Outrage Culture and Calm

With all the talk about certain social media platforms amplifying outrage, hate and unrest, what comes to mind is the Harry Sheerer character in This is Spinal Tap saying that his band mates David and Nigel are like hot and cold and his role is to be "luke warm water." The next thing that comes to mind is an old John Cleese video listing all the people hated by the left and hated by the right, with both lists ending with "moderates." Nonetheless, that is where I see myself, the person who will come off as glib to those who thrive on outrage. It's not like anyone's adrenaline can sustain for days at a time, or that they have enough salive to foam at the mouth 24/7 but there are incendiary positions held as deeply as religous zealotry that come out as compulsive hashtag tweeting and blog sharing. You know the person who wakes up each morning to Google their trigger words. "JK Rowling won't copy/paste my opinion -- she must be a witch!" I am against lies and spin that "make life easier" or harder for anyone. If I had the means to put out fires I would. I am not an influencer. I can struggle with my weight and all of its related malodies and still be against any drive to enforce the idea that fat is as good as muscle. Social media might call for a wider range of body types and faces in movies, but maybe cinematographers might not want the challenge of making them "look good." Claudette Coulbert in the early days of cinema got a camera man fired for shooting "her bad side." Rosie O'Donnell sued her namesake magazine supposedly for violating their contractual agreement to never show an unflattering photo of her. That seems to be a set-up for walking-on-eggshells. What I have usually instead of active rage about the issues of the day is bemusement instead of amusement, an eye-roll. For example, the term cis was not used in relation to gender until about 2013 when it began being foisted onto the discourse even though as the opposite of trans it only had relevance in regards to that subject. The late Norm MacDonald described cisgender as "a way to marginalize normal people." So as cheeky as that assessment may have been, it is not a term that I will use. It is at least redundant for those of us who remain the same gender our whole lives. Only a small fraction of the population claim to be transgender, and surely an even smaller portion would be considered as such by a narrow standard such as gender confirmation surgery, or what used to be called a sex change operation. To call it like it is, or to refuse to join the short-lived trend of cramming preferred gender pronouns beside your name on Twitter is not in any way causing a trans person to comit suicide or a mad gunman to target a trans event nor condoning idiots chasing after and beating up transgendered people in the streets. But one of the tactics of the activists who range from well meaning to deranged is to conflate those violent events and anyone's refusal to play along and say two plus two is five. While it should not be about personalities, the cases that got a lot of heat came from Twitter. JK Rowling commented under a caption that used the term "People who menstruate" and her quip was a joke like, ‘People who menstruate.’ I’m sure there used to be a word for those people. Someone help me out. Wumben? Wimpund? Woomud?" Let me be clear: This is a funny line responding to the absurdity being shoved in our faces. It will not please everybody, and nore does the re-engineering of language to artificially boost the relevance of societies margines. The term "menstruating persons" instead of women has been taken up by AOC, but at least she has not been using "Latinx" which is a term her people flatly reject. Unfortunately, it does get used by Michael Moore. The reality is that there are people you value and respect, from politicians to moviemakers and writers, who are going to have an opinion you do not like. You can cut off your nose to spite your face, giving up on any work that person is involved in or dismissing them wholesale over that one or two failures to overlap with your Venn diagram or you can take what you like and leave the rest. You will have friends and family with whom you disagree on one issue or another. Hating a celebrity or public figure because his or her social media reach is being used to prop up something you dislike or is failing to boost the ideas you want promoted is a waste of energy. Gina Carano voted the wrong way the first time she voted in her life in 2020. I also disagree with her on vaccinations for Covid 19. But I like her in movies and enjoyed her as Cara Dune on The Mandalorian. I expect I would have liked Rangers of the New Republic which had been written and developed by Jon Favreau built around her. But Kathleen Kennedy and her toxic-woke gremlins at Lucasfilm used her irrelevant Twitter posts as an excuse to not renew her contract. This impacted Jon Favreau and his shows.THAT is the kind of issue that can frustrate me. It all started with Gina politely refusing to pust her own gender pronouns, and when people did not respect her choice and kept swarming and nagging, she posted Artoo Detoo pronouns "Beep/bop/boop" and sparked further outrage among the most cretinous Twitter stans ostensibly looking to "make trans people feel welcome" on the all but anonymous platform. In practical terms, they have drawn blood from people who had benign indifference to trans issues and now see their white knights as a dangerous joke. If a Gina Carano fan flushes an obnoxious activist out an airlock, that will be the reason. Trans people "need better representatives," as Gina has said.

