So what exactly is the problem with Rose ... ?

Replies

  • Vendi1983
    4153 posts Member
    @HTWarrior interesting, because I have the exact same opinion about TROS. Waited for it to be over in opening night, and still haven't watched it again to this day.
  • HTWarrior
    43 posts Member
    edited July 29
    @Vendi1983 I forgot to mention that I was so disapointed by TLJ that I even ignored "SOLO" completely and only watched TROS when a friend came over with the BlueRay and convinced me to watch it. It's so interesting to see how they were trying to undo some of the damage TLJ had done to the brand and still they just presented another $h§t show.

    However to give some love to new SW-content: I loved every second of the Mandalorian.
  • Vendi1983
    4153 posts Member
    edited July 29
    Well I'll agree on that. Mando was top notch, every episode.

    I think what disappointed me the most about TROS was how much I wanted to enjoy it. It's the first Star Wars movie I haven't seen twice (or more) in theatres, going back to TPM.
  • Nihion
    3002 posts Member
    I like Mandalorian, but it’s overhyped. That makes it less fun.

    TLJ and TROS are exact opposites. I like them both individually, but neither of them fit in the Star Wars universe.

    Rian Johnson is a really good filmmaker. He made TLJ as he makes all movies: Artistic and genuine. He disregards fan service and makes his own thing. This makes TLJ a great movie; but not for Star Wars.

    JJ was obviously called back to “fix this issue,” and then he over corrected. It feels like a bad Marvel movie: Rushed, lore-breaking, and stuffed full of safe and boring moves. I like the movie because it finally begins to develop the characters, but it feels too much like a poorly made film.
  • TVF
    25046 posts Member
    Boo
    The CGDF is recruiting. Say hi in our Discord! https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
  • Deathbringer59
    199 posts Member
    edited July 30
    I was too young to know but did people have this much problems when the prequels came out? I was 3 when the TFP first dropped
  • Nikoms565
    12702 posts Member
    Nihion wrote: »
    I like Mandalorian, but it’s overhyped. That makes it less fun.
    These two sentences don't make sense. Legit question - how does the hype surrounding it affect your enjoyment? If it does, perhaps you should just ignore what "everybody else" is saying...about everything. As a general rule, I find that is much more enjoyable way to live one's life.


    In game name: Lucas Gregory - - - -"Whale blah grump poooop." - Ouchie

    In game guild: TNR Uprising
    I beat the REAL T7 Yoda (not the nerfed one) and did so before mods were there to help
    *This space left intentionally blank*
  • Nihion
    3002 posts Member
    Nikoms565 wrote: »
    Nihion wrote: »
    I like Mandalorian, but it’s overhyped. That makes it less fun.
    These two sentences don't make sense. Legit question - how does the hype surrounding it affect your enjoyment? If it does, perhaps you should just ignore what "everybody else" is saying...about everything. As a general rule, I find that is much more enjoyable way to live one's life.


    I honestly just couldn’t find the words in the moment and didn’t want to go into a whole big thing... so here I go.

    The Mandalorian is good, but now it’s been taken by pop culture. It’s treated as the only visual Star Wars in the last fifteen years that’s actually good (it’s really good at dragging you in with cool fight scenes and cute babies, when the story is actually pretty meh), and this sets it up for overhype. Which it’s receiving a lot of.

    This means that when someone goes to watch it in ten years, and they hear all the hubbub, they’ll be expecting too much. This means that directors will continue to look back and build on this show, even if it’s not the best. This means that in 20 years, when someone tries to tell the early life of Mando, the audience will hate all the “new stuff” because it just ain’t what it used to be. This means that in 40 years, when they finally create a sequel show, there is no way it could possibly ever be as good as the original “Mandalorian” because pop culture and overexcited fans have lifted into a god-like state and made sure that nothing can ever live up to the wonderful okay-ness of Star Wa- I mean, the Mandalorian.
  • LordDirt
    1590 posts Member
    TLJ - Good movie
    TROS - Rushed piece of crap
    Mandalorioan - ok tv show

    Just my opinion
  • LordDirt wrote: »
    TLJ - Good movie
    TROS - Rushed piece of crap
    Mandalorioan - ok tv show

    Just my opinion

    Disagree

    TFA - ok movie but bad setup for a trilogy. Ex rey beats kylo in 1st movie. Also to much of a copy of the originals and no time spent explaining why we still have the empire I mean first order.

