Categories
imaginary backwards land misogyny oppressed white men racism

Star Wars Boycott a Huge Success in Imaginary Backwards Land

Daisy Ridley, JJ Abrams and John Boyega mourn the disasterous failure of Star Wars: The Force Awakens in some alternate universe probably
Daisy Ridley, JJ Abrams and John Boyega mourn the disastrous failure of Star Wars: The Force Awakens in some alternate universe probably

So you remember that half-assed Star Wars: The Force Awakens “boycott” that the white supremacists tried to get going a couple of months ago?

Well, apparently it was a GIGANTIC SUCCESS. In some alternate universe. Probably.

Aren’t there like infinite universes or something? There’s probably an alternate universe somewhere where we’re all giant land-squids, and in that universe every single giant land squid decided to spend the day playing Jarts instead of going to Star Wars: The Force Awakens.

Oh, also in that universe Jarts are still legal.

Meanwhile, in this universe, where very few of us are giant land-squids, the Star Wars boycott kind of flopped big time.

Making this dude very, very sad, we imagine.

152 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Moggie
Moggie
8 years ago

Maybe the MGTOW sexbot utopia is closer than I imagined. If they’ll settle for Star Wars merch with a fleshlight glued to it, you could pretty much satisfy their dreams immediately.

nparker
nparker
8 years ago

Ooh, ninja’d! I thought I was being original mentioning 20th Century Fox. Oh bother…

Walter
Walter
8 years ago

Falconer

I saw the movie two days ago. It was OK. I think people are overrating it drastically. It has serious flaws and was very bland.

It might have looked more “lived in” than the prequels, a critique I do agree with a little bit, but the prequels had much better world building and their situation and conflict made much more sense to me.

Rey was a great character, but the movie spent so much time with Han Solo and all those other nostalgic bits that she didn’t really get a chance to have any kind of proper character development.

I didn’t mind Finn, but much like Rey his character isn’t really developed during the film and is mostly portrayed as a bumbling oaf that exists to make the white heroes look good. He’s honestly a less racist version of Jar Jar Binks.

It was an OK movie, don’t get me wrong, but it was soulless and clearly lacked any kind of vision or purpose outside of, “let’s make money!”

Falconer
Falconer
8 years ago

I didn’t mind Finn, but much like Rey his character isn’t really developed during the film and is mostly portrayed as a bumbling oaf that exists to make the white heroes look good. He’s honestly a less racist version of Jar Jar Binks.

I’m sorry, we apparently didn’t watch the same movie.

Finn is highly competent, brave, and morally upright. He is able to learn how to use new things very quickly, just like Rey.

That’s all I will say, for much more will stray into spoilers.

It was an OK movie, don’t get me wrong, but it was soulless and clearly lacked any kind of vision or purpose outside of, “let’s make money!”

I stand by what I said: I got more pew pew and life savers and ex wigs and you didn’t. You went to see a movie. I had the time of my life.

nparker
nparker
8 years ago

@ Falconer

I had the time of my life.

People keep saying things like that- I can’t wait to see it tomorrow!

Scented Fucking Hard Chairs
Scented Fucking Hard Chairs
8 years ago

The artists who work for Disney have a creative process. It’s them who create the beautiful films that have made the Disney Corporation so much money, not Disney or the suits who run it.

The artists who work for Disney are Disney, you stupid fuck.

Unless you’re specifically talking about Walt Disney. In which case, I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but he died 49 years ago.

nparker
nparker
8 years ago

@ Scented Fucking Hard Chairs

The artists who work for Disney are Disney, you stupid fuck.

Exactly!

nparker
nparker
8 years ago

Oh, and Pixar (who, you know, are owned by Disney) have openly stated that they only want to make sequels when they believe there is a great story for one. So much for the ‘corporate exploitation’ angle Walter seems unduly obsessed about.

