Star Wars The Acolyte

[FlowersByIrene]

There’s your first problem. Going to an obvious and admitted bad faith grifter for objective opinion about a thing he declared he hated a year ago. Dude. If you’re truly trying to engage with Star Wars and this show in particular, stop going to sites that have a declared and vested interest in tearing it down.

Second issue is that Qimir’s swim and getting undressed (which lets face it, was pretty tame) had everything to do with the story. It revealed his scarred back and progressed his entrapment and influence of Osha building sexual tension between them as he tries to bring her to his pov. It’s an essential part of the story development. Leia’s slave outfit was basically just eye candy for 12 year old boys to get excited about. It didn’t help progress the story. There were no underlying themes other than Leia was powerless - which could have been shown in numerous other ways.

To be fair, I only watch those shows sporadically and I do so after sharing my thoughts on the episode in here initially for additional context. I'm not subscribed to that guy (I am subscribed to Eckhardt's Ladder who does videos on this but he is more positive).

I think the slave Leia outfit actually is quite important as it juxtaposes her brief moment of powerlessness against her usually regal and confident self and shows a continued deeper insight into her character and how capable she is. And then so what if it was there for 12 year old boys to get excited about, there is value in that in story telling too. Some of the most iconic moments in pop-culture are done for that exact reason, Megan Fox in the first Transformers comes to mind. The Acolyte could do with something that is imprinted into the culture as that scene.

I just find it funny when people who think that they are better than you (i.e woke) are really, the exact same and hypocritical to their supposed moral superiority.

 

[Kellythatsit]

To be fair, I only watch those shows sporadically and I do so after sharing my thoughts on the episode in here initially for additional context. I'm not subscribed to that guy (I am subscribed to Eckhardt's Ladder who does videos on this but he is more positive).

I think the slave Leia outfit actually is quite important as it juxtaposes her brief moment of powerlessness against her usually regal and confident self and shows a continued deeper insight into her character and how capable she is. And then so what if it was there for 12 year old boys to get excited about, there is value in that in story telling too. Some of the most iconic moments in pop-culture are done for that exact reason, Megan Fox in the first Transformers comes to mind. The Acolyte could do with something that is imprinted into the culture as that scene.

I just find it funny when people who think that they are better than you (i.e woke) are really, the exact same and hypocritical to their supposed moral superiority.

No one thinks they’re better than you mate. All this woke and elitist nonsense is just a made up thing to make people feel like they have to fight against some horrible, undefinable shadow. That you’re fighting against some faceless mob who thinks they’re better than you when really they’re people who just see things from a different angle.

Take the slave Leia thing for example. I think I’m right, you think you’re right. Who really is? Neither of us but both of us also. It’s the actual making of the conversation and discussing our own perspectives. It’s getting other people to think about their own perspectives without instantly dismissing it as “woke” or whatever.

 

[SM]

Woke!!! Took longer than expected for that bingo tick.

 

[FlowersByIrene]

Woke!!! Took longer than expected for that bingo tick.

You sound like Ki Adi Mundi ignoring the threat of the returning Sith.

FBI: "my only conclusion can be that it was woke influence".
SM: "Impossible, the woke have been extinct for a millennia".

 

[Kellythatsit]

I think the slave Leia outfit actually is quite important as it juxtaposes her brief moment of powerlessness against her usually regal and confident self and shows a continued deeper insight into her character and how capable she is. And then so what if it was there for 12 year old boys to get excited about, there is value in that in story telling too. Some of the most iconic moments in pop-culture are done for that exact reason, Megan Fox in the first Transformers comes to mind. The Acolyte could do with something that is imprinted into the culture as that scene.

I haven’t watched Transformers so I can’t comment on that but there are plenty of iconic moments in The Acolyte. The difference is that slave Leia has had decades of nostalgic build-up from one of the most recognised and beloved films in popular culture. It’s also likely the first time a lot of Star Wars fans discovered we had a massive crush on Princess Leia!

It’s not wrong that we felt that way, and I agree with your points about what it represents for her character. It’s questionable about what it progresses in the story though. Could these character points be shown in a different way? I’d argue they already were in Empire when she had been captured by Vader and was powerless to save Han. What’s also notable is that in marketing and the posters for the film we have Luke and Han in action poses at their most powerful and “alpha” yet Leia is showcased when the character is at her most vulnerable. That’s where the objectification comes in. It was used as an intentional tool to get an audience of adolescent and pre-teen boys excited about Leia and also use that to market the film: “Look there’s plenty of action, cool spaceships and aliens and also Leia gets her kit off!”

Now, let’s look at The Acolyte. Qirin’s “nudity” is implied only. We see his scarred back and really no lower than mid torso. For all we know he could have had a pair of Micky Mouse boxers on. Most of the scene he was in the water where you see only his face. But importantly, it has a significant impact on progressing the story as well as providing details about the character. It also helped to provide a softer nuanced side for the audience after the previous episode when he was so forebearing and aggressive.