    TLJ - pointless movie that added nothing to the new trilogy and broke the lore. And killed the only remaining viable villain before the end of the trilogy.

    TROS - Rushed attempt to fix problems listed above with a very anticlimactic ending. But considering what they had to work with, not as bad as I would have expected.

    The mandalorian- good TV ssf how that respects the franchise and has a solid story. Yeah there's some filler but overall pretty good.
  • Vendi1983
    4153 posts Member
    Any lore-breaking in ST is nothing worse than what Lucas broke himself with his massive plot connection holes in the PT-to-OT issues.
  • Stenun
    655 posts Member
    Ex rey beats kylo in 1st movie

    I've never understood this point as a complaint. So what if Rey beats Kylo in TFA? Everyone uses it to attack Rey's character but as far as I'm concerned it is completely disingenuous to do so.

    Consider the following:

    At the end of ANH, Luke - without any training whatsoever - proves extremely difficult for a Sith Lord to target even with the help of a targeting computer and everyone just says that's fine as it shows Luke's natural strength. Not to mention Han Solo then surprising a Sith Lord but again that's fine because, er, it's Han Solo and people like him?

    At the end of TPM, Obi-Wan defeats the Sith who just killed a Jedi Master despite the fact that Obi-Wan is a Padawan at this point. And everyone says that's fine as it shows Obi-Wan's natural strength.

    At the end of TFA, Rey defeats a severely wounded Dark Side Apprentice and nobody says that's fine as it shows Rey's natural strength. They say it's bad writing as they claim it doesn't allow the character anywhere to "grow". But that argument is NEVER applied to Luke or Obi-Wan and indeed those two characters do indeed grow over subsequent movies. Just like Rey does.

    But a different set of "character rules" seems to be applied to Rey. Why?

  • Vendi1983
    4153 posts Member
    edited July 30
    Because "she". That's why, unfortunately.

    They show you 2-3 times over the course of the movie how powerful the bowcaster is (both visually and even verbally), as like a "you get it NOW? Do you???!!!" type of foreshadowing by JJ so that when Kylo eats a shot from it to the stomach you realize; A - how tough he is, B - how Rey was able to overpower/equal him.
  • She has no purpose in the movies and adds nothing whatsoever. It would be one thing if she were a background character but for her to be one of the main characters? Ridiculous.
  • Nihion
    3002 posts Member
    I think people just don’t like Rey, but Rey defeating Kylo in TFA was a way to show that she doesn’t have anywhere she needs to grow physically; but mentally, she’s far from perfect. She will do anything to get back to her family, and I was hoping that TLJ would utilize that weakness. But oh well.
  • LordDirt
    1590 posts Member
    TLJ - pointless movie that added nothing to the new trilogy and broke the lore. And killed the only remaining viable villain before the end of the trilogy.

    Huh? It added Kylo Ren as the ultimate villain. He defeated his master and took his place. Something darkside users usually do. Too bad Vader couldnt do it.
  • LordDirt
    1590 posts Member
    BTW, the trilogy was supposed to show Kylo Ren’s growth not Rey’s but we are always expecting the heroes journey with our entertainment and not the villian’s.

    7 - Kylo Ren doesnt want to kill Rey. He is wounded and wants to convert her. She calls upon the Force and beats him and flees

    8 - Kylo Ren still trys to convert her, she refuses and they fight over the lightsaber and it is a draw.

    9 - Kylo Ren is at his ultimate power and finally realizes she will not join him and he beats her in a duel
  • Nihion
    3002 posts Member
    LordDirt wrote: »
    BTW, the trilogy was supposed to show Kylo Ren’s growth not Rey’s but we are always expecting the heroes journey with our entertainment and not the villian’s.

    7 - Kylo Ren doesnt want to kill Rey. He is wounded and wants to convert her. She calls upon the Force and beats him and flees

    8 - Kylo Ren still trys to convert her, she refuses and they fight over the lightsaber and it is a draw.

