Hate on what you Love. Let's air our grievances.
-
@Planguy said in Hate on what you Love. Let's air our grievances.:
The sequel trilogy being deconstructions are destructive to what Star Wars is supposed to be, and damaging to them being popular.
I feel like you're trying to demonstrate my point. All you're saying is that you found them antithetical to what Star Wars means to you personally. That's fine. You don't have to like them.
I was really happy with the first movie because unlike the prequels it once again felt like a Star Wars movie to me. I watched it once, I enjoyed it, and then I didn't think about it again until the next movie came out.
Both the Original Trilogy and the Prequel Trilogy have had a mark on the popular consciousness. Who talks about the Sequel Trilogy?
That remains to be seen. When the prequels came out, they were also widely panned. Based on your statement it's not clear why the prequels were noteworthy in a way that the sequels are not. But to me, the fan reaction feels identical.
Incidentally, it was in the prequel timeframe that I came to realize how annoying I found the Star Wars fanbase.
In fairness, I will say that we live in a much more cynical time and the entertainment landscape is more saturated than ever. If they have less impact that may have something to do with it. I can't see my daughter rewatching Star Wars, or any other movie, like I used to because she just has so many more choices at the push of a button.
-
In regard to Star Wars trilogies: There can only be one.
-
@Geezer-Weasalopes Ironically enough, that is also true of Highlander movies...
@unknownmat Thinking about it... Now, this is just my guess (since we're not nearly far enough from the sequel trilogy's releases to know how they'll go down in history), but:
The Force Awakens was a perfectly serviceable film, but as many people noted at the time, it was basically a remake of A New Hope but with better effects and a worse main cast. The Last Jedi spent more effort tearing down previous additions to the series than adding new ones... though again, entertaining enough to watch, even if it doesn't fit with the rest of the series very well. Rise of Skywalker was a mess.
Now, for the prequel trilogy. It brings a very different-feeling setting to the other two - the Jedi Order and Republic still exist, and the heroes are the defenders of the central government trying to stop the rebellion against it. Its the only trilogy where the central character is an actual fully trained Jedi; the only trilogy with more than one jedi in the primary cast; the only trilogy where a romance is one of the main plots instead of a side plot. The down side? The overall films were, for the most part, not good.
But when it comes down to which of them will go down in pop culture... I would say that the prequel trilogy has the better chance. It had a few scenes that were genuine highlights of the series (like the Obi-Wan/Qui-Gon vs Darth Maul fight on Naboo), a couple of the series' best characters (Obi-Wan and Palpatine in their primes), and... a load of rubbish surrounding the good bits. (I certainly don't blame you for giving up in Attack of the Clones.)
But its the extremes that tend to get remembered. Both the good ones and the bad ones. When it comes to your place in pop culture, the worst thing you can be isn't bad, or even boring - its bland.
The sequel trilogy was two bland films (one good, one bad) sandwiching one that seems to have wandered in from the wrong series. Maybe Last Jedi goes down in pop culture like the prequels eventually did, but Abrams' two films likely won't.
-
@kuali said in Hate on what you Love. Let's air our grievances.:
But its the extremes that tend to get remembered. Both the good ones and the bad ones. When it comes to your place in pop culture, the worst thing you can be isn't bad, or even boring - its bland
I can see that. It's perfectly plausible that the sequels were just too bland to become the cultural milestones that the older movies were.
It's really hard to judge the originals in today's terms because they did have such a cultural impact. Not only does this affect the way that people perceive the movies when rewatching them (with a huge dollop of nostalgia), but it also means that every movie released subsequently had Star Wars as source material to borrow from. It is almost nonsensical to speak about how we might perceive Star Wars if it were released for the first time today, because the movie landscape without Star Wars would have been a very different one.
The prequels are notable perhaps for how disappointing they were. There was a huge backlash against Jar Jar and the kid Anakin (ruined the poor kid's life, incidentally - fuck that toxicity). And by that standard, I agree that the sequels are pretty milqetoast as movies, but still better than the prequels.
That said, it wouldn't surprise me if there are middle-school-aged children out there to whom the sequels were their first introduction to the Star Wars universe, and they may very well grow up with the same love for the sequels that I had for the originals. I similarly know people who grew up on the prequels and who like them just fine..
-
@Travis-Butler That's fine. We are allowed to have different opinions thankfully. Though in Henrietta's case I would call it teasing. We tease people because we like something about them, and because we know it bothers them.
So calling her sadistic for what she's doing would make most people sadistic. Definitely a lot of characters in anime, LN's and manga. The characters that teases other characters because they are bothered by it is basically a trope. So don't you think calling her sadistic is going a bit far?
