Why hate Disney at all?

I don't understand it. There are so many other companies to hate, and for much better reasons. EA makes terrible games, overcharges for DLC, and genuinely despises its customers. Comcast is Comcast, 'nuff said. Microsoft releases new Windows versions that are worse than older versions (use more processor time, are harder to use, etc) just to keep earning money. Wal-Mart has closed entire stores to make sure their employees can't unionize. Koch Industries has revolutionized corrupting our political process and spent millions to stop 'nonprofitable' things from clean energy to higher taxes. British Petroleum caused billions in damage and are somehow receiving billions in tax cuts this year. A full dozen of the US's biggest banks colluded to remove laws meant to stop the world's economy collapsing, almost caused the world's economy to collapse, got bailed out for it because they were "Too big to fail" (which was what one of those removed laws prevented!), and now they're richer than ever on paper but those same circumstances are going to play out again and again...

And Disney does what, exactly, to bring your piss to a boil? Make kid's movies? Run theme parks? Have merchandised characters?

Literally the only - ONLY! - reason I've ever heard for hating Disney that made even the remotest amount of twisted, hate-filled sense is the religious right complaining that Disney doesn't hate gays the way they do. And even that's a dumb reason.

So, take that Disney hate and either turn it towards one of the companies that's actually RUINING the world, or shut the **** up.

Disney (among others, but my local cinema owner told me they are the worst offender) dictates rental prices for cinamas, since they know that cinemas have no other choice than to stock the latest and greatest by Disney. They also have horrible extra clauses in the rental contracs like forced run time. Disney movie bombs? tough luck, you still have to show it every day for another 2 months. Small cinemas are seriously threatened by this.

I gather we found quite a few reasons for hating Disney, right?

Overall I thought the movie was just okay. Like most JJ Abram's movie's it was visually pretty, but was a bit light on the actual storyline and acting. Rey is a cool character, but as others have already pointed out is just too good at everything for her character to really flourish.

In other words, another Luke?//

Overall I thought the movie was just okay. Like most JJ Abram's movie's it was visually pretty, but was a bit light on the actual storyline and acting. Rey is a cool character, but as others have already pointed out is just too good at everything for her character to really flourish.

In other words, another Luke?//

Have you seen the films? What does Luke succeed in doing, ever, apart from blowing up two TIE fighters (with a targeting computer), the first Death Star, a single AT-AT, and kicking the crap out of Vader in ROTJ? Every time he has even limited success, it is in order to get out the situation that he caused in the first place by screwing up! Swing across the bottomless pit with Leia? Had to do that, because he shot out the bridge controls. Cut arm off a Wampa? If he hadn't let it ambush his ass and string him up in his cave, would never have happened. Kill a Rancor? If he hadn't decided to walk alone into Jabba's palace and try to mind trick a species that happens to be resistant to them, could have avoided the entire thing. Ditto the Sarlacc episode.

Give us an example of where Rey catagorically sucks at something.

Overall I thought the movie was just okay. Like most JJ Abram's movie's it was visually pretty, but was a bit light on the actual storyline and acting. Rey is a cool character, but as others have already pointed out is just too good at everything for her character to really flourish.

In other words, another Luke?//

You mean another Skywalker. Look at young Anakin (as much as you don't want to look at the Ep.I) - He could 'Fly,' build Droids, build his own pod-racer, and ineptly hit on girls who were roughly twice his age.

All Skywalkers have these innate talents: piloting aptitude, mechanical aptitude (Luke to a lesser extent - we really only see him cleaning Artoo and Threepio - but he does want to get power converters for some reason at Toshi station, maybe to supe up that T-16. And come to think of it in the new Comics, they have made it out that Luke does do mechanical things because Oni-wan keeps leaving him boxes of parts... so...), and the ability to converse with droids.

Overall I thought the movie was just okay. Like most JJ Abram's movie's it was visually pretty, but was a bit light on the actual storyline and acting. Rey is a cool character, but as others have already pointed out is just too good at everything for her character to really flourish.