Star Wars Leak | Kennedy Behind Gina Carano's Firing, Source Claims (RUMOR)

The core fanbase did not like Episodes VII, VIII and IX - especially VIII. Kennedy disparaged the fanbase and notoriously told Michael Arndt Luke was distracting in his original outlines and that Luke "represented the patriarchy and male-driven narratives" so he had to go or be sidelined and then Rian and the "story group" Kennedy hired retconned Luke. So Kennedy was already hated and she resented Jon Favreau's Mandalorian winning back fans, and especially hated seeing the surprise return of active, heroic Luke in the finale. She is a psychopath and a lot of people at Lucasfilm are hurting because of her. Gina just got to be the scapegoat. It gets exhausting to fact check people on this. Bots and "stans" made it a mission to inflate the anti-Carano reeeeeee! Now because Disney caved (to mostly fake accounts) slactivists are emboldened and may go after Rosario Dawson. These decisions hurt the brand. Carano may be conservative but no more than Stallone, Chuck Norris or any number of action stars we enjoy seeing content from. Jon Voight has crazy views but I like seeing him act. And how often did we compare the orange con-man-in-chief to Hitler, and people who don't like the way comic books have gone (comicsGate) to Nazis ? The bar for hyperbole is already set. And to demand someone put pronouns in their bio is absurd. Busybody imbeciles. But it is Kathleen Kennedy and her faction that are to blame. It is unfortunate that (by Kennedy's design) Favreau's shows that stole her thunder will suffer as core fans (real fans, not those claiming cultural real estate) withdraw from Disney plus and hurt the bottom line (while likely pirating the Favreau and Filoni stuff or Marvel).

List of Reasons The Last Jedi the Worst of the Sequel Trilogy

On the argument of The Last Jedi being the least weak of the sequel trilogy, here are some things to consider, even though the argument may be wearing us all out. The trouble with The Force Awakens was a) sidelining Luke so he won't distract, although his absence ended up being a distraction itself and b) mystery box format which itself is not Star Wars and rarely pays off c) too much like the original Star Wars even to the point of Starkiller Base exploding which seems rote and d) The concept of Starkiller Base is built-in self destruction since it is fixed to the planet and will doom itself by draining its only sun, as opposed to the Sun Crusher which was mobile in the EU books. e) Entering the atmosphere at light speed is dumb but some edge is taken off of it by the comical slide to the edge of a cliff. f) failing to devote the first film to the issue of Ben Solo and his training, culminating in his massacre and escape instead of having that be backstory. Too much concern about introducing Rey right away. On the plus side, until Han's fate he is a welcome and entertaining presence. The case against The Last Jedi both as Star Wars and as a movie on its own goes something like this: A) Leaving no time lapse between episode VII and VIII serves no purpose except to show how Rey and Luke's first conversation would go (and that could have been skipped unless the lightsaber toss was hilarious). B) General Hux (Hugs) is minimized as a threat by being treated as a joke right away. His only solid laugh about repeating commands was funnier the first time when Sigourney Weaver did it in Galaxy Quest. His one moment of balls where he reaches for his gun when Kylo is unconscious comes from the actor Domhnall Gleeson, according to Rian Johnson's commentary track. C) Rey and Luke, Holdo and Poe, as well as Rose and Finn have the same condescending dynamic in their scenes, even to the extent of girlsplaining the econimics of The First Order to a storm trooper. D) The Holdo maneuver could have been performed by a sacrificial droid. E) While this isn't clear in the movie, the novelization says that Leia sees a light go out indicating that Poe has switched off his radio when she objects to the bombing run. She could have called it off - as General - on the open channel and still had a case for his demotion. F) Unconscious in space, Leia could not breathe. While she can wake and will herself back to the ship she does not have the power to come out of a coma except via help from a male, her brother, through long distance force healing. G) Despite the ostensibly feminist construct of the characters, Holdo misjudges Poe and ensures there will be mutiny, Rose for all her knowledge of Canto Bight does not know to ask permission to land, and Rey is wrong to fall for Kylo's lure and for ignoring Luke's advice. H) Flashbacks at all in Star Wars