Star Wars: The Force Awakens - Official Teaser Trailer #2

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm simply saying I don't see the problem with it. I don't think it paints either sex in any kind of particular or negative light and I wasn't saying the Star Wars scene is bad, just similar. It's a more traditional way of writing, I guess? And it's interesting coming from Whedon; hypocritical, even.

If you don't see the unironic depiction of a virile young man attempting to "loosen up" a stiff, prudish woman as painting the woman in a negative light, then I don't know what to say to you.

Lots of shitty things have been defended in the name of "tradition". Blackface on film and stage was defended as being "traditional". It still is sometimes.
 
The most important difference between original and prequel trilogies is the story. The story in OT is easy to follow, exiting and drives the action forwards. in prequels the story is a confusing mess, that relies too much on main characters just happening to be in the right place at the right time, instead of driving the action.

In first case, even if the characters were weak (I don't think they are), dialogue bad (not really, but there are some one-liners we could live without) or acting bad (Alec Guinness and James Earl Jones did a brilliant job*), it wouldn't matter as much because the characters were archetypes. You knew what the characters were like after a few scenes.

In second case, everything falls apart if there are no strong characters keeping the story together. Unfortunately Anakin and Obi-Wan weren't.


edit:
*Mark Hamill is also doing a good job, I've always thought. And Harrison Ford plays the same character he plays in almost every movie, and he seems to have met some success doing that.
Want to know the bigger problem with the sequel's writing? Because Lucas' kept doing "And this this happens." and "Then that happens."

Instead of an organic flow, "This happens, and therefore because of that, this happens, but because that happening, this happens."

Good writing and a story is supposed to flow so well where if you go into the middle of a completed script and change something or delete something all the subsequent action/story thereafter become completely different.
 
I'm simply saying I don't see the problem with it. I don't think it paints either sex in any kind of particular or negative light and I wasn't saying the Star Wars scene is bad, just similar. It's a more traditional way of writing, I guess? And it's interesting coming from Whedon; hypocritical, even.
such as?
 
I was having breakfast at my parents house this and showed my dad the trailer. He actually teared up a little.

He isn't even that big a star wars fan, which is the funny part. He enjoyed the movies a lot. I think it was the old man Han solo part that got him
 
Found this while surfing Youtube; it's basically the teaser re-visualized as a trailer on an old VHS, complete with old Lucasfilm logo and 4:3 aspect ratio.

The tracking effect is a bit overdone at times, but it really cements the cinematography as belonging to that era, especially when it comes to that very first shot, which I never thought I could love even more until I saw it reinterpreted in this manner.

edit:
gQgtZbm.gif

Jesus Christ, it's Tracking: The Movie.
 
If you don't see the unironic depiction of a virile young man attempting to "loosen up" a stiff, prudish woman as painting the woman in a negative light, then I don't know what to say to you.

Because it isn't? The clip told us that they've known each other a while and had a fling at one point. She's being "stiff" because she's trying to be there on business but he's messing with her-- though not in a rude fashion, going by her facial expressions. She acts annoyed by it but she isn't because they still likely share similar feelings. She certainly isn't unattracted to him. That's their personalities. I don't see how it's any different than the first 20 minutes or so of Jurassic Park drowning us with Ian flirting with Ellie scenes, with him downright going down the playbook right in front of her boyfriend, who was obviously her boyfriend. But she was going along with it because he's charming, just as Owen is. I guess it would have been okay if the move had came out 13-14 years prior so that it would have made it into that window where it was okay for boys to flirt with girls in movies before some higher power declared that it was unacceptable after the 70's shut the window.

But hey, it's whatever. If some people want to interpret the scene as the writers being sexist I guess that's not my business.


Ignoring Cabin in the Woods or Dollhouse or Buffy or a number of other projects he's written, there's also that really lame Avengers bit where Black Widow says "I'm always picking up after you boys" and I personally take complete offense at the sexist notion that boys are sloppy-- because I'm perfect just like Claire in Jurassic World and we can't have other people bringing out our flaws. It would just be too... 70's.
 
Want to know the bigger problem with the sequel's writing? Because Lucas' kept doing "And this this happens." and "Then that happens."

Instead of an organic flow, "This happens, and therefore because of that, this happens, but because that happening, this happens."

Good writing and a story is supposed to flow so well where if you go into the middle of a completed script and change something or delete something all the subsequent action/story thereafter become completely different.