 

[FlowersByIrene]

I haven’t watched Transformers so I can’t comment on that but there are plenty of iconic moments in The Acolyte. The difference is that slave Leia has had decades of nostalgic build-up from one of the most recognised and beloved films in popular culture. It’s also likely the first time a lot of Star Wars fans discovered we had a massive crush on Princess Leia!

It’s not wrong that we felt that way, and I agree with your points about what it represents for her character. It’s questionable about what it progresses in the story though. Could these character points be shown in a different way? I’d argue they already were in Empire when she had been captured by Vader and was powerless to save Han. What’s also notable is that in marketing and the posters for the film we have Luke and Han in action poses at their most powerful and “alpha” yet Leia is showcased when the character is at her most vulnerable. That’s where the objectification comes in. It was used as an intentional tool to get an audience of adolescent and pre-teen boys excited about Leia and also use that to market the film: “Look there’s plenty of action, cool spaceships and aliens and also Leia gets her kit off!”

Now, let’s look at The Acolyte. Qirin’s “nudity” is implied only. We see his scarred back and really no lower than mid torso. For all we know he could have had a pair of Micky Mouse boxers on. Most of the scene he was in the water where you see only his face. But importantly, it has a significant impact on progressing the story as well as providing details about the character. It also helped to provide a softer nuanced side for the audience after the previous episode when he was so forebearing and aggressive.

Come on mate, there was so much sexual innuendo with his lightsaber - he says something like "go on touch it, it feels good to have it back in your hands" or something like that to Osha while he's standing there naked haha it's the exact same. My point is none of its objectification but if any of it is it all is.

 

[Royces Hart]

I haven’t watched Transformers so I can’t comment on that but there are plenty of iconic moments in The Acolyte. The difference is that slave Leia has had decades of nostalgic build-up from one of the most recognised and beloved films in popular culture. It’s also likely the first time a lot of Star Wars fans discovered we had a massive crush on Princess Leia!

It’s not wrong that we felt that way, and I agree with your points about what it represents for her character. It’s questionable about what it progresses in the story though. Could these character points be shown in a different way? I’d argue they already were in Empire when she had been captured by Vader and was powerless to save Han. What’s also notable is that in marketing and the posters for the film we have Luke and Han in action poses at their most powerful and “alpha” yet Leia is showcased when the character is at her most vulnerable. That’s where the objectification comes in. It was used as an intentional tool to get an audience of adolescent and pre-teen boys excited about Leia and also use that to market the film: “Look there’s plenty of action, cool spaceships and aliens and also Leia gets her kit off!”

Now, let’s look at The Acolyte. Qirin’s “nudity” is implied only. We see his scarred back and really no lower than mid torso. For all we know he could have had a pair of Micky Mouse boxers on. Most of the scene he was in the water where you see only his face. But importantly, it has a significant impact on progressing the story as well as providing details about the character. It also helped to provide a softer nuanced side for the audience after the previous episode when he was so forebearing and aggressive.

I’m very much against the bullshit “woke” complaints.

Having said that, it does kind of feel like double standards. I mean, I don’t know how the Yord or Kylo Ren topless scenes progressed the story.

I’d rather everyone just keep their clothes on tbh.

 

[SM]

You sound like Ki Adi Mundi ignoring the threat of the returning Sith.

FBI: "my only conclusion can be that it was woke influence".
SM: "Impossible, the woke have been extinct for a millennia".

Quite the opposite, you use a word and don't know what it actually means because kids on YouTube tell you it's bad.

 

[Kellythatsit]

Come on mate, there was so much sexual innuendo with his lightsaber - he says something like "go on touch it, it feels good to have it back in your hands" or something like that to Osha while he's standing there naked haha it's the exact same. My point is none of its objectification but if any of it is it all is.

It’s not “the exact same thing” just because you’ve chosen to dismiss my points and hand wave it away as it’s all or nothing. Sexual innuendo and sexual tension are completely different from sexual objectification as I’ve stated in my previous post. I’m sorry if my points aren’t clear enough for you. As an observation, perhaps this “all or nothing” nonsense may be a reason you are finding it difficult to enjoy this show. It’s either got to be the greatest piece of entertainment ever conceived or it’s absolutely worthless, poorly written tripe.

 

[Kellythatsit]

I’m very much against the bullshit “woke” complaints.

Having said that, it does kind of feel like double standards. I mean, I don’t know how the Yord or Kylo Ren topless scenes progressed the story.

I’d rather everyone just keep their clothes on tbh.

Yorde I’d agree with but the Kylo Ren scene is pretty much the exact same thing as Qimir.

 

[Kellythatsit]

You sound like Ki Adi Mundi ignoring the threat of the returning Sith.

FBI: "my only conclusion can be that it was woke influence".
SM: "Impossible, the woke have been extinct for a millennia".

WTF is woke? Can you define it?

 

[SM]

WTF is woke? Can you define it?

Something something diversity something something cancel culture something something snowflakes.