don't fit. This is inherited from JJ's mystery box having abandoned the more linear narrative of the other films. But worst of all Luke would have had a parent-teacher interview with Han and Leia if he was worried about Ben (should have been first scene of The Force Awakens to get those three together right away). Luke would not have crept to his sleeping nephew in the night, let alone with murder at all a consideration. Even a protagonist in a non Star Wars movie would make no sense doing that. I) Luke restores his connection to the force and demonstrates force push ability on Rey's hut, but then doesn't bother using it when Rey gets him on his back and pins him with his own family saber. He should have sent it flying one way and Rey another. This moment you can really imagine Rian typing away and Kennedy's "story group" having no problem with it. J) Luke may have a reason to deceive the First Order outside the old Crait rebel base, but he has no reason to deceive Leia and the resistance team, especially not to give Leia the magic disappearing dice which apparently she dropped on the floor at some point. Apart from Luke winking at Threepio (Mark Hamill's decision because Rian didn't want him to acknowledge his old droid) there is no clue that things are not as they appear. Rian put his own arrangement of reveals ahead of what would have been practical. Luke could have said to Leia, "The rear exit is blocked by rocks. You better get levitating those and get people out. I'll distract your guests outside." Poe really didn't have to be left to connect those dots, except that it contrives something for him to contribute. Although, if Luke wants them to escape, he could have cleared the rocks himself. K) The Escape from L.A. twist with Luke works fine, but might he have been able to use the force to also crush the canons or kneecap the walkers, or could he have arrived earlier and prevented the "death star tech" from cooking Finn's kamikaze run (and save us from the cringe moment with Rose) ? L) After being told by Leia that Poe is not ready, she decides, "Why are you looking at me? Follow HIM." Which somewhat again flips the ham-fisted messaging that came before. M) It is not clear how Rey in an off screen stolen Imperial ship reunited with Chewie and the Falcon so they could arrive at Crait. N) Luke's death is arbitrary. O) The broom boy playing with home made Star Wars figures might have been stronger if we had not been bombarded with commercials featuring kids playing pretend interacting with representations of the real thing. P) The point is often made that the Fathiers freed by Rose and Finn would be easily gathered up later, while had they freed the kids they might have hidden and evaded capture. Q) DJ describing the black market of ships to both the bad guys and the good bothers some people, although the military-industrial complex is a fair topic to give a nod. But had they met DJ in the rebel brig Rose was dragging Finn to, there would be no need for the mis-direct about the code breaker we kind of hoped would be Lando. DJ could have been discretely released from the brig and began the mission, maybe even after perhaps the hologram of Maz Kanata might not be able to give him a reference. (It looked like she was busy in a better movie.) R) The Captain Phasma character was given an anticlimactic and premature death falling into fire, but in fairness we can put an asterisk on this point because the next writer or director or the ever vigilant story group could have just had Gwendolin Christie infiltrate the Resistance with a burn scar on her eye and maybe a patch which might have explained it. Her armor might have protected her beyond the helmet crack. S) It was not quite clear when the lightsaber crystal exploded and the Holdo explosion happened who was on what ship. T) Deleted scenes like Luke's third lesson and a trooper (Tom Hardy) recognizing Finn in the elevator, should have stayed in and Canto Bight just eliminated. U) When page drops the bomber payload, maybe it should have been as explicit as the novelization in stating that they are magnetic so some viewers couldn't take it as ignoring the lack of gravity. V) BB-8 coming to the rescue riding a chicken walker was very ewok-esque. W) Could Luke have simply resisted the call to adventure politely and offered Rey tea instead of being rude to the one other human on the planet ? X) Chewie is guilted out of actually eating the porg even after he killed it, plucked its feathers, and put barbecue sauce on it and cooked it. After the other porgs batted their eyes and caused him to hesitate, the button on that scene should have been Chewie taking a defiant bite. Instead