Maybe that's mirrored in Palpatine's overall plot in the sequel trilogy. His plan relied on The Jedi winning against his guys most of the time, and just happening to be in the right place at the right time (like finding the clone factory at just the right moment).
 
Because it isn't? The clip told us that they've known each other a while and had a fling at one point. She's being "stiff" because she's trying to be there on business but he's messing with her-- though not in a rude fashion, going by her facial expressions. She acts annoyed by it but she isn't because they still likely share similar feelings. She certainly isn't unattracted to him. That's their personalities. I don't see how it's any different than the first 20 minutes or so of Jurassic Park drowning us with Ian flirting with Ellie scenes, with him downright going down the playbook right in front of her boyfriend, who was obviously her boyfriend. But she was going along with it because he's charming, just as Owen is. I guess it would have been okay if the move had came out 13-14 years prior so that it would have made it into that window where it was okay for boys to flirt with girls in movies before some higher power declared that it was unacceptable after the 70's shut the window.

"That's just their personalities"...
Well, your position is nothing if not predictable, given the fact that I preempted it entirely in my last post. Go check it out.

But the fact that you think Whedon's problem is "boys flirting with girls" is pretty indicative that there's not much reading going on here.

And that mysterious "higher power" that decides things are unacceptable after a certain amount of time is called progress.
 
"That's just their personalities"...
Well, your position is nothing if not predictable, given the fact that I preempted it entirely in my last post. Go check it out.

And that mysterious "higher power" that decides things are unacceptable after a certain amount of time is called progress.

So you're saying that nobody flirts this way anymore and that it's not acceptable to see in movies now? I'm not being sexist by disagreeing with any of this, I simply disagree that Owen flirting with Claire is some kind of outdated manner. I also think that this conversation can totally be carried out without resorting to personal slams; I'm not the book on sexism, but... well, when Daisy was cast, I was hoping she would be the main character because I love strong female characters such as Ripley or even Leia, and I think Claire could be one. We see her with a flare in the teaser trying to redirect Indominus away from attacking other people as she feels it's her responsibility. To me that makes her a strong and likable female figure. Just because Pratt flirts with her in a non-subtle way doesn't make her some kind of a negative, terrible woman nor do I think it makes the writers "sexist."

My point, or at least my thought anyway, is that everyone has a different viewpoint on flirting. I have a friend that is very outgoing and shameless when he flirts; I'm not saying it's okay, but it's a lot different to my methods and different things work on different people.
 
So you're saying that nobody flirts this way anymore and that it's not acceptable to see in movies now? I'm not being sexist by disagreeing with any of this, I simply disagree that Owen flirting with Claire is some kind of outdated manner. I also think that this conversation can totally be carried out without resorting to personal slams; I'm not the book on sexism, but... well, when Daisy was cast, I was hoping she would be the main character because I love strong female characters such as Ripley or even Leia, and I think Claire could be one. We see her with a flare in the teaser trying to redirect Indominus away from attacking other people as she feels it's her responsibility. To me that makes her a strong and likable female figure. Just because Pratt flirts with her in a non-subtle way doesn't make her some kind of a negative, terrible woman nor do I think it makes the writers "sexist."

My point, or at least my thought anyway, is that everyone has a different viewpoint on flirting. I have a friend that is very outgoing and shameless when he flirts; I'm not saying it's okay, but it's a lot different to my methods and different things work on different people.

Not sure where you're getting personal slams from? Whose posts are you reading?
I'm really unclear as to what your argument is here exactly, but I'm interested. Could you sum it up? Why is the use of this sexist trope in film not tired? Or why is it not sexist because "some real people flirt that way"?

I didn't call you sexist. And I don't think anybody here has called the writers sexist either. What gave you that impression?
 
Found this while surfing Youtube; it's basically the teaser re-visualized as a trailer on an old VHS, complete with old Lucasfilm logo and 4:3 aspect ratio.

The tracking effect is a bit overdone at times, but it really cements the cinematography as belonging to that era, especially when it comes to that very first shot, which I never thought I could love even more until I saw it reinterpreted in this manner.
Even 9 year old me would have thrown a VHS broken like that in the garbage.
 
I'm really unclear as to what your argument is here exactly, but I'm interested. Could you sum it up? Why is the use of this sexist trope in film not tired? Or why is it not sexist because "some real people flirt that way"?

First I just wanted to make it clear that I'm not sexist and have just as much respect for women as anyone else; by arguing against this stuff being sexist I was afraid I might give someone the wrong impression and I didn't want that to happen.

