Online Series: Star Wars: The Acolyte on Disney+

[Osprey]

Reducing Leia to a "beautiful princess" is not understanding the character at all.

I'm sure that johnjm22 understands the character fine and wasn't trying to give a complete character bio.

 

[kingsfan28]

Theory is about to because the real life Joker, I think the show broke him.

This is the same guy who says he loves Stars Wars, yet tears it down 4 or 5 times a week with his shitty takes. He's also the same guy who says he hated Andor because in the "REAL" Star Wars Universe, they don't use bricks.

 

[Scandale du Jour]

I'm sure that johnjm22 understands the character fine and wasn't trying to give a complete character bio.

Pretty sure he was trying to argue for conventional gender roles, but hey, that's just me.

 

[johnjm22]

Reducing Leia to a "beautiful princess" is not understanding the character at all.

You didn't feel I was reducing Han by calling him a "cocky male"?

I didn't say Leia was ONLY a beautiful princess.

 

[Hint1k]

Tell me what I am incorrect about

Let's take fire for example:

- What is the point of the fire scene?

- The point of the fire scene is to create a symbolic association in a viewer's mind between fire / danger / explosion and the main character's past. It is powerful way to visualize the incoming events before the viewer sees them. Fire is a common symbol in literature and cinematography for danger, destruction, and chaos. The whole technique is often called "foreshadowing".

- What the show writers wanted to achieve in making that association?

- It is a psychological trick. The human mind often dislikes things it is not familiar with. But it likes very much to recognize things it knows. So when the events happen, the viewer is tricked to welcome them thanks to that association. It is very similar to the feeling of meeting an old friend.

- But the writers could have set the fire scene on the surface of the planet instead?

- Sure, that would be the most common way of doing it. Moving the fire scene to space is a more creative and thought-provoking way. And one of the main points of any art is to use creativity to challenge viewers and make them think.

 

[Hivemind]

You didn't feel I was reducing Han by calling him a "cocky male"?

I didn't say Leia was ONLY a beautiful princess.

Cocky is a personality trait and one of the defining aspects of Han Solo's behavior. Princess is a title.

 

[MadDevil]

This is the same guy who says he loves Stars Wars, yet tears it down 4 or 5 times a week with his shitty takes. He's also the same guy who says he hated Andor because in the "REAL" Star Wars Universe, they don't use bricks.

Sadly being a whiny bitch drives more traffic and engagement and he sold out for that a long time ago.

And I'm not labeling anybody who is critical of Star Wars a whiny bitch, but what he does goes well beyond that.

 

[Hint1k]

Tell me what I am incorrect about

The knife scene.

The question of "Can the student-level assassin beat the master-level jedi?" isn't the point of the scene. The filmmakers weren't asking that because the answer is obvious - it's not possible.

- So what's the point of the battle scene?
- The filmmakers asked the viewer the question: "Did the assassin tell the truth? Is Indara a real jedi?"

- How does the viewer know if Indara is a jedi?
- The viewer should recall (or in this very scene get introduced to) the main feature of any jedi is to put the needs of others above their own, including sacrificing their own life. Words can't be evidence of this, the only acceptable evidence is action.

Indara is forced into an impossible situation for a normal human being. She has to die to prove she's a jedi.

This is similar to the first episode of The Witcher, where Renfri must die to prove to Geralt she's not a monster. There's a good chance the creators were inspired by the Witcher. As well as the movies like "House of Flying Daggers," "Hero," and "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon," setting up similar questions and answers.

So, when Indara faces the choice to help the bartender or herself, the question isn't whether she can do both. It's about whether she's a true jedi or not. Stopping both daggers proves nothing but her superior skill over student. By choosing to die protecting the other, she demonstrates she is a real jedi and ultimately wins the battle.

 

[Osprey]

I think one of the reasons medieval story telling endures is because of how gendered it is. Princesses in dresses, knights in shining armor, kings and queens. The setting allows for traditional gender roles, which I think most people enjoy in story context.