In other words, another Luke?//

Have you seen the films? What does Luke succeed in doing, ever, apart from blowing up two TIE fighters (with a targeting computer), the first Death Star, a single AT-AT, and kicking the crap out of Vader in ROTJ? Every time he has even limited success, it is in order to get out the situation that he caused in the first place by screwing up! Swing across the bottomless pit with Leia? Had to do that, because he shot out the bridge controls. Cut arm off a Wampa? If he hadn't let it ambush his ass and string him up in his cave, would never have happened. Kill a Rancor? If he hadn't decided to walk alone into Jabba's palace and try to mind trick a species that happens to be resistant to them, could have avoided the entire thing. Ditto the Sarlacc episode.

Give us an example of where Rey catagorically sucks at something.

Well the whole thing with her family at the start, how she just can't ... https://youtu.be/L0MK7qz13bU?t=1m3sI think I deserve to die for that.

Also the whole action on Hans freighter is pretty **** similar to Luke and Leia swinging across a bottomless pit, now that you mention it.

Is it just me or do some people who didn't like or enjoy the TFA* miss that all the ones considered "better" also had inconsistencies, unanswered questions, and required you to suspend belief? It's a soap opera. In outer space. That's how George Lucas describes it.

* You're entitled to your opinion! I respect it and wouldn't try to change it. It's okay with me if you hate the movie. It won't change the fact that I love it.

Not really, I think you misunderstand the term Space Opera. Much like the old shows which it derived from Space Opera focused more on the interactions of the people with shows like Lost in Space and even Star Trek although the latter was riddled with technobabble pron, but if you look at it closer the plots were more of interaction with the crew and even aliens who may have no emotions or repress all emotions.

Disney (among others, but my local cinema owner told me they are the worst offender) dictates rental prices for cinamas, since they know that cinemas have no other choice than to stock the latest and greatest by Disney. They also have horrible extra clauses in the rental contracs like forced run time. Disney movie bombs? tough luck, you still have to show it every day for another 2 months. Small cinemas are seriously threatened by this.

I gather we found quite a few reasons for hating Disney, right?

No, not really.

Sony's the worst in the opinion of a loose acquaintance of mine who quit managing a theatre a few years back - didn't need the ulcers, he says. Disney's somewhere in 2-5th place - which is to say, they're ALL awful, and NONE of them are friendly to the local cinemas, but it's because the whole movie industry is messed up and no one seems to know how to save it aside from charging more to cover the increased costs of movies.

Concessions are the only thing theatres make money on, which is why I grit my teeth and buy popcorn when I go in because it's got good profit ratio for them.

This is honestly more true than not.

Disney is horrific for what they've done to anyone working in creative fields.

Thing is - I'm a BIG FAN of copyright law, patents and trade marks...I do occasional work in creative fields, and it's VERY IMPORTANT to be able to protect your work. I mean...it's not fun many times, it really is work...a LOT of it...and if someone agrees to pay you for it, you should be able to produce art, be compensated for that, have the company hiring you make profit so they can continue doing business and giving you more work...without dipsharts on the internet stealing it because 'whatever'.

The idea that art and creativity is culturally important, and something viable to do, is an absolutely critically important idea to protect.

But Disney does go too far. The life of the artist? Okay, I can see that. I'd argue it - I mean, I do something creative to contribute to society...yeah, I want compensation for it, but...a few years is fine. A decade or two? I won't complain. My ENTIRE life? For ONE creative act? Ehhhh... But, then, MY entire life AND the life of ALL my heirs? And then ANYONE they feel like passing the rights on to? Good gods, no - at that point, the art is no longer a "contribution" to society, but rather a vampire that simply drains any new creative spark from igniting into the next generation of artists and creators.

So, uh. Are you going to complain next about how rain gets you wet, or how pooping hurts if you don't eat enough fibre?

Copyrights go for too long, yes, and Disney was at the forefront of extending those laws (once again, that long-term vision) to help their bottom line. But the rest of your complaint?

When a person creates something FOR A COMPANY, it belongs TO THAT COMPANY. Lauren Faust doesn't make noises about how My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic belongs to her, because she created it FOR Hasbro - just as the architect who built Trump Towers doesn't kvetch about the use it's put to because it was made FOR Trump's real estate business. It's part of the business.

If you sell property TO A COMPANY, it belongs TO THAT COMPANY. The grandchildren of the farmers who sold Disney their land don't kvetch about how much more the land is worth now because the reason it's WORTH more is it's Disneyland.