To sum it up, I'm saying it's not an outdated "trope" because people still flirt this way. It's harmless, nor is it painting a negative image of women. Women can be just as guilty of it as men, and there's nothing wrong with the portrayal of basic human instinct. There was also some heavy playfulness in that clip as well, with Bryce reacting in a mostly "I'm pretending to be annoyed but my expression and body language say otherwise."

I don't think this is something that went away after the 70's. Perhaps you see less of it based on the writing style of the things you or someone else watch, but I don't consider it archaic, just another form of flirtation and personality. I'm simply in disagreement with the sexist extrapolation some people are getting out of the scene. Like we both agree with it's a more traditional form of flirtation or male/female interaction, but I don't see how the old school approach is some negative or backwards thinking as again, I don't think it "went away" and the notion that it became outdated after the 70's is beyond ridiculous to me.

The chances of us agreeing are slim to none and I don't completely disagree with everything you're saying, but at the same time I find it very much harmless. Hopefully we can just respectfully disagree as I can see you feel strongly about it, which is more than okay with me.
 
Found this while surfing Youtube; it's basically the teaser re-visualized as a trailer on an old VHS, complete with old Lucasfilm logo and 4:3 aspect ratio.

The tracking effect is a bit overdone at times, but it really cements the cinematography as belonging to that era, especially when it comes to that very first shot, which I never thought I could love even more until I saw it reinterpreted in this manner.

edit:
gQgtZbm.gif

A Japanese ghost didn't crawl out of the TV to kill me.

2/10
 
Thanks for the summary. Always interesting to read how some people interpret these issues.

At the same time I find it very much harmless.

Here's where we'll disagree most. Promotion of sexist or negative stereotype on film isn't only lazy, it is almost always harmful to those on the receiving end.
 
also, while I don't doubt that there are real-life men and women who have interactions like in that clip, that wasn't really what Joss was criticizing in the first place. His tweet wasn't, "She's a stiff, he's a life-force, how unrealistic!" It was "we're still writing characters like this?" It's a tired characterization, regardless of how real or not it is.
 
Totally different tangent... I really want to go into Halloween with a Kylo Ren setup.

I don't know what the hell you two are talking about the OT holds up REALLY well today. I watch the OT at least once a year and nostalgia has nothing to do with my enjoyment of those movies since I watched them for the first time when I was in my late teens after having watched all the prequels. Empire, for example, is just the perfect movie and I think personally the finest movie ever made. I'm surprised every time I re-watch the movies at just how well the hold up.

I came into the Star Wars lore with Episode 1, then 2, then 4-5-6 and then finally 3. I don't think they hold up as much as people think they do to be honest.

There's definitely a divide among people. (which kind of goes to show that the prequels weren't as terrible as people make it out to be)
 
Here's where we'll disagree most. Promotion of sexist or negative stereotype on film isn't only lazy, it is almost always harmful to those on the receiving end.

So there's a specific way to show people flirting in modern film and if you deviate from that you're being lazy/sexist? What's the way that it has to be? And saying that clip was harmful in any way toward anyone is not something I get. Again they had something once and he's more or less poking fun at how clammed up of a person she can be. It's not a statement toward the entire gender of women, just that one character. It's not hurting anything.

edit: this is way off-topic and I don't want to go any further with it, so I'll forfeit.
 
So there's a specific way to show people flirting in modern film and if you deviate from that you're being lazy/sexist? What's the way that it has to be? And saying that clip was harmful in any way toward anyone is not something I get. Again they had something once and he's more or less poking fun at how clammed up of a person she can be.

edit: this is way off-topic and I don't want to go any further with it, so I'll forfeit.

No, there is no one specific way to show flirting on film. Not sure where you're getting that. You seem to be applying the same logic as Gamergaters. Criticism of media is not censorship of media.

And yes, if you pull out tired sexist tropes of the past devoid of irony or artistic commentary, that is certainly lazy. It makes Jurassic World a dinosaur movie in more ways than one.

It's not a statement toward the entire gender of women, just that one character.

Again, see my previous post. I've covered this. This argument is functionally no different than "This movie about a greedy Jewish man is not a statement that all Jews are greedy. just this one." It's a weak argument because it ignores all cultural context, and apologizes for the promotion of negative stereotypes.

Maybe we've had vastly different upbringings and life experiences, but I've always viewed negative stereotypes as harmful, and have difficulty understanding how any one instance of it should be hand waved off in the name of "tradition". Doubly so when the "tradition" is one of marginalization and injustice.

