I'll assume you're American. You're demonstrating 100% of anti-union propaganda. YOU HAVE NO CLUE WHAT A UNION IS.
And no, you don't have "two bosses", moron.
All caps yelling and name calling tells me all I need to know about you.
Critic reviews suggest it's not a bad movie at all, but I'll wait for it to come on streaming.
It might be a wonderful film. But relating to what I said, I'm not going to see it.
There have been some duds from Disney, like most of The Mandalorian after season 1, Book of Boba Fett, Ahsoka... Giving the fans what they claim to want is usually a recipe for disaster, and it shows with those.
The critic/fans I follow. were liking Mandalorian 1 Didn't like the book of Boba Fett, and were mixed on Ahsoka, a number said it was walking, walking, walking, and thought Rosario Dawson as Ahsoka was okay except that the fight scenes seemed too choreographed and slow. I know a lot of Fans were looking forward to Ahsoka were looking forward to that adaptation, since there wouldn't be sex or race swapping, Which when a person knows the story, it would be admittedly annoying to have, say Stephen Colbert cast as Ahsoka.
But also the fans for SW (and at least half the Trek fans) are extremely toxic and tend to ruin anything that is actually good.
If fans ruin any thing that is actually good, perhaps the SW and Trek universes should go away. And don't forget Tolkien's army of fans, some who have dedicated their academic lives to the study of his writings. Some people say the Tolkien scholar who quit on the Amazon LOTR prequel, saying that they were not respecting the material was toxic.
Andor seems to be an exception, but Acolyte was actually a decent idea, and Last Jedi was probably the only hope the franchise had of moving forward.
I've noted in here that I could have written a good SW version of "The Acolyte" using the premise of lesbian space witches. What was provided was pretty dull stuff.
It's like Meyer said around the time he did Wrath of Khan. The fans don't know what they want until you give it to them. On paper that movie should have sucked - Very little fan service, a sequel to a TV show episode, beloved characters make mistakes or die, Kirk has a son out of nowhere, it's a submarine thriller in space... But it works really, really well. If it was released today, the internet would get wind of Kirk needing glasses, and spend the year leading up to release panning it as the worse thing ever, an insult to their intelligence, not understanding Trek at all, and generally trying to destroy it in every way possible.
I will note that you apparently believe that fans of SW and ST want to have something they loved torn down and destroyed. I think that is odd.
Wrath of Kahn has some things that a lot of modern movies don't have. A good story line, the main characters are aging, but that process is incorporated into the story line, not put there to "subvert expectations". By the time WoK came out, a lot of the 60's fans were going through a bit go aging on their own. It had a conflict, a historical one to boot, as the aging enemies fought one another, Kahn with his incredible intelligence, Kirk with his experience.
And here is something most people overlook. Lighting and sound. Even back in the original ST, they understood lighting. In some of the new stuff, they appear to be stuck in dramatic mode.
Audio - this is a problem with movies in general today. Sound effects way too intense. Foley artists appear to rule the studio. And the dynamic range thing, they are intent at having a conversation almost at the threshold of hearing, followed by an incredibly loud sound. I cannot watch movies with sound in the evening after my wife has gone to bed. I have to put on closed captioning.
Well, if you're not a Star Wars fan (I know Star Trek fans are Trekkies, what are Star Wars fans? Warries?), what're you doing on this post?
Well yes, I would be a trekkie. I don't know what starwars fans are, maybe jedists? But what got my interest in this story is the fact that Disney lost to not one but TWO indie films, despite how much they spent on the movie. Shit, they probably exceeded the budgets of both films combined on just marketing and promoting their movie.
Having said that, I don't believe "loud, annoying and stupid" is a valid reason to report somebody. If it was, I'd have done it already.
And the South Park guys had their own take on JarJar:
It's reasonable to ban assault rifles because they serve no real purpose. Well, aside from making little boys with penis envy feel a little better about themselves.
The term assault rifle is a useless term and has no meaningful definition anymore.