Sadism or everyday sadism (which is the subclinical term) refers to experiencing pleasure in seeing others suffer or inflicting suffering on others. Sadistic individuals enjoy cruelty and seek opportunities to induce suffering upon others
But if we take all this literally, then 99% of the human population is sadistic. We all enjoy making fun of friends, teasing them and such. Because we know it bothers them so much. But do we truly enjoy their pain and suffering? Does Henrietta truly enjoy watching Akatsuki writhe in pain and filled with suffering?
But I guess it's simply in the eye of the beholder. We do forgive actions easier based on how much we like a person. Basically we judge them based on our likes and/or dislikes. I like her, so I see her actions is a much nicer light.
You might see it differently.
-
@killerrin said in Hate on what you Love. Let's air our grievances.:
And it's like "FFS Dude, just stand up for yourself. You don't have to put up with this. If they truly loved you, they wouldn't be trying to change you. Have some self respect."
Eeeeh. Yes and no? I get the whole concept of "loving me as who I am" but that's an idealistic view of love imo. And has little to do with the real world. We all expect people to change once we are in a relationship. We expect them to stop being flirty with others for one. We expect them to stop seeing others behind our back for second. And these are just two extremely basic things I think we all expect our partners to change about themselves once we are in a relationship.
I liked this article I once found. So I'll copy paste a paragraph. I like saving stuff like this that has interesting topics.
At this point, the Greek idea of love turns to a notion to which we desperately need to rehabilitate ourselves: education. For the Greeks, given that we are all very imperfect, part of what it means to deepen love is to want to teach – and to be taught. Two people should see a relationship as a constant opportunity to improve and be improved. When lovers teach each other uncomfortable truths, they are not giving up on love. They are trying to do something very true to love: which is to make their partners more loveable.
We should stop feeling guilty for simply wanting to change our partners, and we should never resent our partners for simply wanting to change us. Both these projects are, in theory, highly legitimate, even necessary. The desire to put one’s lover right is, in fact, utterly loyal to the essential task of love – to help another person to become the best version of themselves.
https://www.theschooloflife.com/article/if-you-loved-me-you-wouldnt-want-to-change-me/
You can read more if you care at all.
-
@KopiCAT everything you wrote is an example of healthy change, which is not only perfectly fine, but expected. And when it's used properly elevates a relationship in both real life and fiction. Healthy change is a give/take scenario.
I'm talking more of the unhealthy variety where it's completely one-sided. The unhealthy relationship in a "romance" where it being unhealthy doesn't really play into the story being told. For example a character has an otherwise healthy hobby, but they're told they should never do it again because of flimsy reasons. Maybe the character reads manga or builds models, but the love interest throws out all of their books/models with an excuse of it being childish while the protagonist just shrugs it off.
So, to put it another way. Just the unhealthy relationship that nobody acknowledges as being unhealthy, and it doesn't play into the story with the characters trying to move past it
-
@killerrin Ah yeah that makes sense. And I too hate MCs who just sits there and takes it. I hate tsundere characters, but I hate the male leads even more when they interact with the stereotypical violent tsundere. Because they never say anything about the violence. They just agree everything is always their own fault.
-
@KopiCAT said in Hate on what you Love. Let's air our grievances.:
@Travis-Butler That's fine. We are allowed to have different opinions thankfully. Though in Henrietta's case I would call it teasing. We tease people because we like something about them, and because we know it bothers them.
All I can say is that you must have had a very different life experience than I had. I went through two different periods of teasing - grade/middle school and mid-30s workplace - and neither one was benign, both were malicious and yes, sadistic.
To give an example of the latter, one of the people responsible also liked to 'tease' one of our office ladies - in her 50's - with jokes about taking out her dentures and giving him a "gum job". That's not all in good fun - that's vicious, that's nasty, and it's way beyond any kind of civilized behavior.
So I have a bit of a thing about teasing. It can be benign. It can also go way beyond that into taking joy at making others suffer, and that's sadism, pure and simple.
Henrietta absolutely takes it that far with Akatsuki.
So calling her sadistic for what she's doing would make most people sadistic. Definitely a lot of characters in anime, LN's and manga. The characters that teases other characters because they are bothered by it is basically a trope. So don't you think calling her sadistic is going a bit far?
Not in the slightest.
Sadism or everyday sadism (which is the subclinical term) refers to experiencing pleasure in seeing others suffer or inflicting suffering on others. Sadistic individuals enjoy cruelty and seek opportunities to induce suffering upon others.
Yes. And that describes Henrietta's behavior towards Akatsuki to a 'T'. She knows Akatsuki hates being used as a dress-up doll, that it humiliates and frightens her. And Henrietta seeks out opportunities to do it. She's outright ecstatic at the chance, and follows it up with head pats and other infantilizing humiliations.
Her relationship with Shiro is a lot healthier, but there are still moments when she takes glee in poking at one of his weaknesses.
This stands out to me because in most ways, I actually like Henrietta. She's smart, hard-working, and has it together in most situations. I sympathize with her occasional frustrations in dealing with Marielle, and recognize the friendship that keeps things going there in spite of the frustration. That just makes it even more annoying when she acts like a predatory asshole.
