It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Disney: ‘Strong, Empowered’ Females In Star Wars Is ‘Purposeful’

page: 3
4
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 3 2017 @ 10:35 AM
link   
a reply to: Profusion

it was a jk no implication of anything.




posted on Jan, 3 2017 @ 02:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Profusion


George Lucas was trying to make art.

This is the most laughable thing I've ever read about the Star Wars franchise. MAYBE with episode 4 he was trying to make art but at no point afterwards was the Star Wars movies about making art. You pretty much invalidated your entire argument with this one line.

Heck, it's even hard to call episode 4 "art" since it's really just a rewrite of an old Japanese samurai flick. The Film Star Wars Stole From

I'm not trying to give the impression I don't like Star Wars here either. I am a HUGE SW fan, but it is delusional to not acknowledge that George Lucas was cashing in on Star Wars since the 70's. Or do you think this was made for the sake of art?


Here's what George Lucas said about selling the Star Wars films to Disney (starting at 1:45 in the video below):



George Lucas: These are my kids.

Charles Rose: All the "Star Wars" films.

George Lucas: All the "Star Wars" films.

Charles Rose: They were your kids?

George Lucas: Yeah, well they are. You know, I loved them. I created them. I'm very intimately involved in them. And, obviously to sell them off to...

Charles Rose: You sold them.

George Lucas: I sold them to the white slavers that take these things and, and uh (laughs)


What do you think Lucas is alluding to? "What slavers"? Even speaking metaphorically, how much worse can it get? I sense regret in his voice.

Lucas was obviously trying to capitalize on his art, but I don't see how that fact detracts from the artistic quality of any of his films. An artist trying to make a living from their art is completely different than a corporation putting a story together based on what they believe will maximize profits. That's what I believe George Lucas was getting at when he called Disney "white slavers."


www.youtube.com...
edit on 3-1-2017 by Profusion because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 3 2017 @ 03:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Profusion

I really don't care about his opinion that he is trying to sell the media about. The products he released under the Star Wars label speak for themselves (in other words actions speak louder than words here). The amount of cash grabs that Lucas attempted using this franchise is just insane. Heck Lucas is credited with creating the modern merchandising tie-in model for modern blockbusters. You know how there are toys for all the characters in the movie to buy before it even comes out? Yeah that was Lucas and Star Wars.

But heck, just off the top of my head here are a bunch of Lucas cash grabs:
Star Wars Christmas special
Ewoks added to Episode VI specifically to sell toys
Star Wars Special Editions ("Han shot first")
Number of theatrical rereleases since the 80's.
The god-awful prequels (the pod race was added to sell that stupid N64 game).

Heck even when you strip away all the glory of the Star Wars franchise, you are left with a mediocre story that's been told THOUSANDS of times and is full of plot holes. Most of the glory involving SW involves nostalgia and the way Lucas redefined how blockbusters are sold and marketed to the public. Again, it's a great series and I too love it, but let's be real here Star Wars is as much "art" as the Transformers franchise is today.

The best Star Wars stories are all EU stories and they are all written by other people. Sure Lucas approved every story, but its not like he came up with the ideas for them himself.
edit on 3-1-2017 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 3 2017 @ 03:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Profusion

I really don't care about his opinion that he is trying to sell the media about. The products he released under the Star Wars label speak for themselves (in other words actions speak louder than words here).


Is Steven King any less of an artist because he's capitalized on his work in many different ways? I see Steven King and George Lucas as being equally true to their art. I think they're both great businessmen as well. I don't see any reason why someone can't be a true artist and a brilliant businessman simultaneously concerning their art.

I understand that we have completely different views on this matter, and I don't see any way we can agree.



posted on Jan, 3 2017 @ 03:34 PM
link   
a reply to: Profusion

Now you aren't understanding what I'm trying to explain here. I never claimed that an artist cannot make money off of their work, or even get mindbogglingly rich off of it, but comparing King's work to Lucas' isn't even valid. What I'm pointing out are times where Lucas modified his own work to cash in on it and make money over producing art. King may do it to some degree, but Lucas is guilty as sin for it and complaining that Disney is doing it now with Star Wars is asinine since they are really only picking up the torch where Lucas handed it off.