If you truly do intend to end this discussion, I'll finish off how I started. I really think you'd benefit from picking up a book on gender politics in the 21st century, and I hope you don't think I'm being condescending by saying so. These ideas, and this very discussion we're having isn't unique and has been treaded over again and again in literature. There's a reason that Hollywood is moving in the right direction overall and why leaders like Whedon's views on the subject are so well respected.
 
Haha, at this Marvel panel right now at Star Wars Celebrstion they just called the Batman v Superman trailer a huge embarrassment and got loud applause.
 
If you truly do intend to end this discussion, I'll finish off how I started. I really think you'd benefit from picking up a book on gender politics in the 21st century, and I hope you don't think I'm being condescending by saying so. These ideas, and this very discussion we're having isn't unique and has been treaded over again and again in literature. There's a reason that Hollywood is moving in the right direction overall and why leaders like Whedon's views on the subject are so well respected.

I don't find it condescending, I just felt it was too off-topic. I respect your beliefs, I just personally don't see it as a big deal because... well, you read how I interpreted the scene. There's context to the characters that I feel explain their approach to writing them in the scene. People who know each other can make playful jabs like this because they know where they're coming from. That's all I saw between the characters in the scene.

The thing I don't really care for is sexual objectification of the Michael Bay variety, and even J.J. Abrams is guilty of it. Plenty are (unfortunately). I get upset over deliberately treating women like objects. Playful flirting and back and forths as present in the Jurassic clip isn't something I find to be anywhere close to being along those lines. I know it's slightly different, sexual objectification and sexist writing, I'm just pointing out what actually bothers me in writing.

In Abrams' Star Trek, Kirk flirts the hell out of several women, in fact almost every relatively attractive woman in both films. This does not bother me as I see it being a characteristic rather than objectification. In Jurassic World, to me it's the same thing, Pratt's character is definitely an old-school rogue-ish type with some charm and he's obviously very flirtacious, but I don't see this as being demeaning or offensive to women. I think putting Megan Fox on a curvy motorcycle and aligning her body along with the motorcycle is "harmful" mainly because it's actually objectifying her and, well, fucking stupid.

There goes my resolve to... resolve this, but I didn't want to ignore your post either and further clarify how I feel and what I personally consider to be bad.
 
I don't find it condescending. I don't have much else to add, and I just felt it was too off-topic. I respect your beliefs, I just personally don't see it as a big deal because... well, you read how I interpreted the scene. There's context to the characters that I feel explain their approach to writing them in the scene. People who know each other can make playful jabs like this because they know where they're coming from. That's all I saw between the characters in the scene.

The thing I don't really care for is sexual objectification of the Michael Bay variety, and even J.J. Abrams is guilty of it. Plenty are (unfortunately). I get upset over deliberately treating women like objects. Playful flirting and back and forths as present in the Jurassic clip isn't something I find to be anywhere close to being along those lines. I know it's slightly different, sexual objectification and sexist writing, I'm just pointing out what actually bothers me in writing.

In Abrams' Star Trek, Kirk flirts the hell out of several women, in fact almost every relatively attractive woman in both films. This does not bother me as I see it being a characteristic rather than objectification. In Jurassic World, to me it's the same thing, Pratt's character is definitely an old-school rogue-ish type with some charm and he's obviously very flirtacious, but I don't see this as being demeaning or offensive to women. I think putting Megan Fox on a curvy motorcycle and aligning her body along with the motorcycle is "harmful" mainly because it's actually objectifying her and, well, fucking stupid.

Agreed on almost all points, specifically re:Michael Bay. And you are correct that objectification and the overuse of tired gender tropes are two different manifestations of sexism.

To bring it back, I have high hopes for Abrams in this regard, and most of the info that's out there seems promising, but damn, that random gratuitous "shirtless babe" scene in Into Darkness must have had Gene Roddenberry spinning in his grave.
 
To bring it back, I have high hopes for Abrams in this regard, and most of the info that's out there seems promising, but damn, that random gratuitous "shirtless babe" scene in Into Darkness must have had Gene Roddenberry spinning in his grave.

That used to not bother me either, but... yeah, it kind of does. It just felt tacked on and lazy. I wasn't offended by it, but in the long run it contributes all of zilch to the story. I like to think of Abrams as a gifted director that is sometimes let down by bad and lazy writing; considering who has mostly written for him in the past, well. Shit happens. I don't expect that sort of thing in this movie.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom