"Get Woke, Go Broke"
Mikah wrote:
TW1ZTY wrote:
The whole Mary Sue thing was born out of sexism. Face it.
I'm not sure Mary Sue is the right term. That's about the author inserting themselves into the narrative as a near perfect character who is the centre of attention, has all the solutions to every problem, loved by all etc. The term originated from a particular fan fiction story decades ago, it wasn't about female characters in particular.
The term is thrown around extremely loosely these days. While there are people who use it in the traditional sense, now it’s used more as “character that I don’t like”.
Rey is probably one of the better uses of it as she does master the force very quickly... but so does Luke Skywalker, who is also inexplicably an amazing pilot.
Antrax wrote:
The_Walrus wrote:
If anything, it seems that "getting woke" is a good money-maker, but at worst it does no harm.
I suggest you read my post, as it would be a waste of forum space to make the same statements over. In summary, "wokeness" is good for business if your customer base is in favor of "wokeness" and bad for business if your customer base is not in favor of "wokeness." It's not a one-size fits all criteria, and "wokeness" can indeed do some harm to some brands.
Quite right, I should always check if you have made a post before making my own.
I don’t think it is quite right. For one thing, I’d say Captain Marvel and Black Panther were very much part of an established franchise. But they managed to attract far more viewers. I don’t quite understand why CM was quite so successful but ten years ago you’d probably have agreed with Ike Perlmutter that audiences just don’t want to see women superheroes. The audience is elastic and is rarely the biggest it could be. “The Avengers” was a huge success with an all-white team and one woman. The Infinity films were even bigger successes. I don’t think that’s entirely down to BP/CM but I’d be surprised if none of it is.
Or take the lads mag. Sales have been declining for a long time. Men aren’t so interested in that content any more, and have the internet in any case. Removing the naked women and emphasising “the articles” is an attempt to rescue a failing business, not the cause of the failure.
On Star Wars... there’s a two minute scene where the characters free some captive animals in The Last Jedi, but other than that they’re no more or less “political” than the originals and much less than the prequels. The accusation of “wokeness” for those films seems to come primarily from the fact that they cast a black man in a leading role and made a woman force sensitive, with some from making a woman a general in The Last Jedi. I don’t think TLJ is a good film, but it isn’t a political one.
Now not every brand has the potential to expand, but elasticity of audience is real in general terms and shouldn’t be underestimated.
^ To some people, featuring anything other than a straight, white, male in the lead role is SJW-ism.
I see Rey as a female power fantasy. If men can have power fantasies, so can women. She's not a particularly "deep" character, but she'll definitely sell an action figure to a 7-year-old girl.
Male "power fantasies" don't get nearly the same amount of criticism that female ones do.
_________________
"If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced."
-XFG (no longer a moderator)
XFilesGeek wrote:
... Male "power fantasies" don't get nearly the same amount of criticism that female ones do.
Male "power fantasies" don't get nearly enough criticism, in my opinion.Personally, I like the Rose Tico character better than Rey. She showed that a woman doesn't have to look like a half-starved ballerina and do back-flips to prove her competence as a human being.
TW1ZTY wrote:
Mikah wrote:
TW1ZTY wrote:
The whole Mary Sue thing was born out of sexism. Face it.
I'm not sure Mary Sue is the right term. That's about the author inserting themselves into the narrative as a near perfect character who is the centre of attention, has all the solutions to every problem, loved by all etc. The term originated from a particular fan fiction story decades ago, it wasn't about female characters in particular.
In that case I would consider any of the characters played by the likes of somebody like Arnold Schwarzeneggee to be like a Mary Sue, and yet he isnt hated anywhere as much as Rey from the new Star Wars movie.
That could be the case for sure. However, it oftentimes isn't. With cases like Arnold Schwarzenegger, it's easy to just attribute bad/lazy writing. With someone like Rey, we know that's not the case because we know the purpose was political. The entire purpose of the character was female empowerment so therefore, the character could have no personal flaws, hence Mary Sue.
We have had intrepid female characters in literature (and in real life) for centuries.
There was a sort of an idolization of "female virtue" and motherhood during the Victorian Era.
Then we have, in medieval days, intrepid females like Eleanor of Aquitaine.
In some form, we have had this "meme" for a long time.
The_Walrus wrote:
On Star Wars... there’s a two minute scene where the characters free some captive animals in The Last Jedi, but other than that they’re no more or less “political” than the originals and much less than the prequels. The accusation of “wokeness” for those films seems to come primarily from the fact that they cast a black man in a leading role and made a woman force sensitive, with some from making a woman a general in The Last Jedi. I don’t think TLJ is a good film, but it isn’t a political one.