    9 - Kylo Ren is at his ultimate power and finally realizes she will not join him and he beats her in a duel

    Exactly. Rey’s journey is opposite, more of a descent than a rise.

    Rey’s Journey:

    7 - Rey refuses to join Kylo, beats him, almost kills him.

    8 - They briefly work together, she refuses again, she doesn’t defeat Kylo or tries to kill him.

    9 - Kylo tries one last time, she considers it, and then she doesn’t have to choose as she escapes (I personally think that this is the moment she should have turned). Kylo defeats her, doesn’t offer his hand, tries to kill her. Then all the weirdness happens.
  • Stenun wrote: »
    Ex rey beats kylo in 1st movie

    I've never understood this point as a complaint. So what if Rey beats Kylo in TFA? Everyone uses it to attack Rey's character but as far as I'm concerned it is completely disingenuous to do so.

    Consider the following:

    At the end of ANH, Luke - without any training whatsoever - proves extremely difficult for a Sith Lord to target even with the help of a targeting computer and everyone just says that's fine as it shows Luke's natural strength. Not to mention Han Solo then surprising a Sith Lord but again that's fine because, er, it's Han Solo and people like him?

    At the end of TPM, Obi-Wan defeats the Sith who just killed a Jedi Master despite the fact that Obi-Wan is a Padawan at this point. And everyone says that's fine as it shows Obi-Wan's natural strength.

    At the end of TFA, Rey defeats a severely wounded Dark Side Apprentice and nobody says that's fine as it shows Rey's natural strength. They say it's bad writing as they claim it doesn't allow the character anywhere to "grow". But that argument is NEVER applied to Luke or Obi-Wan and indeed those two characters do indeed grow over subsequent movies. Just like Rey does.

    But a different set of "character rules" seems to be applied to Rey. Why?

    Luke doesn't beat vader in a lightsaber fight without any training in lightsabercombat. If so, it would be the same issue.

    Luke's backstory has him being a skilled pilot. Rey's backstory has her being a scavenger and then she ends up being great at piloting, force powers, and lightsaber combat just because. Not much of a hero's journey if you start out good at everything.

    Up until TFA, lightsaber combat was something that required training. So to have someone who had never heard of the force the day before suddenly beat a sith apprentice is lore breaking.

    ANH does get a pass with lore breaking since there was no lore to break at the time.

    Maul was a skilled apprentice but not at the level of a Sith Lord. It also didn't remove the stakes since palps was still lurking in the shadows and was enough of a villain to keep the stakes for the movie. In fact in Legends, maul wasn't even a true sith apprentice just a trained assassin. Also Obiwan had trained for years in lightsaber combat and was at the level of a jedi knight by that time.

    So a trained jedi beating a trained sith doesn't break the lore.

    And at least for me Rey's "subsequent growth" in TLJ is **** too. The movie picks up immediately after TFA and only takes place over 16 hours. So Rey again barely trains yet then lifts like a hundred huge rocks at the end.

    TROS doesn't bother me as much as far as Rey being OP because there was a time skip and she did train as shown in the opening scene.

    There was an appropriate 3 yr time skip from ANH to ESB and there was still several scenes of Luke training to use the force before he even did any lightsaber combat or major force powers. That established that using the force and lightsaber combat was a skill that needed to be learned.

    The prequels didn't break the lore and ignore this. It is pretty clear that obiwan was trained from a small child so of course he could fight with a lightsaber.

    If they wanted Rey to kick **** with a lightsaber in the first sequel, all they would have done was make her back story to be one of Luke's apprentices. Then it doesn't break the lore. I have no problem with the following female characters kicking butt with a lightsaber

    Mara Jade
    Jaina Solo
    Tahiti Velia
    Ashoka Tano
    Saba Sebatine

    They are all from Legends. The difference is they respected the lore and were all trained instead of just being a skilled duelist just because. The training doesn't even have to take place on screen. Just a reference to her being a former jedi would have been enough.

    And that is only one example of them ignoring prior lore for no apparent good reason. The sequels are full of that kind of pointless crapping on the lore.
  • LordDirt wrote: »
    TLJ - pointless movie that added nothing to the new trilogy and broke the lore. And killed the only remaining viable villain before the end of the trilogy.