Many people think the definition is you can bolt a scope to the barrel, or the gun is black, scary, whatever.
It is, and has been for for almost a century, illegal for an average citizen to own a weapon that is capable of firing more than one round per trigger pull. That is the true definition of assault rifle. What people talk about now is banning weapons that resemble assault weapons, but are only capable of firing one round per trigger pull.
33 out of how many people? I think you'll find the percentage is quite small.
Being pardoned for an illegal parading conviction does not make someone more inclined to commit other, non-parading related offenses.
But when Iran takes over. They'll have a list of people to go after.
They already do, and they do go after them. (Hello, "largest state sponsor of terrorism"?)
What if it was? Are you assuming facial recognition was the sole evidence used against her? I suspect the German authorities had her fingerprints and other compelling evidence, the Facial Recognition by the journalist merely gave them something to investigate.
What multiple of that 13 year sentence should the journalist get for violating the privacy of that poor terrorist?
Please explain, specifically, how the "poor terrorist" had her privacy "violated"?
Did the terrorist place cameras in her home, or rely on existing footage from security cameras or deploy their own cameras IN PUBLIC SPACES?
Is there some right not to be recognized in public? In Germany? By a private citizen?
Did the journalist have her arrested by journalists, taken to journalist prison, and tried in journalist court? No. The journalist said "I think she's someone you are looking for" and the police, using all the legal means at their disposal investigated, arrested, tried her and secured a conviction.
If the tip was wrong, if the police turned up no connection/evidence, what would be the problem?
Did the journalist go to police first and not publish until confirmed, or did the journalist publish first, then go to the police - the last one is bad, the first I'm OK with.
In case you're too young to remember, this is kinda how we found lots of former Nazis a (actual Nazis, not just folks that didn't vote for Harris in 2024) - survivors would "recognize" their "faces" walking around town and tell the authorities.
It was OK then, and it's OK now, even with a little help from Facial Recognition.
Does either option mitigate or magnify her earlier crimes?
The journalist gave a tip to the police, the police followed up, and secured a (presumably) evidence-based conviction.
What exactly is the problem?
If you tie the hands of law enforcement, and you take issue with private citizens employing effective tools privately, you are making it much easier for criminals to escape justice.
So, you're not reporting them, not emailing admins... but, you're trying to call them out as being equals as far as Jar Jar's stupidity... drinkypoo is much more intelligent than that.
Why exactly would someone "report" Drinkypoo?
He annoys some people. So do I. So does Armored Dragon, and ahem, you post ain't sunshine and puppy dogs. No one is doing anything that would get them kicked or even a stern talking to.
Relax a little, maybe enjoy an adult beverage or herb of your liking. Thoughts and prayers!
George Lucas said he was supposed to be the comic relief character. Outside of that, the character is pointless. The problem is he wasn't funny, he was just an annoying CG version of drinkypoo.
Sonavabeotch, you owe me a new keyboard, man! My soda went all over it when I read that.
+5 for making me snort! 8^)
Disney isn't going to let anyone do stuff with Star Wars or any of their properties. Same thing with Bond, now that Amazon owns it all.
Star Wars should've ended with the McGregor/Jackson ones (and, most definitely not had JarJar, or rewrote 'who shot first').
I think that the core problem is that Disney is a terrible fit for Star Wars in any form.
Star Wars was Space Cowboy Epic,
Disney excels at making Disney Princesses.
Both are legitimate, but it is really difficult to make a space cowboy movie when your talent is princesses.
Now that Hollywood has calcified into old-guard money and thinking, YouTube has become a great laboratory for filmmakers to hone their craft. Perhaps Disney will let a YouTube director have a crack at the next Star Wars movie?
You are correct, Youtube doesn't have teh present day constraints Disney does.
As for allowing a Youtuber get involved, maybe. After all they put Harvey Weinstein's secretary with no experience direct "The Acolyte" flop, so if a Youtuber with the proper political beliefs who is willing to take on the fans surfaces, they might just hire them.
A triangle which has an angle of 135 degrees is called an obscene triangle.