In modern Star Wars they're trying to create gender "equality", but I think it reduces both the masculinity and femininity of the characters (traditionally speaking), thus they become more bland. (Although I admit a coven of lesbian witches is pretty cool).

A cocky male and a beautiful princess are fun. I doubt Han or Leia could even be conceived of in modern SW.

I agree. Audiences want characters that they can relate to or aspire to be. I don't think that most women want female characters that act like men. They can't relate to that and that's not what they aspire to be. I think that they want them to be strong but still feminine, to show some vulnerability, grief, compassion and motherly instincts, for example, and to have a little romance. There's not much of any of that in modern Star Wars. I'm reading the Thrawn trilogy (from the 90s) and Leia is pregnant through much of it and able to communicate with her unborn twins through the Force, then gives birth and is very nurturing towards her newborns, even breastfeeding one at one point. It's beautiful to read and it struck me how you'd never see that today because we can't have traditional gender roles or female characters needing men (even for procreation, it turns out). They can't be feminine because that would make them seem weak and the male characters can't be masculine because that's toxic, so they all tend to be similar and less interesting, if not boring.

 

[HolyGhost]

I am hesitant. not a fan of some of the casting decisions

 

[Hint1k]

On the other hand, the jedi are shown to be intruding on their culture and way of life to strip them of their young under the false guise of giving them a choice to give consent. They're still fairly coercive and manipulative, at least with Osha, and ultimately their presence and intrusion is the triggering factor that leads to Mae burning it all down.

I do not think that is what happened. Well it is a theory territory, so it is all: "what if I would be a writer of the show after the original writers retired leaving me the script of the first 3 episodes". My plot would go like this: While there was a conflict between kids downstairs, there also was a conflict between adults upstairs. The conflict among witches. The two mothers represent two halves of the coven - the "evil" side wants to fight jedi and keep the kids, while the "good" side is for a peaceful resolution and let Osha go. The evil half won it by poisoning the good half. Then they attacked the jedi and were killed by jedi in self-defense. In my version of events the jedi would feel they are responsible, but not for the self-defense against the evil half, but because they were the reason of the conflict start and death of the good half.

I'm still willing to give the show the chance to deliver once the full product has been revealed

Exactly. The show writers already made a point not to explain what is going on until some time later. It is actually the most powerful movie making principle - "show it now, explain it later". The books on script writing often says that Matrix (master Indara says hi) is the perfect example of using this principle. The first half of the movie the viewers have no idea what is going on. Why? Because it is more interesting for the viewers when they got the explanation only when they start screaming: "what the hell is going on?!" instead of spoon feeding them in the beginning, when they are not engaged yet and do not care about the characters or the plot.

 

[Hasbro]

This is the same guy who says he loves Stars Wars, yet tears it down 4 or 5 times a week with his shitty takes. He's also the same guy who says he hated Andor because in the "REAL" Star Wars Universe, they don't use bricks.

Bricks?!

 

[Stylizer1]

I think one of the reasons medieval story telling endures is because of how gendered it is. Princesses in dresses, knights in shining armor, kings and queens. The setting allows for traditional gender roles, which I think most people enjoy in story context.

In modern Star Wars they're trying to create gender "equality", but I think it reduces both the masculinity and femininity of the characters (traditionally speaking), thus they become more bland. (Although I admit a coven of lesbian witches is pretty cool).

A cocky male and a beautiful princess are fun. I doubt Han or Leia could even be conceived of in modern SW.

So eloquently put.

 

[Stylizer1]

So, when Indara faces the choice to help the bartender or herself, the question isn't whether she can do both. It's about whether she's a true jedi or not. Stopping both daggers proves nothing but her superior skill over student. By choosing to die protecting the other, she demonstrates she is a real jedi and ultimately wins the battle.

Naw, poor writing. as a Jedi she should have been able to handle both situations with ease.