    Huh? It added Kylo Ren as the ultimate villain. He defeated his master and took his place. Something darkside users usually do. Too bad Vader couldnt do it.

    Yeah that may have worked if the hero hadn't already defeated Kylo with no training.

    Was anyone really wondering if Rey could beat Kylo at the end of TLJ?

    Even Disney realized the hole they were in after the last jedi. That's why they had to bring back palp. So yeah killing the big bad when you still have a movie left and leaving only a villain who was already defeated by the hero is a pretty stupid move.

    Just have the snoke hologram changed to a palp hologram and you can skip the last jedi and nothing really changes. So yeah pretty much pointless.
  • LordDirt wrote: »
    BTW, the trilogy was supposed to show Kylo Ren’s growth not Rey’s but we are always expecting the heroes journey with our entertainment and not the villian’s.

    7 - Kylo Ren doesnt want to kill Rey. He is wounded and wants to convert her. She calls upon the Force and beats him and flees

    8 - Kylo Ren still trys to convert her, she refuses and they fight over the lightsaber and it is a draw.

    9 - Kylo Ren is at his ultimate power and finally realizes she will not join him and he beats her in a duel

    He gets stabbed with a lightsaber. How's that him beating her?
  • Nihion
    3002 posts Member
    You must have missed the part where Kylo Ren knocked her to the ground and raised his saber.
  • Stenun
    655 posts Member
    Luke's backstory has him being a skilled pilot.

    It is not Luke's skill as a pilot that is the reason that Vader has a hard time targeting him,
    Vader has a famous line at this point and it is NOT "the years of practice are paying off for this one". It is "The Force is strong with this one". It is Luke's strength with the Force that gives Vader a hard time.
    And everyone's fine with that, because it's Luke.
    But lots of people can't accept that the Force is strong with Rey, because it's Rey.

    Also, Vader has just killed Red Leader. I think we can assume that Red Leader is not a newbie to flying and is probably quite skilled, too. But Vader had no problem taking him down.
    It is Luke's Force strength that causes problems for Vader. Not his history piloting his T-16.

    Not much of a hero's journey if you start out good at everything.

    This is another point that I see a lot and it is a "point" that completely ignored Rey's mistakes.
    And when I've tried pointing out Rey's mistakes, people say they're irrelevant or try to re-frame them to be good things. Because if they accepted that Rey makes mistakes, their entire argument falls apart. And it seems to be more important to attack Rey.
    Here, I'll prove it. Let's just go with something trivial.
    Rey isn't good at everything in TFA, Kylo Ren captures her.
    What's your counterpoint to that going to be?

    Up until TFA, lightsaber combat was something that required training. So to have someone who had never heard of the force the day before suddenly beat a sith apprentice is lore breaking.

    So? New information is not a contradiction and it certainly isn't "lore breaking".
    We know Luke can fly a ship and then add the Force on top of that and all is well.
    We know Rey can fight (witness the scene where some thugs try to steal BB-9 from her) and then add the Force on top of that and people say it's "lore breaking".

    Maul was a skilled apprentice but not at the level of a Sith Lord. It also didn't remove the stakes since palps was still lurking in the shadows and was enough of a villain to keep the stakes for the movie. In fact in Legends, maul wasn't even a true sith apprentice just a trained assassin. Also Obiwan had trained for years in lightsaber combat and was at the level of a jedi knight by that time.

    So a trained jedi beating a trained sith doesn't break the lore.

    Even if Maul is "not at the level of a Sith Lord", he IS at the level where he can beat a Jedi Master as he has literally just done so. Obi-Wan is still a padawan.
    At this point, you are turning to information presented outside the film to justify something that happens in the film rather than accept that you are treating Rey differently from Obi-Wan.

    And at least for me Rey's "subsequent growth" in TLJ is **** too. The movie picks up immediately after TFA and only takes place over 16 hours. So Rey again barely trains yet then lifts like a hundred huge rocks at the end.

    Size matters not.

    There was an appropriate 3 yr time skip from ANH to ESB and there was still several scenes of Luke training to use the force before he even did any lightsaber combat or major force powers. That established that using the force and lightsaber combat was a skill that needed to be learned.

