- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 8/22/24 at 7:03 pm to Corinthians420
No, as usual you have to make straw men and ad hominem attacks because you can’t make arguments. Clone Wars is fine as a children’s cartoon but if you view it as part of the cinematic timeline it’s fanfic level quality.
Posted on 8/22/24 at 7:06 pm to Madking
quote:
if you view it as part of the cinematic timeline
It IS part of the cinematic timeline, George Lucas created it and he makes that determination, not you. This isn't a difficult concept.
I don't need great graphics to enjoy a story. Do you even read books?
Posted on 8/22/24 at 7:08 pm to Corinthians420
It is long form storytelling, the movies are the highlights. There is plenty of room to enjoy both.
Posted on 8/22/24 at 7:08 pm to Corinthians420
You know that isn’t true and you know that I know it isn’t so why even try that BS? Do you ever make a constructive post? Do you ever forward, add light or color to a discussion? No, all you do is shill, even for things you haven’t seen.
Posted on 8/22/24 at 7:13 pm to Madking
I am explaining how storytelling works to you.
In the Star Wars universe we didn't get the nuts and bolts of the clone wars until the series came out AFTER the Clone Wars movie.
The movie is the highlights of the war, but it isn't the entire story. There is always room to go back and fill in details afterwards.
Tolkien did it with the Silmarillion, GRRM did it with A World of Ice and Fire and Fire & Blood and also Dunk & Egg.
A story is never truly finished.
In the Star Wars universe we didn't get the nuts and bolts of the clone wars until the series came out AFTER the Clone Wars movie.
The movie is the highlights of the war, but it isn't the entire story. There is always room to go back and fill in details afterwards.
Tolkien did it with the Silmarillion, GRRM did it with A World of Ice and Fire and Fire & Blood and also Dunk & Egg.
A story is never truly finished.
Posted on 8/22/24 at 7:14 pm to Roaad
I last read the Hobbit about 3 years ago. I haven't watched or read any of the Lord of the Rings content in probably a decade, but I'm pretty sure there is unexplored regions or stories to tell.
I mean it doesn't sound like they are taking Aragorn's reign as king and suddenly pretending like some previously unmentioned female was actually the one leading the military and making all the decisions that Aragorn just benefitted from. That's some Star Wars shite right there.
I mean it doesn't sound like they are taking Aragorn's reign as king and suddenly pretending like some previously unmentioned female was actually the one leading the military and making all the decisions that Aragorn just benefitted from. That's some Star Wars shite right there.
Posted on 8/22/24 at 7:14 pm to Corinthians420
I agree and that’s what Disney should’ve been doing this whole time but instead we get trash.
Posted on 8/22/24 at 7:23 pm to ThoseGuys
quote:No.
I mean it doesn't sound like they are taking Aragorn's reign as king and suddenly pretending like some previously unmentioned female was actually the one leading the military and making all the decisions that Aragorn just benefitted from.
They are taking a key figure in the War, sidelining him for a lady created for the series (for all intents and purposes).
there is some leeway, sure. But the odds on them not screwing things up is insurmountable.
Hollywood already tried with Rings of Power and Star Wars. Just because you are going 100-200 years before events, doesn't mean you can't irreparably damage established lore. . .looking at RoP and Acolyte
Posted on 8/22/24 at 7:24 pm to Madking
If a movie came out today with this as a poster for it, the same people would be complaining about girl boss. I know we have hindsight so we can pretend we wouldn't, but come on.
Posted on 8/22/24 at 7:37 pm to ThoseGuys
quote:
(This is not directed at any one poster. I responded to the last post on the thread. I am asking this question to the number of posters on here who typically have complained about too many girl bosses.)
Fair enough
quote:
So for people saying "girl boss!", is it because we know the movie will be about the female and she will fight? Like people love Ripley from Alien and she was kind of a girl boss. Same with the Bride from Kill Bill. So explain the reasoning for me here on why this is a hard pass because 'girl'.
For me, simply. The way she is presented in the trailer is exactly how all the girl boss movies have been the last decade. We had the, she has no say crap in her marriage. The father yelling at her she does not understand about war; but she is a shield maiden. Blah Blah. She would have trained for war all her life, her father would not think in those terms. None of these tropes are present in Tolkin's characters. These characters, in the trailer, do not acted in the manner or style of what Tolken wrote. It is these common subtly, vailed feminist tropes that have become so tiresome and why people say it has a girl boss feel.
quote:
If a movie came out today with this as a poster for it, the same people would be complaining about girl boss. I know we have hindsight so we can pretend we wouldn't, but come on.