it gets an eye roll over imposed vegan-ization of a wookie. Even in the new Holiday Special, he stops his wookie family from eating porgs. Y) Why did Holdo's plan of refueling smaller ships and then distracting the First Order have to be a secret when there was no way Hux and his team would not detect a wagon train of small ships leaving the area? Z) Rose posts herself at the escape pods and feels entitled to zap and arrest people who try to leave a VOLUNTARY resistance. How is that any different from fueling the smaller ships to escape? People like Han can come and go without being branded disloyal. And knowing Finn's status (which must have been really talked up far and wide in the ZERO time between the last film and this) she still assaults him and assumes at every turn that his nature is to bail. Had he been allowed to leave, he might have reached Ach-to and had a Meet the Parents dynamic with Luke. I realize these points have been bandied about for three years. You might be sick of them. But The Last Jedi is such a case study in ideology causing blind spots in storytelling that I feel compelled to call the movie on some of its shit. Luckily I have run out of alphabet so I can leave it at that. Based on the above points, The Last Jedi is the worst of a very flawed trilogy. The Revise of Skywalker inherits most of its deficits from The Last Jedi. I can't get past the idea that any part of the Endor Death Star survived the explosion, let alone an almost intact Emperor's throne room. Pure stupidity the "Lucasfilm Story Group" would not care to challenge because it has nothing to do with identity politics.

Han Solo, Kevin Smith, Collider, and Cinema versus Fads

The target audience for movies may be those 15 to 35, and supposedly mostly males. But even though there have been advances in cinema, there is no calmative reserve of cinematic knowledge built up and shared with each generation of filmmakers. One might expect that the wealth of movie-making experimentation has added up to something for which there is a consensus, but somehow it is controversial for one to say that the director most fluent in screen grammar is Mr. Steven Spielberg. There is what might be considered a "punk" sensibility that could include the Dogme '95 fad, as well as The Blair Witch Project or Paranormal Activity, where actually having a vision as to camera placement and sequence of shots becomes irrelevant. Some will call this "cutting edge" and others will call it hackery, an effective way to disguise having no observable talent in directing the attention of the audience. *************************************************************************************** One battlefield for this argument may be the firing of Lord and Miller as directors of the young Han Solo movie at the behest of co-writer Lawrence Kasdan and producer Kathleen Kennedy of Lucasfilm. Various youtubers and other outlets on the internet have played up the issue of youth versus the old guard in a fit of age-ism. Josh Trank was the first head scratcher of a choice to direct a Star Wars stand-alone film, because his one breakthrough film was a mostly hand-held quazi-documentary style film Chronicle with a strong script by Max Landis; it seemed odd that this would stand as evidence that he fit the Star Wars groove. Then his reported uncommunicative behavior on Fantastic Four led to his dismissal from the Lucasfilm gig. Some fans breathed a sign of relief, even though the directing of Fantastic Four - taken on its own merit, apart from fan expectations of the content - is reassuring and steady for the most part and not ramshackle. His breakthrough had been a viral short called A stabbing at Leia's 22nd Birthday, so that must have put him on Lucasfilm's radar. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^********************************* The youth versus old guard spin is false. Watch the 22 Jump Street making of extras and you see the loose approach of Miller and Lord. This agitated me when they got the gig. Kasdan is the draw and the reassurance. If he conceded to those directors, his name would be a false label. If he removed his name and that of his son, it would hurt Kennedy and Lucasfilm unjustly. Recruiting a Josh Trank or Miller/Lord is marketing. Having Kasdan is creative DNA. If you have handed in a great script (one worth shooting), and the apparent writing is the one effort through which you will be judged, you want directors who DIRECT THE AUDIENCE with appropriate shot choices that bring it to life. To that end, the visual stylists should be at the top of the list, not those who are mainly known for shooting generic coverage recording improv. THAT should