    No, it doesn't.
    Luke never needed training to tap into his raw potential with the Force. Witness him destroying the Death Star without a targeting computer or using telekinesis on the lightsaber in the Wampa cave.
    Take Luke's piloting skills and add the Force on top and he's a formidable pilot and all is grand. Take Rey's fighting skills and add the Force on top and she's a formidable warrior and everyone complains.

    It is pretty clear that obiwan was trained from a small child so of course he could fight with a lightsaber.

    Going purely on the information presented in TPM, why can Obi-Wan beat Maul but Qui-Gon can't?
    Why is it OK for a padawan to do something his Master can't other than that padawan is naturally strong?

    And throughout your reply, you completely ignored the factor of Kylo Ren's really nasty wound. They keep drawing attention to it in the film; it is an important factor in Rey's win.


    I'm sorry, I don't mean to be rude or argumentative but most of your reply really does read like you're clutching at straws.
    At one point you even resort to information from outside the films to try to justify what happens in the films. You turn to information found elsewhere to weaken Maul ("oh he's not really a Sith") but you ignore the points that Kylo is both badly wounded and an apprentice which are both pieces of information presented on screen in the movie
    So what the looks like to me is that you are prepared to weaken Maul using a secondary source to justify Obi-Wan's victory but you are not prepared to use the film itself to justify Rey's.

    It reads to me very much like you hate Rey for some other reasons and are now trying to find some "justifications" for it.
    And if you hate Rey (and indeed Rose too, who this thread was originally about); fine. I'm not trying to convince you otherwise. But none of the reasons presented in this thread for either the Rose hate or the Rey hate stand up to any scrutiny.
  • Nihion
    3002 posts Member
    I don’t think that the reasons for hate are very great either, but if you wanted to prove that, why did you invite people to give their opinion?
  • Stenun
    655 posts Member
    Nihion wrote: »
    I don’t think that the reasons for hate are very great either, but if you wanted to prove that, why did you invite people to give their opinion?

    I'm trying to understand it. And I don't.
    To be honest, that's my motivation for quite a lot of things I do in my life. I want to understand. :smile:

    Why do some people vote for politician A and others vote for politician B? I want to understand that.
    What are the reasons that lead some people to prefer Star Trek to Stargate or vice versa? I want to understand that.
    What are the reasons people hate Rose Tico? I don't understand.
  • Nihion
    3002 posts Member
    Stenun wrote: »
    Nihion wrote: »
    I don’t think that the reasons for hate are very great either, but if you wanted to prove that, why did you invite people to give their opinion?

    I'm trying to understand it. And I don't.
    To be honest, that's my motivation for quite a lot of things I do in my life. I want to understand. :smile:

    Why do some people vote for politician A and others vote for politician B? I want to understand that.
    What are the reasons that lead some people to prefer Star Trek to Stargate or vice versa? I want to understand that.
    What are the reasons people hate Rose Tico? I don't understand.

    I, too, thirst for knowledge. But in my long history of studying controversy, most of the time people get too invested in their own beliefs. It prevents understanding.

    Another thing I’ve learned is that some people just don’t like some things. Could be something from deep in their memory. Could just be that they’re offended. But most often I find that people just don’t want to admit to the simplicity or plain terribleness of their opinions. I’m sure there are some legitimate reasons that people don’t like Rose, but like you hinted at in your opening post: For most people, it’s probably just a subconscious ism.
  • Stenun
    655 posts Member
    Nihion wrote: »
    Another thing I’ve learned is that some people just don’t like some things.

    And that's fine.
    But there is a difference between not liking something and hating it. I don't particularly like Billy Wilder's film The Apartment but I don't hate it. I'm not moved to post online about how much I hate it or argue against it or object to it in all manifestations. I just think "meh, whatever, some like it, I'd prefer to re-watch Some Like It Hot".
    If people just didn't like Rose Tico then fine, whatever. But with Rose it is not a case of "not liking" or even "disliking", it is apoplectic hate.
    And that's a whole different thing entirely. And that's why I'm moved to try to understand. Where does the hate come from?
Sign In or Register to comment.