That is from Aliens. Ripley has already been an established character that acted within the scope of her arch. Given you had Alien that established Ripley, I dare say you would not have that critism. With Ripley they did not try to rip off Tolken and turn one of his characters into a girl boss like Guyladrial.
This post was edited on 8/22/24 at 7:42 pm
Posted on 8/22/24 at 7:45 pm to ThoseGuys
Like Atomic Blonde? Which I love. “Pretend” was a good choice because that’s what you’re doing.
Posted on 8/22/24 at 7:56 pm to ThoseGuys
quote:You are reaching
If a movie came out today with this as a poster for it, the same people would be complaining about girl boss.
We were fine with Gadot's Wonder Woman, so. . .
Posted on 8/22/24 at 8:02 pm to FreddieMac
Anyone calling Ripley a girlboss can be ignored.
She gets her arse kicked throughout 99% of both movies, and takes orders from male characters who are more capable. She has to be saved by men on numerous occasions. She doesn't diminish heroic male characters in order to shine. She is never seen outperforming her gender's physical limitations to also diminish male heroic characters.
I am struggling to see how she is a girlboss.
Do they think a "girlboss" is just a female protagonist?
If so. . .
She gets her arse kicked throughout 99% of both movies, and takes orders from male characters who are more capable. She has to be saved by men on numerous occasions. She doesn't diminish heroic male characters in order to shine. She is never seen outperforming her gender's physical limitations to also diminish male heroic characters.
I am struggling to see how she is a girlboss.
Do they think a "girlboss" is just a female protagonist?
If so. . .
Posted on 8/22/24 at 8:16 pm to Roaad
My argument was that I feel like any time a trailer shows a female in certain light, people cry girl boss. I used a picture that I felt if people saw out of context would make leaping conclusions.
Again the trailer is 2 minutes. She does not have any real action scene until near the very end. We are making assumptions about the character and the movie based on other separate projects. FreddieMac at least listed points he saw in the trailer that make him feel this way. Some where more valid than others, but he didn't just blanket statement "Hollywood bad!" as some are quick to do here.
Again the trailer is 2 minutes. She does not have any real action scene until near the very end. We are making assumptions about the character and the movie based on other separate projects. FreddieMac at least listed points he saw in the trailer that make him feel this way. Some where more valid than others, but he didn't just blanket statement "Hollywood bad!" as some are quick to do here.
Posted on 8/22/24 at 8:17 pm to Corinthians420
quote:
So you realize how dumb this sounds?
The Silmarillion covers over 6,000 years. It's impossible to cover every meaningful person born in a 6,000 year period.
This isn’t the Silmarillion. This isn’t going back 6000 years before the fall of Barad-dûr. We are talking about events, roughly 250 years prior to the battle of Helm’s Deep. (The Two Towers)
Helm had 2 sons.
And a daughter.
CHILDREN
Háma
Haleth
Unnamed daughter
Was she simply not important? Didn’t do anything of significance? Maybe too young at the passing of Helm. Or died as an infant? Was she a half sister, born to another woman? Did Tolkien just not get around to naming her or listing her accomplishments?
What really is dumb is getting Peter Jackson and others who are supremely talented in bringing to life characters from middle earth and wasting it on making a movie centered on some unnamed daughter of Helm Hammerhand, and not the King himself.
Posted on 8/22/24 at 8:21 pm to FreddieMac
Ok fair point about it being from Aliens and we already established her character. How about the trailer from Kill Bill? If you watched that, are you going to tell me people on here wouldn't complain about the girl boss?
Posted on 8/22/24 at 8:27 pm to Roaad
Ripleys main trait is that she’s a survivor not some Mary Sue, man posing as a woman like today’s female leads are written.
Posted on 8/22/24 at 8:31 pm to SouthEasternKaiju
quote:
Was she simply not important? Didn’t do anything of significance? Maybe too young at the passing of Helm. Or died as an infant? Was she a half sister, born to another woman? Did Tolkien just not get around to naming her or listing her accomplishments?
Perhaps they just wanted to maintain the characters/deeds that Tolkien has already written of?
By taking an unnamed character they can create a story that fits within the universe's gaps, while maintaining Tolkien's story.
Tolkien covered the lives of Hama and Haleth in the appendices more extensively so there are less gaps to fill.
But we get it, you don't like the new movie. it's ok, we know you'll be back to tell us how much it sucks in the next thread.
This post was edited on 8/22/24 at 9:13 pm
Posted on 8/22/24 at 8:45 pm to ThoseGuys
quote:
If you watched that, are you going to tell me people on here wouldn't complain about the girl boss?
I could maybe see that, but again, the tropes are not in the trailer.
Page 3 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News