 

[Hint1k]

Naw, poor writing. as a Jedi she should have been able to handle both situations with ease.

Here is how your message looks like:

"My opinion is better than opinions of those professionals who won their jobs by competing with other professionals. They know less about writing scripts, then I do. It does not matter that I never read any books on writing, got no education in writing and no experience in writing scripts. I still know better, because it me, and not some other people."

If you do not want it to look like this, you need to bring some supporting evidence showing that you understand the subject you are talking about.

 

[Stylizer1]

Here is how your message looks like:

"My opinion is better than opinions of those professionals who won their jobs by competing with other professionals. They know less about writing scripts, then I do. It does not matter that I never read any books on writing, got no education in writing and no experience in writing scripts. I still know better, because it me, and not some other people."

If you do not want it to look like this, you need to bring some supporting evidence showing that you understand the subject you are talking about.

Have you ever hired a professional who did a shitty job? You can over analyze this all you want to appear that you have the definitive explanation on what is going on in other peoples minds but the end result won't change. This series is shit and Disney is shit.

 

[BrindamoursNose]

Let's take fire for example:

- What is the point of the fire scene?

- The point of the fire scene is to create a symbolic association in a viewer's mind between fire / danger / explosion and the main character's past. It is powerful way to visualize the incoming events before the viewer sees them. Fire is a common symbol in literature and cinematography for danger, destruction, and chaos. The whole technique is often called "foreshadowing".

- What the show writers wanted to achieve in making that association?

- It is a psychological trick. The human mind often dislikes things it is not familiar with. But it likes very much to recognize things it knows. So when the events happen, the viewer is tricked to recall them thanks to that association. It is very similar to the feeling of meeting an old friend.

- But the writers could have set the fire scene on the surface of the planet instead?

- Sure, that would be the most common way of doing it. Moving the fire scene to space is a more creative and thought-provoking way. And one of the main points of any art is to use creativity to challenge viewers and make them think.

Well I have to say I appreciate you expanding on your comments & injecting what looks to be a lot of time in film school. And I think you know what you're talking about. Seriously.

However, I don't think any of what you said landed with me and probably a lot of the audience. Whatever the intent was, I don't think the fire being a symbol of Osha's past really was significant to me (at least on a conscious level, that's for sure). And on the subconscious, I can't imagine it worked there either since it was made pretty clear quickly her past was checkered when she said she left being a Jedi to become a mechanic, which is a job droids do. And hooray - another force sensitive mechanic Jedi lady. What a fresh take.

Basically I'm just saying I think this is very high academic-critique, but its application is a big ol' whiff.

And I'll comment on the other post later but I have to go do something

 

[Sombastate]

Here is how your message looks like:

"My opinion is better than opinions of those professionals who won their jobs by competing with other professionals. They know less about writing scripts, then I do. It does not matter that I never read any books on writing, got no education in writing and no experience in writing scripts. I still know better, because it me, and not some other people."

If you do not want it to look like this, you need to bring some supporting evidence showing that you understand the subject you are talking about.

I’ve yet to watch this, and I’m using this thread to discern whether or not this is worth my limited time. But:

Apparently credentials matter so, as a published author, a full time musician who travels the world playing what I write, and as a person who has written for several larger acts, a fairly universal principle of writing is that if you have to explain to others why something is good, it’s probably not very good (exceptions to the rule obviously exist).

 

[Hint1k]

Have you ever hired a professional who did a shitty job? You can over analyze this all you want to appear that you have the definitive explanation on what is going on in other peoples minds but the end result won't change. This series is shit and Disney is shit.

you completely missing the point, I do not care about Disney. I do not talk to Disney I talk to you and I see that you have zero knowledge on the discussed subject. So I called your bs. Stop lying to me, mate.

 

[BrindamoursNose]

I’ve yet to watch this, and I’m using this thread to discern whether or not this is worth my limited time. But:

Apparently credentials matter so, as a published author, a full time musician who travels the world playing what I write, and as a person who has written for several larger acts, a fairly universal principle of writing is that if you have to explain to others why something is good, it’s probably not very good (exceptions to the rule obviously exist).