There exist contracts that people can use to lease intellectual property to companies like Disney - Virginia Heinlein stands out to me as a notable example, because she made sure that she still owns Robert Heinlein's stories even if other people option them as scripts. If you have an original idea that Disney wants (say you create a hilarious webcomic and they want to option it as a show), you can take slightly less money and retain joint ownership of it and/or creative control, which is IMHO much more important than what happens to it after one becomes wormfood.

And... really? Disney's a "creative vampire that drains the life from the next generation of artists"? Have you WATCHED Gravity Falls? Frozen? Big Hero Six? The Avengers? Star Wars: Rebels? Any of the Studio Ghibli films Disney COULD have butchered in an attempt to localize them and chose not to? Up? Iron Man? Wander Over Yonder? Wreck it Ralph?

All of those are tremendously creative and original (okay, just the designs from BH6 but that still counts!), and could have been TERRIBLE if Disney were actually as awful as you want them to be. Disney's been around for 80 years, if they're sucking the creative life out of artists they're doing a terrible job of it.

All art is on a sliding scale from prostitution to masturbation; somewhere between doing it for your own pleasure and not giving two faps what anyone thinks, or doing it exclusively for others and the only pleasure is witnessing how others enjoy it. If you're not willing to accept that making money as an artist tends to be more towards whoring than fapping, you're no professional, you're a child.

Disney at least makes an effort to acknowledge their artists and put 'em to work on the projects that will make them happy, because (once again, that far vision) they know that creative types who are happy will make more creative things, which will make them more money in the long term.

Good business = fair treatment of your artists. It's a symbiotic relationship, which Disney understands; not parasitic (where Cartoon Network tries to suck their artists dry), or predatory (where Sony release 'new' movies of the Marvel characters they own, no matter how much money they lose, because letting their contract lapse back to Marvel Studios would make them look bad).

Of course, Disney has DONE both of those practices in the past, and it's possible they'll do them in the future. I'm no oracle, I'm just a guy.

But right now, and in the last 15-20 years? It's been Good Guy Mickey, especially compared to the competition.

However, Mickey himself still sucks. I hate all of the old school characters from Disney except Chip and Dale.

You know people don't read big walls of text.

You know people don't read big walls of text.

You don't know what a wall of text is.

You know people don't read big walls of text.

Hahaha very true.

Overall I thought the movie was just okay. Like most JJ Abram's movie's it was visually pretty, but was a bit light on the actual storyline and acting. Rey is a cool character, but as others have already pointed out is just too good at everything for her character to really flourish.

In other words, another Luke?//

Have you seen the films? What does Luke succeed in doing, ever, apart from blowing up two TIE fighters (with a targeting computer), the first Death Star, a single AT-AT, and kicking the crap out of Vader in ROTJ? Every time he has even limited success, it is in order to get out the situation that he caused in the first place by screwing up! Swing across the bottomless pit with Leia? Had to do that, because he shot out the bridge controls. Cut arm off a Wampa? If he hadn't let it ambush his ass and string him up in his cave, would never have happened. Kill a Rancor? If he hadn't decided to walk alone into Jabba's palace and try to mind trick a species that happens to be resistant to them, could have avoided the entire thing. Ditto the Sarlacc episode.

Give us an example of where Rey catagorically sucks at something.

Well the whole thing with her family at the start, how she just can't ... https://youtu.be/L0MK7qz13bU?t=1m3sI think I deserve to die for that.

Also the whole action on Hans freighter is pretty **** similar to Luke and Leia swinging across a bottomless pit, now that you mention it.

Yeah, she's absolutely perfect and the movie in no way demonstrates any inability on her part.

Stays on same planet like a fool instead of looking for parents. She could have built herself an X-Wing from the parts and flown off.

Numbly accepts the crappy food ration and is slowly starving to death. DOESN'T SELL BB-8.

Almost kills self and Finn on the Millennium Falcon by fooling around with its systems.

Rancor-ball incident results in them getting tagged by criminals who pass on their vector.

"No, the lightsabre is evul!" Love interest Finn uses the lightsabre instead, now looking for a new cybernetic spine.

Gets captured by Kylo (FAIL) and divulges secret of Luke's location. Er whoops.

Poe Dameron + Leia have to come in and save EVERYBODY.