-
@Travis-Butler More like I have grown a thick skin. Once you get over spending years considering suicide, you kinda stop caring. And once it stops bothering you, as a survival mechanic, you stop seeing it as a problem. Because if I didn't start thinking like that, I doubt I'd still be alive.
So no, I probably didn't have that different an experience from you, I just changed in a different way.
I mean, if grade/middle school and mid 30s, you are luckier then me. I lived with it since second grade all the way up til my early 30s.
Edit; So in the end, I think I'll just agree to disagree. I see no maliciousness in her actions at all. All I see is friendly teasing. The same way me and my friends make fun of each other all the time.
-
@KopiCAT I think the tsundere trope is kind of dangerous, in a RL sense. While you may find a real life tsundere, is it really something you would want? Someone who is always ragging on you in public? And how would you tell the difference between a tsundere and a girl who actually hates you? Do you have to wait until she calls the cops on you? Complains to your boss or the school's admin? Best to avoid a girl who acts like that, it could save you a lot of heartache in the future.
-
@Folker46 Since I've never liked the tsundere trope to being with, I don't disagree with that.
-
Pet peeves. Cities with walls around them but no farmland, and why is the forest right next to the town? Wouldn't it have all been cleared when they built it?
Adventure guilds in big cities that send people on fetch quests where the forest is right next to town. Wouldn't that kind of work already be done by the town's poor people? Any forest would have been cleared to build housing, for farms, and firewood.
Most LN authors spend no time thinking of travel distances and how hard it would be to go long distances. Let alone understanding wagons and how many horses you would need. Adventure guilds should be on the outer edges of an Empire, not right in the middle of one!
Hair. The men never talk about how hard it is to shave with a knife or wash their hair, let alone how hairy the women would get. (eww!)
-
To have a specific hate, I think bookworm just lost me.
Great world and protagonist, but the way it handles villains is pretty consistently atrocious and it's inability to properly handle certain side characters is so very alienating (looking at you, treatment of Wil and his retainers both in the general narrative and specific events).
It started with the awful women (always women somehow) from ahrensbach, and it's only gotten worse as the series has aged.
Logic is out, Unreasonableness is in!
-
@Windsagio said in Hate on what you Love. Let's air our grievances.:
awful women (always women somehow) from ahrensbach
I don't deny that it's got an abnormal amount of women villains, but Count Bindewald says it's not always women there. Gerlach and Bezewanst are also of Ahrensbach descent and are aligned there politically, but those are certainly more edge cases.
-
@GeorgeMTO Oh totally. The villians in general are of much poorer quality than the setting or the main cast. Just the women are sustained and particularly poorly characterized (most of the male villians have essentially no characterization at all, which is frankly an improvement).
-
@Windsagio see, always found them very believable. They all come from the same family, and there is a clear cycle of abuse. Veronica discarded Georgine, causing Georgine to resent Sylvester. Georgine never forgave him, and she tried to gain as much power as possible in Ahrensbach. Everyone was treated as a tool, but she still never let go of her resentment for Ehrenfest, her mother and her brother. She was abusive to her own children in her quest for power, and she looked down on Delitinde. I think she also associates her daughter with her mother, which affected their relationship.
I do see where your coming from, and I saw it the same way before. But I do feel that Georgine's back story and influence explains a lot.
-
@Windsagio I have a lot of problems with bookworm. Magic as an evil force that devourers people souls? The MC (and the views) can hear the girl whose body she is in dying as her soul is destroyed. As a viewer I feel nothing but horror and dislike for the show from the start.
The way the nobility and the church view magic are also weird, they see it as a gift from the Gods but also restricted it to themselves, like they have some divine right to it. While commoners who have the "gift" are allowed to die or must serve as slaves of the nobility. I can understand why the MC doesn't react to this immoral setup, she's powerless to change it, but it still rubs me the wrong way.
Why I never really enjoyed the series, I hate the world the MC has to live in. -
Something that's been bothering me with Ascendance of a Bookworm is just how much the narrative has slowed to a crawl. Sure, there are a lot of things happening, but it feels like we can go an entire volume worth of narrative dealing with other things before we get one chapter on a given thread.
It's... frustrating to read. Payouts happen so far apart in reading time that they end up not being satisfying, and often we don't even get them at all! (I really wish we'd seen that conversation from that recent short story, but alas, we can only imagine how that went)
I'm invested, and I want to know what happens, but I wonder if I'd enjoyed it better if I had waited until it was completed and I could have binged my way through.
-
@Folker46 said in Hate on what you Love. Let's air our grievances.:
Magic as an evil force that devourers people souls? The MC (and the views) can hear the girl whose body she is in dying as her soul is destroyed. As a viewer I feel nothing but horror and dislike for the show from the start.
While you are free to interpret that scene how you like...