 

[FlowersByIrene]

WTF is woke? Can you define it?

I would describe woke as: doing something for the purposes of a perceived broader social issue rather than the purpose for which you are trying to achieve. I.e hiring people based on race or gender rather than suitability for the role or creating a role to address a perceived social issue or send a message to contemporary audiences rather than suitability for the story.

Basically any racist, sexist or or anti-normative casting, character creation, themes or actions.

 

[Forward Press]

A Venn diagram of those using the word 'woke' unironically and those who think Andrew Tate makes some good points is a near perfect circle.

 

[Kellythatsit]

At the end of the day, the argument being made is academic anyway and yet another example of this stupid “wokeness” is destroying our lives narrative.

Slave Leia or Huttslayer Leia hasn’t actually been banned or discontinued at all. It’s just another bullshit example of disingenuous comicsgaters making up stuff. Since Disney has owned Lucasfilm they’ve released action figures, Lego min-figs, and even a $370 Sideshow figurine. She has appeared in at least one novel, kids storybooks, and the online Star Wars cartoon series Galaxy of Adventures. In fact, the beat up has actually turned what was basically another peg warmer into a much sought after item because people believe Disney have banned the character. If I was more cynical I’d almost suggest Disney created the rumour just to sell more products!!!

So as happens all the ****ing time with these manufactured YouTube pseudo controversies, the whole thing is absolute bullshit!

 

[FlowersByIrene]

A Venn diagram of those using the word 'woke' unironically and those who think Andrew Tate makes some good points is a near perfect circle.

Equally the venn diagram of those who think there is any irony in using the word woke and being 'woke' is a near perfect circle.

 

[Forward Press]

Equally the venn diagram of those who think there is any irony in using the word woke and being 'woke' is a near perfect circle.

Thank you for proving my point.

 

[FlowersByIrene]

Thank you for proving my point.

Thank you for proving mine

 

[Forward Press]

I would describe woke as: doing something for the purposes of a perceived broader social issue rather than the purpose for which you are trying to achieve. I.e hiring people based on race or gender rather than suitability for the role or creating a role to address a perceived social issue or send a message to contemporary audiences rather than suitability for the story.

Basically any racist, sexist or or anti-normative casting, character creation, themes or actions.

Was Everything Everywhere All at Once woke? Just curious. It fits your definition.

Anyway, maybe I'm getting sucked into one of those nonsense 'debates' but meh I'm bored.

 

[Forward Press]

Thank you for proving mine

Here's some light reading:

 

[SM]

I would describe woke as: doing something for the purposes of a perceived broader social issue rather than the purpose for which you are trying to achieve. I.e hiring people based on race or gender rather than suitability for the role or creating a role to address a perceived social issue or send a message to contemporary audiences rather than suitability for the story.

Basically any racist, sexist or or anti-normative casting, character creation, themes or actions.

****ing hell.

 

[Kellythatsit]

I would describe woke as: doing something for the purposes of a perceived broader social issue rather than the purpose for which you are trying to achieve. I.e hiring people based on race or gender rather than suitability for the role or creating a role to address a perceived social issue or send a message to contemporary audiences rather than suitability for the story.

Basically any racist, sexist or or anti-normative casting, character creation, themes or actions.

So would it be fair to define it further as: diversity, representation, and awareness just for its own sake.

In a nutshell?

 

[FlowersByIrene]

Was Everything Everywhere All at Once woke? Just curious. It fits your definition.

Anyway, maybe I'm getting sucked into one of those nonsense 'debates' but meh I'm bored.

To be honest I think i fell asleep during the rock scene of EEAAO, but i'd had a long day when I saw it. With that caveat, no, i don't recall thinking "this is woke". Why would you think people thought it was woke? To the extent it needs clarification (it shouldn't) that something isn't woke merely because it involves diverse characters or a story about diverse individuals.

For example - House of the Dragon made a controversial decision to race-swap the Velaryons. A decision which might have been done out of some desire to have more diverse representation in the series, but critically was done with an intention and desire to elevate the final product and highlight themes of the text/show. They are consistent with their characterisation, making all Velaryon characters of black descent and use it to highlight key points of the show like the parentage of Rhaneyra's children and then exploring themes of what it means to be family nature vs nurture in a really engaging and interesting way. Not 'woke' because it's done with purpose and elevating the product. The goal is an increased product, not a box ticking, participation medal from those who believe in woke ideology.

In contrast - Rings of Power made a number of questionable decisions such as casting singular diverse elves and dwarves amongst a world of non-diverse elves and dwarves, with no in-textual basis, no exploration of new themes or any other relevance to the story. It was merely done for purpose of box ticking and appealing to the perceived public desire for diversity and inclusion. Woke.

 

[FlowersByIrene]

So would it be fair to define it further as: diversity, representation, and awareness just for its own sake.

In a nutshell?

Exactly, in my opinion.

 

[Brick Loosener]

Woke!!! Took longer than expected for that bingo tick.

Amandla used it weeks ago in her diss track.