They're pretty even, given Luke's fumbles in E:IV as well (though not necessarily his fault)

Is it just me or do some people who didn't like or enjoy the TFA* miss that all the ones considered "better" also had inconsistencies, unanswered questions, and required you to suspend belief? It's a soap opera. In outer space. That's how George Lucas describes it.

* You're entitled to your opinion! I respect it and wouldn't try to change it. It's okay with me if you hate the movie. It won't change the fact that I love it.

Not really, I think you misunderstand the term Space Opera. Much like the old shows which it derived from Space Opera focused more on the interactions of the people with shows like Lost in Space and even Star Trek although the latter was riddled with technobabble pron, but if you look at it closer the plots were more of interaction with the crew and even aliens who may have no emotions or repress all emotions.

I don't think so but I could be. Lucas has called SW a soap opera many times and was quoted as recently as the TFA release using that phrase. A soap opera is a melodrama about the interactions between people. I can't recall saying it wasn't. If you check out the wiki entry for melodrama I think SW nails this.

I think your video supports the point I'm trying to get across. Saying you don't like TFA because of the faults I've listed but still love prior movies doesn't make a lot of sense to me because all the films require you to believe in magic aka the Force.

Is it just me or do some people who didn't like or enjoy the TFA* miss that all the ones considered "better" also had inconsistencies, unanswered questions, and required you to suspend belief? It's a soap opera. In outer space. That's how George Lucas describes it.

* You're entitled to your opinion! I respect it and wouldn't try to change it. It's okay with me if you hate the movie. It won't change the fact that I love it.

Not really, I think you misunderstand the term Space Opera. Much like the old shows which it derived from Space Opera focused more on the interactions of the people with shows like Lost in Space and even Star Trek although the latter was riddled with technobabble pron, but if you look at it closer the plots were more of interaction with the crew and even aliens who may have no emotions or repress all emotions.

I don't think so but I could be. Lucas has called SW a soap opera many times and was quoted as recently as the TFA release using that phrase. A soap opera is a melodrama about the interactions between people. I can't recall saying it wasn't. If you check out the wiki entry for melodrama I think SW nails this.

I think your video supports the point I'm trying to get across. Saying you don't like TFA because of the faults I've listed but still love prior movies doesn't make a lot of sense to me because all the films require you to believe in magic aka the Force.

Yeah but he also said he sold the franchise to white slavers so really who takes old Lucas seriously.

The dust has been stirred back up!

Is her first name seriously Jan or have I misheard that? She and that bearded dude - so much Kyle Kartarn and Jan Ors.

Is her first name seriously Jan or have I misheard that? She and that bearded dude - so much Kyle Kartarn and Jan Ors.

Jyn Erso.

Is her first name seriously Jan or have I misheard that? She and that bearded dude - so much Kyle Kartarn and Jan Ors.

Jyn Erso.

Thats close enough for me

Looking at Rogue 1 trailer (in addition to TFA) is proof positive that the sale of Lucasfilm to Disney was a great thing for the franchise and the fans.

At least Rogue One won't be a remake

Well, as a fan of the X-Wing books (Rogue-Wraith Squadron), TFA is worth it for that one scene where you see the X-Wings fly in for the rescure, zapping Stormtroopers on the ground & Dameron kills 6-7 Ties in less than a minute. The kind of stuff we've read alot in books but never quite got to see in a movie ...

In fact, I think TFA should've been X-Wings from beginning to end. Screw the rest of the story =D

Honestly, it was "Fun".

But "Fun" in the kind of description you give a movie that was entertaining for a couple hours, and you didn't waste your time or money.

TFA is basically the Lethal Weapon 4 of Star Wars. It had the characters you love, some new characters you kinda like,and the plot moves along competently. But, in the end, it's really only worth a repeat viewing if you come across it on cable on a rainy Sunday afternoon in the football offseason.

Let's just get over the hump right away. The writing is bad. You can tell where a three time Academy Award Nominated screenwriter tried to make a gritty drama, and where the esteemed author of Gone Fishin' and Taking Care of Business tried to turn it into a buddy cop action adventure. The dialog is painfully campy in parts, the action as well.