Now not every brand has the potential to expand, but elasticity of audience is real in general terms and shouldn’t be underestimated.
TLJ is significantly more political than the originals, and about on par with the prequels. It's far more than 2 minutes of them freeing animals. The entire casino sequence reads as a criticism of capitalism, an idea that is further developed by Benicio Del Toro's character. The stopping of Finn's suicide run, reads as a criticism of Trumpism. The difference between it and the prequels is that the prequels are a bland "democracy good" politics that arrived in a time when everyone wasn't so hyper-political. The politics of AOTC or ROTS are solidly within the mainstream. The politics of TLJ are on a political faultline in the U.S.
Frankly the TFA did not garner the backlash that TLJ did, and that is when the casting decisions were made. And in TLJ, Rey is a better written character, significantly less "Mary Sue" than TFA.
_________________
"Ignorance may be bliss, but knowledge is power."
Last edited by Antrax on 06 Nov 2019, 1:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The_Walrus wrote:
I don’t think it is quite right. For one thing, I’d say Captain Marvel and Black Panther were very much part of an established franchise. But they managed to attract far more viewers. I don’t quite understand why CM was quite so successful but ten years ago you’d probably have agreed with Ike Perlmutter that audiences just don’t want to see women superheroes. The audience is elastic and is rarely the biggest it could be. “The Avengers” was a huge success with an all-white team and one woman. The Infinity films were even bigger successes. I don’t think that’s entirely down to BP/CM but I’d be surprised if none of it is.
The marvel (and DC) movies are a unique case. In that they both are independent properties and part of an existing franchise. But Marvel's strategy is to offer variety and quality. They deliberately make their individual films "different genres." CA: TWS is a political thriller. Guardians of the Galaxy is a space fantasy. Antman is a heist film. Spiderman Homecoming and FFH are teen dramas. Black Panther is a court intrigue film. Dr. Strange is Lovecraftian, etc. etc. The point is with their individual films they go for niche. They don't try to appeal to all marvel fans with each movie but rather appeal to a specific audience. The avengers films go for big tent, let all the characters shine so all the individual film fans show up.
_________________
"Ignorance may be bliss, but knowledge is power."
The_Walrus wrote:
Rey is probably one of the better uses of it
Definitely. It's so bad they should consider renaming the trope after her.
http://www.castaliahouse.com/rey-sue-th ... rson-ever/
When first she meets another primary character, Rey saves both their lives, even in the face of his bumbling machismo which threatens to get them both killed. Then she flies a starship for the very first time (completely untrained) and—though a rank amateur—she pulls off several maneuvers Han Solo would have had trouble duplicating even on his very best day as a pilot. Then her and Finn spend an entire hour gushing over how awesome she is. Then she goes to repair the ship—no mention how an untutored scavenger from the back of the back of beyond knows how to service a damned starship, much less the Millennium Falcon, a ship which gave even an astromech droid (MADE for starship repair) the fits—and gets to yell at Finn because he’s so damn incompetent. And she speaks droid, AND she speaks Wookie. And she releases monsters to kill bad guys (which she thought was the wrong thing to do, but turns out she was mistaken as the monsters eat up all the bad guys. (This is the only time she’s ever wrong, in the entire movie.)) With the tough, criminal bad guys dead or running, Rey saves Finn, Han, and Chewie from certain death at the hands of the monsters she released. And she deftly repairs the Millennium Falcon—AGAIN. Finn wants to flee like a coward, Rey wants to stand like a hero. She’s suddenly able to read people’s mind with The Force, as well as do that funky Jedi Mind Trick, all with absolutely no training. She gets captured once, and taken to the BIGGEST MILITARY BASE IN THE ENTIRE GALAXY, but before the menfolk can rescue her, Rey rescues herself. And then free-climbs an infinitely high wall without a HINT of vertigo or hesitation. And then bypasses the security system of the Planet-sized Interstellar Planet Killing Secret Base Death Machine, prompting Han to say “Girl knows her stuff because she’s awesomesauce and coolicious and brilliantatious like that. Word to your mother, my woolly Wookie homie.” (What did Luke get in a similar situation? “Great, kid. Don’t get cocky.”) And then she defeats the super-evil, super-competent, been-training-in-The-Force-for-over-ten-years evil Sith dude in a lightsaber battle.
The_Walrus wrote:
as she does master the force very quickly... but so does Luke Skywalker, who is also inexplicably an amazing pilot.