Like I said, Star Wars is awesome and it helped define my childhood, but at the same time we have to realize that it has a lot of fan propped nostalgia backing it too. The plot holes and scientific inaccuracies (explosions in space?) are hard to ignore in this day and age with the internet. Why else do you think the Force Awakens was so loved by everyone? It retold the original story.



posted on Jan, 3 2017 @ 03:52 PM
link   
a reply to: blood0fheroes

Disney is using their traditional princesses to focus on girls and the MArvel universe to focus on boys.



posted on Jan, 3 2017 @ 03:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

What about the Clone Wars TV show? I gotta admit that's like one of the best things in Star Wars.

Star Wars brought up a lot of interesting ideas: it shows the idea of the possibilities of other humans in other parts of the universe (explored in Star Trek, Stargate Farscape and other Sci Fi media), the idea of science existing side by side with spiritual forces (Space travel alongside Ghosts), Telekinesis and other Psychic abilities (Some of us members including me are Psychics) and lastly the idea of the Force which is more believable than an invisible man in the sky.

I'm not saying Star Wars is real, what I'm saying is George probably got them somewhere.

Sure it's somewhat scientifically inaccurate but it gets you thinking where George got his ideas.
edit on 1/3/2017 by starwarsisreal because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 3 2017 @ 04:08 PM
link   
Luke will not be the main in E8, it will still be Rey and Emo Ren. Supposedly Cap'n Phasma will have a more central role as well.


I'm reserving my outrage for the upcoming transgender Disney princess flick
edit on 132017 by Butterfinger because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 3 2017 @ 04:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Butterfinger
Luke will not be the main in E8, it will still be Rey and Emo Ren. Supposedly Cap'n Phasma will have a more central role as well.


I'm reserving my outrage for the upcoming transgender Disney princess flick


You just inspired me!

/runs off to scribble out an outline for the fanfic masterpiece "Emo Ren seduced by Brianne of Tarth"



~meathead



posted on Jan, 4 2017 @ 07:01 AM
link   
a reply to: starwarsisreal

Oh dude. I'm seriously not trying to give the wrong impression here. I LOVE, L-O-V-E, Star Wars. Again. It was my childhood. But at the same time I recognize the man behind the curtain as well. It's rather obvious, BUT if you think about it, it's not so bad that Disney acquired the Star Wars franchise.

If you accept that the Star Wars franchise has always been a cash grab on Lucas' part then Disney acquiring Star Wars is the best thing that can ever happen to the franchise. Let's get one thing straight. Disney knows fun. Everything they touch turns fun and magical for pretty much anyone of any age. They have it down to a science. No joke; they are called Imagineers. Think about it. Only the Disney corporation could take an amusement park ride and turn it into a multi-million dollar movie franchise.

And let's not twist facts here. Disney is in it for the money. They always have been. It's been no secret, but they have monetized fun. They value imagination at that company. Something that the Star Wars franchise DESPERATELY needed. Sure you mention some good non-movie cannon like the Clone Wars series, but you can't ignore the duds. I mean the Star Wars Holiday Special is an atrocity to all things art. Disney would find a way to present Star Wars in a MUCH more dignified manor while also being hugely successful with it.

Let's also talk about Disney's need to cast female leads. I really don't even know why this is surprising. Disney has pretty much been on the feminist train since the 90's if anyone cared to notice. Someone said that all the Disney Princesses are just weak women waiting to be saved, but that stopped being true about 20 years ago with the movie Mulan. Since then Disney movies have been steadily featuring stronger and stronger female protagonists. Think of a Disney movie since 1998 that has a typical "oh save me hero!" Princess in it. Instead male protags have been steadily phased out and pushed to supporting characters. You have Tangled. Brave. Even their "girliest" movies like Frozen have strong female leads.

But hey if Disney says that a strong female lead will make for a good movie, then I'll take their word based on their track record alone.
edit on 4-1-2017 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join