be the issue. I like the actors in a Christopher Guest movie or Anchorman and I laugh at those, and even the Jump Street movies are amusing, but that isn't cinema. Some people feel if a movie is Star Wars or super heroes or action adventure or horror it is trash -- but on the contrary that is where the BEST directors are NEEDED. They aren't needed for hand-held weepy social issue movies which will get awards for choice of subject matter anyway. If you are worried about not enough women or two many whites, put Iranian director Ana Lily Armirpour on a Star Wars. She has the right attitude. She prefers Zemeckis over Jarmush, and that bodes well. If a director or actor can't have faith in a screenplay, their priorities may be out of whack. There DOES have to be a side to take in this. Kennedy and Kasdan want to make a Star Wars movie, not a 22 Jump Street in Star Wars drag. ###################################################################################### There is no such thing as fun for the whole family. Especially the larger the family. When that family fills an entire hall, or has a large internet reach, there tends to be compromise. There is no such thing as truth for the whole family, at least the honest conveyance of it, using the same principles. Larger the family, the more watered down or obligatory-positive it may have to be. ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// As a fan of pre-podcast Kevin Smith, I hate to use him as an example even if it makes a point but ultimately there may even be people on Collider panels and other loud, gesticulating youtubers I do like and listen to despite my pet peeves. %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Are people clicking on the latest blog or v-log or discussion to glean some sort of information, or merely to feed the algorithms affirmative data? Insert loud, high-energy greeting here, followed by personal updates on anyone involved as if it is necessary to know their personal habits and not merely to pad the running time and create a false rapport with the viewer. ****************************************************************** There have been a few times when I felt waves of utter falseness from the youtube facade of Kevin Smith. 1/ He fully embraced the GhostBros canard and the Sony-inflated stats on how many detractors rejected the 2016 Ghostbusters remake merely out of sexism. 2/ When some advanced screenings for Wonder Women were promoted as being just for female fans, Kevin jumped on the band wagon of scolding male fans who supposedly complained of being excluded. 3/ When Chris Lord and Phil Miller were fired by Lucasfilm from the Han Solo movie, Kevin and his co-host Mark totally missed the point and spent most of the segment praising those directors. Maybe being an insider and not wanting to lose a job or alienate those directly involved counts against being blunt. An internet presence is not just an end to itself but a platform of cross promotion. So maybe it would not be savvy to say that Paul Feig was naive in thinking the continuity of Ghostbusters would not matter and that hitting re-set would be just fine, and maybe there was half a second where some kids on twitter had their complaints artificially elevated and inflated by a marketing bot before the fast majority of us fanboys found out way to the opening weekend of Wonder Woman and got in just fine. And maybe there are people who value the choice of post-modern directors who are more about letting actors interject alternate variations on a script. ************************************************************************************************************** Maybe Lawrence Kasdan and writers in general should just accept the arbitrary vision of directors who bring to the table merely a willingness to goof on the material and riff on it rather than take it as read and get down to visualizing it and knowing how to use the frame to direct our attention withing the content that has been provided. Maybe Kevin has more of a kinship for a Feig or the Lord and Miller approach, which appears to be awfully loose as shown in behind the scenes DVD extras for 22 Jump Street. Mark had a funny line where he said, "Maybe there is a world where Lawence Kasdan is the draw getting people pumped for the Han movie." D'ya think?!!! The Kasdan hand in it is the only draw for me. When I heard Lord and Miller had been chosen as directors, of course I thought they must have to appease the ageist internet as if the "new" way to "direct" a movie is what we all need. If it is Jump Street in Star Wars drag, it will be a disaster. And we all knew that from the... jump. $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ It is one thing for a director to recognize a flawed script and help guide it, but quite another for the director to have nothing much to offer other than input on the script. Because once THE definitive screenplay is done and approved by all, the team is going to need an actual director to do the directing. Someone might be a presence that puts an improv motor-mouth actor at ease, but it should be called what it is. There are some fun-loving sets full of writers posing as actors instead of bringing to life a fine-tuned script. Riffing and joke-o-rama sessions don't engage the heart and give it flight, let alone embellish a galaxy far, far away. ************************************************************************************************************** A Lord and Miller or a Paul Feig will keep getting work as long as people like them and maintain friendship with them. But it won't be prompted by their stellar instincts of how to present a scene. My GOD! Is Star Wars an entry-level job? Or Ghostbusters? What if Paul Verhoven directed a Han Solo movie? It would be properly storyborded by his own hand and every shot would count. Why isn't there more discussion and appreciation for the actual DIRECTING? ************************************************************************************************************** When people say a director is a "genius," look at who is saying it. An actor who gets to improvise or make up the script completely or just wander wherever he/she wants and lets the camera catch up may consider the director a genius. "He says nothing," they typically say of "actor's directors." A cinematographer who is essentially a de facto co-director conceiving many of the shots will consider the director a genius for having not intruded actual direction. The writer who sees the complete script verbatim brought to live with no ideas from the director will sing the praises of the director. The director who is actually the producer and makes all the calls and raises the money and gets distribution deals is the kind of director a producer might be delighted to honor by adding their own name as producer to be along for the ride. That's the one area where the director with little or no talent might have to do something: to do the producer's job. But in most all other areas, the less creativity the director contributes, the more his or her reputation as a co-operative genius well liked by others will be secured. ************************************************************************************************************** This of course doesn't help those of us who are writer-directors who like to storyboard everything and know the movie we are setting out to make. We might get stuck having to take on the other jobs because we are "difficult." ************************************************************************************************************** Great to learn trickles of information that the star of Han Solo Alden Ehrenreich was the first to complain about the directors going off the rails with their "vision" which included "Ace Ventura" wacky directing, which indeed sounds like a career-killer. This takes Kennedy and Kasdan off of the hotseat as top-down bosses. It also supports the view many of us have (okay, a small minority of us) that Miller/Lord is a far cry from the Cohen Brothers or even Farrelly brothers in terms of expressing an artistic voice to cherish, nurture and protect. It is odd to see that the imdb page already has Rob Howard listed ALONE as the director of the Han film, regardless of who shot first. *************!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Better Young Han Solo possibilities?

I've posted a few links compulsively on imdb discussion boards, because that is the sort of deranged nerd I am. Also, it only took a few minutes. But who do you try to "contact" through an imdb board? Kathleen Kennedy? The directors of the proposed new Han Solo movie? Or the writers Lawrence Kasdan and his son Jon? I didn't even go that far. The most the message might reach is a handful of fans who happen to click on a given argument... I mean discussion. Though they are not on the short list being publicized, a Young Han Solo doesn't need an established celebrity name. The name above the title is the name IN the title - Han Solo. It would be a big mistake to cast anyone who does not evoke Harrison Ford. Who are the best of the non-short-listed (that we know of) that should come to the attention of the directors? Jamie Costa (most famous for a Robin Williams impression reel) or Anthony Ingruber (young Ford in Age of Adeline) Here are others talking about the options out there.