Rayvin

We'll be doing it again next year as well, you just know it.

I'm actually a bit surprised you're genuinely invested in this character, as I really don't see his appeal - as such, I suppose you must be right about the comics building up a lot of background context that I'm ultimately not privy to. So fair enough. Based on the films alone, he's an example of the same issue I have with Rey. Maybe if she had an expansive backstory in pre-existing canon, the issue wouldn't be there.

This is almost post for post what we argued about last time

As have I. EDIT - Man I love these sorts of discussion I didn't start this one fwiw.

I know. I thought it might be helpful for you to know that there are actually arguments behind his positions, rather than just knee jerk reactions to everything. He's not always right, far from it in fact, but it's not always push back.

Just saying, but Sargon backed the female Dr. Who decision. I also don't recall him ever making a statement about Star Wars. His view was that the story permitted the possibility of a female Dr, so there was no issue in terms of consistency with the canon, and I genuinely don't think he gives a fuck about Star Wars. Assuming his position is consistent, there is no reason why he would have been able to oppose it, as there is no canon problem. (There was with Rogue One but don't worry, I got over it). Also, there is plenty of precedent for female lead characters in Sci Fi. What would perhaps be a more interesting avenue of discussion would be why do Parky and I believe that her selection and character design, -were- in fact as a result of pandering, rather than an entirely creatively driven process.

You think she was chosen in a political vacuum then? That's fine, if so. I disagree but I may just be too cynical these days. Also, if they'd cast a man in the same role, I would have been even more disappointed by that film. Because that would have meant it was just written poorly by accident, instead of being written poorly for an actual purpose. If she turns to the dark side, the whole trilogy is saved, IMO. She can then go on to destroy the universe and castrate every man in it for all I care, at least she'll have an interesting character. In before KCG calls me a misogynist cunt, btw.

I'm sorry, it's just that I can't recall ever worrying about what might happen to Thor in the same way that I might in films about other superheroes.

Possibly, but that would be consistent with my characterisation of him too. He's interested in the political aspect of this. I'm conflicted on that front - I feel like if films like this could exist, with strong female characters and well written roles, without the insane fanfare, virtue signalling and triumphalism, I would be able to enjoy them far more. Now, I have to be mindful of the fact that whenever I see stuff like this, I'm being shown something making a clear political statement that is, in my opinion alone, used in order to pander to idiots to take their focus off more important issues and to sow division. Rogue One, thank fuck, did not meet with the same fanfare - probably because the Twitterati didn't entirely like to see a female character who was strong, but who had very real flaws, like a real fucking person - thus making her relateable. Who knows though.

I don't particularly want them to justify why she's all powerful. I know why Thor is all powerful. That doesn't make his narrative a compelling one. Both he and Rey have done nothing to earn their power, and as such, are not interesting. If the choice was between an all powerful man and an all powerful woman, then I agree. Choose the woman. It serves a political purpose and advances things that some people care about deeply. However, I have no interest in that choice. My concern is that they've chosen between a well written and flawed male character with a good character arc, and an all powerful woman because it successfully panders to the pious and righteous. I would have happily accepted a flawed female character in the same position. Hence, this could all be recovered for me, if she's being set up for a horrifying collapse into the seduction of the dark side

Parky has the view that Disney are pandering and while I'm not sure he has an issue with Rey as a character, I think he takes issue with why she was chosen and what it was supposed to say. That said, he can speak for himself. My issue is that they made her ridiculously powerful to the point where she faced off with her main enemy in the first installment of a trilogy, and won. Thus, what possible threat is there for the remaining two installments? We already know everything that will happen with this film. Where I blur with Parky on this issue is that it's clear that this was chosen as a result of the need to pander, and therefore that's an unfortunate development for the story. Thus, the thing I want to happen in the next two films is for Rey to turn to the dark side, because it would at least give the story some structure and depth that it currently woefully lacks. She can be all powerful or whatever then, fine, no problem, but at least it makes it fucking interesting. At least she has character flaws. As it stands she has basically no personality and is just all powerful. Like Thor. Unlike whatshername in Rogue One.

We have covered this in extensive detail earlier in the thread Not sure it needs to be unpicked. What I will say is that the strong female lead in Rogue One was far better done than Rey. Which is one of the reasons I took great joy in finding that I really liked Rogue One.

There's some really good theories on this:

I think they can improve themselves from TFA here, but they can't just play it safe.

New trailer out. I'm hoping against hope here that what the end of the trailer implies is actually the route they go down, because it would resurrect the whole thing for me. They won't though, they're not dark enough for that shit. The film director has cautioned against watching this trailer because of spoilers, so watch at your own risk:

Nice.

Benevolent dictatorship ftw.

Yep. Democracy is not just a sham these days, it's also a total waste of everyone's time

Wait, she does? I thought that was her surname Shows how much attention I was paying. I thought she was pretty good though. I noticed they made a comment about "the problem being culture, not race" which sounds like something the Alt Right would say Dog whistle iyam.

I never really watched any of the others and have only seen the movies, so for me, it really doesn't matter where in the timeline it is

That's not totally true though, is it? You didn't post your north east top dog thing on there

Yeah probably true. To Shearer's credit he did actually try to pretty open with them, but for instance the Gary Speed bit could have been handled with far more tact than it was. Still though, they're not seasoned interviewers, they're just two guys with youtube channels who can't believe they're sitting interviewing Alan Shearer. The comments under the video were all very supportive in the sense that most people were just delighted that TG had the chance to do it. Tells us that his audience isn't really interested in the in depth stuff, they're invested in TG as a person. That's the way it seems to go on youtube.

I suppose we did cover that.

The glitch definitely saves time, no question about it. Takes about 1 minute to pull off and saves about 5-10 in killing ads throughout the rest of the fight. Basically ensures your flimsier teammates don't die. Our clan leader has the raid shotgun and my god He demonstrated it on one of the cabal standing outside the raid palace as you're running in at the start. It disintegrated him and the guy immediately behind him

Feel like this should be a focal point for you in the psychology thread...