Robert
Robert
8 years ago

Falconer – can you explain what an ‘ex wig’ is without it being a spoiler?

Falconer
Falconer
8 years ago

Apparently, when Disney produces a movie, it’s an entirely different process than when MGM/UA or Fox or Universal produces a movie, one that negates the Vision that the Creators have.

The proper way to consume movies is to read the first draft of the script, apparently. Like Patrician Vetinari reading the sheet music instead of going to concerts, except he reads the polished piece.

Walter
Walter
8 years ago

nparker

Praise to be to our corporate overlords for they are the job creators. Please tell me nparker, how does the corporate teat taste?

The suits in charge of Disney are just money changers. They don’t contribute anything of value that isn’t preceded by a dollar sign. You know a lot of the people in charge of movie/TV studios don’t even watch movies for pleasure? It’s true. A lot of people who have worked in the industry have come out and said that numerous times. Dan Harmon for example. That should tell you the truth about these guys. They’re just money changers. They don’t care about film or art. They’ve probably never had a creative idea in their life that didn’t revolve around tricking someone out of a few dollars.

If Disney didn’t exist, someone else would just take their place. Disney isn’t necessary, just useful. They serve a purpose, for now, but they aren’t necessary to the creative process and are really just holding back American culture by keeping anything from going into the public domain.

Falconer
Falconer
8 years ago

@ Robert, it’s a (hopefully) humorous mispelling of “X-Wing.”

There’s a gifset going around Tumblr right now about how “I like Star Wars! Pew Pew! Light savers! Dark Vader! Obi 1 Cannoli! I like Star Trek!” and I was going for that general sort of whimsy.

Falconer
Falconer
8 years ago

They’re just money changers. They don’t care about film or art. They’ve probably never had a creative idea in their life that didn’t revolve around tricking someone out of a few dollars.

Do you want me to hold your sandals while you throw them out of the temple, then, O Lord?

Walter
Walter
8 years ago

Falconer

All those companies are run by a bunch of useless middlemen. We would be better off as a society if they were all broken up or eliminated.

We can’t discuss that movie without spoiling it, so we’ll just have to agree to disagree, because the character I saw on screen was essentially Jar Jar Binks for the new generation.

Scented Fucking Hard Chairs

No. The artist who work for Disney are their employees. Remove them from Disney and they will keep on creating and adding to American culture. Disney is just the corporate entity. It’s an abstract idea on a piece of paper. Nothing more.

Walter
Walter
8 years ago

Falconer

I’m sure you’ll be too busy voting Republican to hold anything.

Scented Fucking Hard Chairs
Scented Fucking Hard Chairs
8 years ago

The suits in charge of Disney are just money changers.

Okay, no, fucking Nazi-ass dog whistles about DA JOOZ are going way too far. We’re talking about Star Wars, not Stormfront. Fuck the hell off before I call David.

Falconer
Falconer
8 years ago

Place ya betz! Place ya betz! How many comments before Walter sez da woid “sheeple” !

Place ya betz ‘ere!

Walter
Walter
8 years ago

I’m sure you’ll be too busy voting Republican to hold anything.

hmm, upon thinking about, there is something you’ll be able to hold. Atlas Shrugged. Please tell me about the “joys” of objectivism and the free market.

Walter
Walter
8 years ago

Scented Fucking Hard Chairs

What are you talking about? No one said anything about Jewish people. You’re ridiculous.

WeirwoodTreeHugger
WeirwoodTreeHugger
8 years ago

Anytime an artist is paid to create something, they lose a little bit of creative control. Does that make it not art? Because even a lot of the great art hanging in museums was commissioned by an aristocrat or a religious institution. If an artist working for Disney isn’t an artist because they’re being paid by a large entity, than Michaelangelo’s work at the Cistene (sp?) Chapel isn’t art either.

nparker
nparker
8 years ago

@ Walter

“The suits in charge of Disney are just money changers. They don’t contribute anything of value that isn’t preceded by a dollar sign. ”

And how would you know this, oh wise one?