A good story has the story follow events in a logical order. This happens because of this, which happened because of this. The Force Awakens does essentially the opposite. Events happen in the movie only because they have to, in order to facilitate the next scene. Look! we found a TIE Fighter with two seats! Look, I didn't find my friend who was thrown free of a crash in the open desert so we can have a joyous reunion later! Look, it's the Millennium Falcon! Look, Han Solo found us in the Millennium Falcon! Look, here's Luke's lightsaber in the basement of this random Space Bar! Look, R2D2 woke up and knew what we needed all along!

Nevermind the ridiculous borrowing, they didn't even borrow well. In Return of the Jedi, they knew the protagonists would need some help on Endor, so they sent commandos. The writers figured out a reason to separate the protagonists from the commandos who were less important to the narrative than they were to the story. If life as you know it is about to end. If your entire organization is about to be crushed. And the only way to stop it is to infiltrate a heavily defended space base, do you A: send a crack team of commandos, or B: send a recent defector of untested loyalty and a conflicting goal to save his friend, a seven foot tall unstealthy wookie known for snacking on food he finds left out, and a geriatric smuggler with his own conflicting goal to find his son?

And, there's no arguing it, Rey is is a bad character. She has no character development, and no arc.

When she needs to fly, she is an ace. When the spaceship breaks, she is an engineer. All of this learned while picking up trash on Planet Afghanistan, apparently. When she gets captured, she learns to Force. When she has to lightsaber battle, she learns to Jedi.

Basically, she has no adversity. Everything in the movie set up to be adversity is actually just a vehicle to show the next thing she is really good at. She's even better at being Han Solo than Han Solo is.

Now, at this point, some people will be clamoring to say "Whatevur. You just don't like because girl. Luke Skywalker was just as good"

Except these people have never actually seen Star Wars. Luke Skywalker contributes almost nothing in the original film other than to use his mediocre flying skills to be positioned to save the day through luck and the intervention of others. He gets beaten up by sand people. He is saved by Obi Wan in the cantina. Han Solo is the one with the ship and the savvy to escape from the Imperials. Obi Wan turns off the tractor beam and distracts Darth Vader. Wedge saves Luke from a TIE Fighter, Han Solo saves Luke from Darth Vader. Obi Wan reminds him to trust his feelings and the Force.

Then we get to The Empire Strike Back. A movie that has 40% of its running time dedicated to Luke Skywalker failing. He gets beaten up by a snow monster. He sucks so bad at being a Jedi that Yoda is constantly disappointed in him and doesn't think he is disciplined enough. He leaves to go to Cloud City, and he sucks so badly at lightsaber fighting that Darth Vader gets bored and just starts throwing things at him instead. Then he loses his hand and has to be saved by Leia.

After you get past the campy Buddy Cop dialog and the story built on convenience and contrivance, you have a protagonist who is just really good at everything, and whose "adversity" is all fake and staged. She's like John McClain in Die Hard 4.

Basically, Disney was so worried about their Star Wars investment that they made the safest movie possible. And in the process, created MaRey Sue.

The key to TFA's overwhelming success was that it neatly and cleanly skipped over the extremely low bar of "Better than the Prequels".

Good posts. I agree mostly. I still like Rey, I just do not like how she is handled, how she becomes the Marry Sue of the writers. And I don't think that TFA skipped over the bar of "better than Prequels". Besides, Lukes progress is still astonishing quick, even when he keeps needing rescue.

Rey being a Mary Sue is a bull argument.

_{it is what it is and its never gonna change......Disney said so}

Well, as a fan of the X-Wing books (Rogue-Wraith Squadron), TFA is worth it for that one scene where you see the X-Wings fly in for the rescure, zapping Stormtroopers on the ground & Dameron kills 6-7 Ties in less than a minute. The kind of stuff we've read alot in books but never quite got to see in a movie ...

In fact, I think TFA should've been X-Wings from beginning to end. Screw the rest of the story =D

Jap, TFA would be so much better as a Poe Dameron + Wedge Antilles movie. Make Wedge his CAG and give Poe Rogue Squadron and everyone would be happy

Do all the Mouse haters think that Star Wars would've been better off staying in Lucas' hands*? Love 'em or hate 'em Disney is really good at what they do. And that is make a product that the masses want. If not Disney who would've you liked to see buy it? Because I believe Star Wars would've withered and died if Disney didn't pry it from Lucas' hands.

* This is not a troll. It's a serious question.