3 ms·
How so? To me it seems like the exact opposite of what's happened with Star Wars in the last 20 years. 538 was purchased and then left to wither and die where
by superfrank 5mo ago
How so? To me it seems like the exact opposite of what's happened with Star Wars in the last 20 years.
538 was purchased and then left to wither and die where as Disney seems intent on squeezing every last penny from the Star Wars franchise by using the IP as much as possible
- SilverElfin 5mo agoDisney removed a lot of the earlier IP from the official Star Wars storyline shortly after acquiring it. That IP was much better than the complete mess and politicization of Star Wars that happened in the sequels. Sure they are trying to squeeze money out of it - and maybe some of the TV shows are tolerable - but they killed the brand and its best content in the process.
- wredcoll 5mo agoGood point, Star Wars was famously not about politics. Very apolitical.
- teddyh 5mo agoThe politics of the original trilogy Star Wars was essentially “dictators and fascists with big armies are bad”. It was naïve and simplistic; a simple storytelling device, nothing more. There was no conscious choice behind it. If it had been made 40 years earlier, the enemies would have been savage indigenous people, as was the style at the time. The politics of modern Star Wars are… specific. Pointed. Winking at the camera. I suspect they may not age well.
- hobofan 5mo agoThe Viet Cong parallels in the original Star Wars about as much "winking at the camera" as current Star Wars is to current politics.
- teddyh 5mo agoWhat Viet Cong parallels? Whatever you mean, it can’t have been very visible to the audience, since clear Viet Cong sympathies would not have gone over well (at least not universally) in 1977-1983.
- slg 5mo agoThis 3 minute clip of a conversation between George Lucas and James Cameron might help. https://youtube.com/watch?v=fv9Jq_mCJEo https://youtube.com/watch?v=fv9Jq_mCJEo
- teddyh 5mo ago“Not available in your country.” But what George Lucas claims to have thought (now many years later), is essentially irrelevant. What matters is how audiences interpret the movies when watching them, both at the time and now. If, as I strongly suspect, essentially nobody saw clear Viet Cong sympathies in the original trilogy, then the modern Star Wars differs significantly. And this is my point. The politics of the original trilogy was cookie-cutter, incidental, and unimportant, whereas much of the modern Star Wars has political creeds, obvious symbolism and grandstanding all over the place, front and center. You may (or may not) agree with the politics of the new Star Wars, but you can’t deny that they are different.
- slg 5mo agoYou said “There was no conscious choice behind it” and here is the creator telling you the choice was intentional from the start. Some people simply can’t admit they are wrong.
- teddyh 5mo ago1. I can’t watch the video, as I said. 2. I actually don’t believe whatever George Lucas claims, many years later, to have had in mind at the time. Creators in general are known for not always being truthful in these matters, and mostly just going “yes, exactly, that is what I really meant” when fans come up with and present their complex theories many years later. 3. However, it does not matter what George Lucas thought or intended. What matters is how audiences interpreted it. Most people, both then and now, do not see any clear Viet Cong sympathies in the original trilogies. Ergo, the politics of the original trilogies was different, since most people do see the heavy-handed symbolism in today’s Star Wars. But I guess some people simply can’t read what I write.
- mholm 5mo agoContent quality and content monetization are very different. The EU had exceptionally low monetization and brand recognition.
- SilverElfin 5mo agoThey removed a lot of first party content too like the video games. But it almost doesn’t matter what was removed. The sequels and many of the shows were worse than all of it.