Reputator

WAIT LET ME HELP

Absolutely. We live in a completely different time. We transitioned to having cable TV to the internet and at this point, people can filter what they see so precisely that they never hear anything on the news anymore, unless by accident. People might hear about the fires in California and Australia but they know nothing about what's happening in Syria or elsewhere. Hell I work with people that never heard of the Mueller Report.

The dude has four daughters, right? How do you even begin to tell the other three that their dad and sister were suddenly killed? Unimaginable.

I don't necessarily disagree with you about quality vs public perception. But truly bad movies are generally well recognized, and can hurt revenue. Of course Transformers exists to fuck up every notion I have of commonsense, but I'm gonna pretend those don't exist for a moment. I like to bring up LOTR because it's one of those success stories that really illustrates that great quality can break the curse of a thirdqual (sorry, that's an awful word but it's efficient) making less money than it's predecessors. Hell, even a moderately inferior film like Dark Knight Rises succumbs to the problem, so a truly poorly executed film like ROS fared even worse. And I think that the old Disney addage of Michael Eisner's that "quality sells" is something Bob Iger (his protege anyway) really takes to heart. You are grossly overstating and generalizing the reception of the films thus far. Yeah TLJ was the least like Empire and the OT, I don't disagree. But the parallels of the scene in ROS with Rey and Palpatine and the battle taking place outside the window (or hole in the roof in this case) is, if not lazy, a really hamfisted callback.

But isn't that last part what we're talking about here? And also, if all Disney cared about was money, and not public perception, why backtrack so much on TLJ when it was undoubtedly a moneymaker?

Alright, how about low risk? Rehashing story ideas from the OT doesn't seem like the biggest effort to me, and milking nostalgia checkboxes in all films, especially Solo, is pretty disheartening as well. The OT wasn't even the most original story-wise to begin with, so copying and pasting from those is pretty sad. Oh right you also said "generally well recieved." Well that changes things in a discussion about light fluffy films that have no lasting meaning.

That's two of his kids so far? Or is that another correction?

I don't know how anyone could look at the myriad of production problems and inconsistent execution and say "Eh, sure! She's doing a great job!" That blows MY mind. Saying she's good because she managed to make money is an incredibly low bar to set, especially since we're talking about Star Wars here, something with a massive established fanbase. The most minimum effort could have made money (and arguably did).

Tribalism. And I think a lot of it has to do with judges.

All I can do is shake my head. This is the same guy that's going to be acquitted by the senate.

Going to have to disagree with you there. You can absolutely tell which films were made by Shane Black and Taika Waititi. Hell even Captain American: The First Avenger feels a little bit like a movie made by the guy that did The Rocketeer. And I'll definitely disagree with the notion they stopped being interesting 5 years ago, before they even concluded The Infinity Wars story. Both final Avengers films are just brilliant pieces of popcorn cinema and I love them to death. Not sure if your post is meant to be a defense of the current crop of Star Wars films but I'd definitely call Rogue One, Solo, and Episode 9 empty films. They're mildly satisfying in the moment but they don't hold up over time or with subsequent views.

No doubt, but those people hate the films even more, and much of that hatred comes from alt-right borderline sociopaths. But in an effort to fight against those groups, the tendency from more moderate folks is to defend Kennedy, even while admitting that as much as half the films under her have been mediocre to poor, and I don't think that's the right approach. I haven't kept a tally but I feel there's been as much or more (publicly known) director shake-ups and complete rewrites on Disney's Star Wars films compared to the MCU with more than four times as many films. And those films with the most problems have tended to be passable at best, and I don't think it's unfair to expect better than that. Especially when the execution that has been good has been pretty dang good. The rest should follow suit.

This really just makes me hate the entire ST so damn much. I'm just done with it.

Let's be fair here, the track record has NOT been consistent, and throughout the lows we've seen how good the highs can be, and we've also seen another giant Disney blockbluster franchise that has managed to be consistent. I'm not pitting all the blame on Kennedy but she likely has all the final say, and she really just needs to go.

Not sure what the difference is. Crimes without consequences are just.....'normal behavior' then.