“You know a lot of the people in charge of movie/TV studios don’t even watch movies for pleasure? It’s true. A lot of people who have worked in the industry have come out and said that numerous times. Dan Harmon for example.”

So? Who cares? For a lot of people, if they spend their working life sorting out the logistics of making films, they’re not likely to want to get back home, sit down and relax with a nice film. A little like people who work at Cadbury’s probably don’t relax in the evening with a bar of chocolate.

“That should tell you the truth about these guys. They’re just money changers. They don’t care about film or art.”

Uh, no. Some care, some don’t. That’s the way the whole world works. To some, its just a job. To some, it is a way of life. Who are you to say they don’t care about film or art? Have you met them? Have you talked films, or art, with them all? The person who dismisses the usefulness of an entire production company in making films is the one who doesn’t care about art.

George Lucas was in charge of Lucasfilm. You still haven’t told me- how can you deride a whole group of people for something yet not mind when another you deem more worthy does it?

Oh, thought experiment time- in the UK, we have the BBC. Its funded by a mixture of the licence fee, which most people have to pay, and the commercial sales done by BBC Worldwide. Would you say that the general public don’t care about films, or BBC programmes, or art, just because it’s their money going in?

“They’ve probably never had a creative idea in their life that didn’t revolve around tricking someone out of a few dollars.”

Citation needed.

“All those companies are run by a bunch of useless middlemen. We would be better off as a society if they were all broken up or eliminated.”

Citation needed.

“No. The artist who work for Disney are their employees. Remove them from Disney and they will keep on creating and adding to American culture.”

As they are within the Disney Company, they are Disney. They can be referred to collectively as Disney.

“Disney is just the corporate entity. It’s an abstract idea on a piece of paper. Nothing more.”

Repeating the same damn thing over and over again does not make it true.

“The character I saw on screen was essentially Jar Jar Binks for the new generation.”

Good. I like a character that engages the younger fans who enjoy the same movies I enjoy.

Walter, why the hell do you hate business execs so much?

WeirwoodTreeHugger
WeirwoodTreeHugger
8 years ago

I mean, it can certainly be argued that large movie studios let money concerns override the creative vision of the director and screenwriter to the extent that it wrecks movies. That happens often and it’s a fair argument. BUT, when someone tries to act like they’re the arbiter of what is and isn’t art and who is or isn’t an artist, then I throw a major side eye at them.

nparker
nparker
8 years ago

@ WeirwoodTreeHugger

That’s exactly how I feel. Art is one of the greatest things ever, and to see it defined by some arbitrary limit or rule saddens me no end.

Falconer
Falconer
8 years ago

I’m sure you’ll be too busy voting Republican to hold anything.

hmm, upon thinking about, there is something you’ll be able to hold. Atlas Shrugged. Please tell me about the “joys” of objectivism and the free market.

http://cdn.meme.am/instances/35899753.jpg

https://youtu.be/FopyRHHlt3M

And if you look to your left,

Scented Fucking Hard Chairs

What are you talking about? No one said anything about Jewish people. You’re ridiculous.

you will see one of the finest specimens of the dog whistle ever captured alive on these shores.

WeirwoodTreeHugger
WeirwoodTreeHugger
8 years ago

And I know I’m in danger of spamming, but I have one more point.

Walter’s arguments have a thin veneer of anti-capitalist, proletarian crusading to them. But there’s actually nothing more elitist and classist than smugly declaring what True Art really is.

It takes a shit ton of privilege to be able to travel to cities like Paris where the famous works of art reside. Or buy ballet, opera, and theater tickets. Or spend tons of time tracking down obscure arthouse movies. But almost anyone can at least occasionally see studio movies. During the depression, going to the movies gave struggling people a break from their worries. So really, Walter’s smugness isn’t quite as radical as he thinks it is.