Really...this.

Like yeah it's cool if an Art of Film professor would give it high marks, but if your mass audience for this STAR WARS DISNEY film doesn't pick up on these things...then the Director/Writers have *completely* missed their target audience.

It doesn't become the audience's fault as a result.

 

[Hivemind]

Just reposting this again.

A member of the Jedi High Council getting killed by a couple blaster shots from someone standing perfectly still a few feet away from him.


The combat skills of Jedi have always been subject to the needs of the plot. Your internal head canon about Jedi being badasses all the time doesn't really hold true.

 

[BrindamoursNose]

Just reposting this again.

A member of the Jedi High Council getting killed by a couple blaster shots from someone standing perfectly still a few feet away from him.


The combat skills of Jedi have always been subject to the needs of the plot. Your internal head canon about Jedi being badasses all the time doesn't really hold true.

Yeah, it was dumb then as well. Doesn't mean it isn't incredibly stupid when it happened in The Acolyte.

Everything is subject to the needs of the plot. Doesn't need to be said.

 

[Hivemind]

Yeah, it was dumb then as well. Doesn't mean it isn't incredibly stupid when it happened in The Acolyte.

Everything is subject to the needs of the plot. Doesn't need to be said.

The point is that Jedi have died from shit way lamer than a dagger toss while saving an innocent civilian all the time. This is just one example. Why are people just now getting mad over something that has been a frequent part of Star Wars? It's just another example of the manufactured outrage, along the lines of how Star Wars has flames, audible sounds, and gravity in space.

It's always been like that, why is it suddenly an issue in The Acolyte?

Answer: it's because people are just looking for reasons to hate this show

 

[BrindamoursNose]

The point is that Jedi have died from shit way lamer than a dagger toss while saving an innocent civilian all the time. This is just one example. Why are people just now getting mad over something that has been a frequent part of Star Wars? It's just another example of the manufactured outrage, along the lines of how Star Wars has flames, audible sounds, and gravity in space.

It's always been like that, why is it suddenly an issue in The Acolyte?

Answer: it's because people are just looking for reasons to hate this show

Well not really. That was a blaster shot from probably the best bouny hunter in the galaxy at the time - a true Mandalorian warrior in Jango Fett, while staring down Count Dooku whom was right there of course. A bit more significant than a sneaky dagger from this evil twin person.

The difference, ultimately, is that this stupid Jedi master who was killed by Jango wasn't relevant to anything. People exclusively knew him as "stupid Jedi killed immediately by Jango" and nothing else.

Indirra (spelled right?) is a core character, as we've learned. The scale is totally different when it comes to expectations. No matter what happens with her moving forward, barring this being the most special dagger in the world, I will forever think she died like a total chump for a character that is supposed to be meaningful to the story.

The sounds, flames, etc. in outer space is stupid stuff fans only add because they don't like the overall product, but you're right that those things are really nitpicky. But major characters dying/how they die *is* important.

And there's a lot of reasons to dislike this show. We can't pretend it's been Mandalorian S1 or anything.

 

[Osprey]

Fake beards are almost always bad looking, but that fake beard was comically bad. Looked like something from an SNL costume.

Star Wars has always had fake beards. Your internal head canon about characters having real beards all the time doesn't really hold true. Why are you only now getting mad about something that's been a frequent part of Star Wars? It's just another example of manufactured outrage because you're looking for reasons to hate this show.

Seriously, you don't need to repeatedly point out when something that people are criticizing has been in Star Wars before. That doesn't mean that they can't criticize it now. Now, if people actually suggest that it's never happened before (like Jedi never being killed in an embarrassing fashion or Star Wars never showing open flames in space) or that it wasn't dumb in the past, then sure, go right ahead and correct them on that, but you're only assuming those things so far.