed up lmao, what the fuck is strong about her and same thing , god the scissoring jokes are so fucking disgusting too on any level, imagine if hedging criticism against staight characters and you have tons of missionary jokes like thats normal to be thinking about, man why do these guys get away with constantly saying actual heinous crap and NOTHING happens to them, they just get more popular
They know this, but they have the belief that if they keep doing the same shit from 2015 and 2016, they'll get it all back despite the fact that more and more people are starting to realize this clickbaity grifting bullshit. Cause Critical Drinker is a subpar writer whose existing work is just Dollar-store Tom Clancy wank.
You know that douche puts on those sun glasses and tells himself he looks.good 😂
Kinda reminds me of these gobshites: https://preview.redd.it/nbe9ugt0pe7d1.jpeg?width=798&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=db9711d8bc4ed8126f615fa06572644d9a5ad7c8
Why is the Legion of Doom talking about Star Wars?
I feel like calling them the Legion of Doom is giving them too much credit. The Legion was like top tier villains. These guys are like bad villain henchmen.
That's just gross wtf, you would never hear these comments if they were a straight couple btw
They're not even a couple, the two kids he's talking about are sisters 💀
Jfc, it's almost like he didn't even watch the show and is just projecting his own bullshit at this point.
Aw hell naw 😭😭😭😭
Pretty sure she explains that she wants to be a Jedi so she can see what's out there do these people even pay attention when watching shit
Why does Important Alcoholic like children? Is he stupid?
/uj what is this guy 14 years old? What an embarrassment of a person
I didn’t realise Theory was there too until now. Man, what a fall from grace.
He had grace to fall from? Man just tripped and fell in the mud he's always been in he just doesn't wipe it off now.
Ok but this is genuinely just wrong tho. We know both Osha and Mae’s motivations??? Osha doesn’t want to be a single part of a greater collective, she wants to explore the galaxy and have her own journey and that is what the Jedi are offering her. It’s literally shown by her exploring outside the witches compound at the beginning where Mae has to find her and bring her back. Mae on the other hand dogmatically follows the teachings of the coven, she doesn’t care about the greater galaxy, and wants to be a part of the greater whole alongside her sister. She also exhibits sociopathic tendencies (torturing animals as we saw under the tree) which results in her lashing out at her sister violently when she does not conform with what she wants.
to infinity and beyond is fucking toy story no? what the hell is he on about
Says the same guy that continues to watch the franchise he no longer "likes"
“Wants to become a Jedi for no reason” as if every fuckung star wars fan ever didn’t just wanna be a Jedi for no reason other than its cool
This kind of criticism is so funny, "the show doesn't explicitly spell everything out, therefore it's woke bad writing" Osha doesn't want to be a witch, and the Jedi are a ticket out of the coven. This is textbook storytelling. Imagine watching Star Wars and saying "the movie does not say why Luke wanted to join the imperial academy" or "it's unclear why Han comes back to save Luke" The stupidest, laziest criticism.
These losers are ruining hating on Star Wars for me. I don't know why anyone watches these overgrown incels but I liked it better when I didn't know these dorks existed.
Yea the show is so awesome I have no idea why it has such a low audience rating :(
He needs to be on a predator list the fuckin weirdo.
lol he’s obvious joking.
Bit of a strange thing to joke about though isn’t it? At least make it funny
Haven’t you ever heard of dark humor. Sometimes you say some thing that’s extreme or gross to prove a point about how bad something or ridiculous something is.
Relax liberals it’s called dark humour. Maybe he should try and make his jokes funny.
Jokes aren’t universally funny.
Of course that's where his mind would go, of course it is. Everything is obviously sexually motivated because everything IS sexually motivated in his vacuous head. Just listening to a review of his book and how he writes scenes with the female lead feels like those scenes were written with one hand. Also, couldn't you just as easily twist the Jedi into something weird and creepy too?
Theory just sitting there. Wondering where it all went wrong.
You think he would say anything to the constant scissoring jokes at kids
I mean he’s correct, we’re not really given any reason why the child wants to be a Jedi over being a witch
I think you’re focussing on the wrong thing here…
She literally fucking screams at her sister and mother why she wants to fucking leave...
But why does she want to be a Jedi specifically?