I didn't recall dear old Luke being much of one, so I actually went and looked this up. He's a good pilot due to spending most of his youth flying around - this is briefly mentioned by other characters in the first film and Luke himself talks about shooting down womp rats in a T-16 (a ship). Regarding the force, however quickly he may have picked it up (it's debatable how long he was actually training with Yoda), at the very least he had to be trained to be anything more than useless. Not so for Rey...
_________________
Behold! we are not bound for ever to the circles of the world, and beyond them is more than memory, Farewell!
Mikah wrote:
The_Walrus wrote:
Rey is probably one of the better uses of it
Definitely. It's so bad they should consider renaming the trope after her.
http://www.castaliahouse.com/rey-sue-th ... rson-ever/
When first she meets another primary character, Rey saves both their lives, even in the face of his bumbling machismo which threatens to get them both killed. Then she flies a starship for the very first time (completely untrained) and—though a rank amateur—she pulls off several maneuvers Han Solo would have had trouble duplicating even on his very best day as a pilot. Then her and Finn spend an entire hour gushing over how awesome she is. Then she goes to repair the ship—no mention how an untutored scavenger from the back of the back of beyond knows how to service a damned starship, much less the Millennium Falcon, a ship which gave even an astromech droid (MADE for starship repair) the fits—and gets to yell at Finn because he’s so damn incompetent. And she speaks droid, AND she speaks Wookie. And she releases monsters to kill bad guys (which she thought was the wrong thing to do, but turns out she was mistaken as the monsters eat up all the bad guys. (This is the only time she’s ever wrong, in the entire movie.)) With the tough, criminal bad guys dead or running, Rey saves Finn, Han, and Chewie from certain death at the hands of the monsters she released. And she deftly repairs the Millennium Falcon—AGAIN. Finn wants to flee like a coward, Rey wants to stand like a hero. She’s suddenly able to read people’s mind with The Force, as well as do that funky Jedi Mind Trick, all with absolutely no training. She gets captured once, and taken to the BIGGEST MILITARY BASE IN THE ENTIRE GALAXY, but before the menfolk can rescue her, Rey rescues herself. And then free-climbs an infinitely high wall without a HINT of vertigo or hesitation. And then bypasses the security system of the Planet-sized Interstellar Planet Killing Secret Base Death Machine, prompting Han to say “Girl knows her stuff because she’s awesomesauce and coolicious and brilliantatious like that. Word to your mother, my woolly Wookie homie.” (What did Luke get in a similar situation? “Great, kid. Don’t get cocky.”) And then she defeats the super-evil, super-competent, been-training-in-The-Force-for-over-ten-years evil Sith dude in a lightsaber battle.
The_Walrus wrote:
as she does master the force very quickly... but so does Luke Skywalker, who is also inexplicably an amazing pilot.
I didn't recall dear old Luke being much of one, so I actually went and looked this up. He's a good pilot due to spending most of his youth flying around - this is briefly mentioned by other characters in the first film and Luke himself talks about shooting down womp rats in a T-16 (a ship). Regarding the force, however quickly he may have picked it up (it's debatable how long he was actually training with Yoda), at the very least he had to be trained to be anything more than useless. Not so for Rey...
Luke has a lot of inexplicable skills for a farm boy whose pilot skills are limited to hunting wombrats in a T-16. The Star Wars explanation is that he's a powerful force user and can be guided by that. This can be used to explain most of Anakin's feats in the phantom menace and Rey's feats in the force awakens.
What is inexplicable is Rey defeating Kylo Ren in a lightsaber duel. Luke and Anakin got destroyed by Vader and Dooku respectively in their first duels and had more relevant combat experience than Rey at that point. One could argue that Kylo Ren isn't the skill level of Vader or Dooku, but he showed himself to be plenty threatening over the two movies.
_________________
"Ignorance may be bliss, but knowledge is power."
Antrax wrote:
Luke has a lot of inexplicable skills for a farm boy whose pilot skills are limited to hunting wombrats in a T-16.
Limited to? In the context of the conversation that is clearly a difficult thing to do for most people. The point is, while the Force grants an advantage, the first film at least paid lip service to the idea that talent, skill and power is earned through practice and training. Mary Sues typically don't need training. Also, I don't recall any other inexplicable skillsets Luke possesses, though it has been some time since I saw them.
_________________
Behold! we are not bound for ever to the circles of the world, and beyond them is more than memory, Farewell!
The_Walrus wrote:
Fnord wrote:
Am I missing something here, or are political correctness and identity politics bad for business?
Yes, you're missing a lot.
For a start, your examples seem to be pretty dodgy. Ascribing the cancellation of one of the Game of Thrones prequels to "identity politics" seems unsubstantiated, as well as bizarre given GoT is utterly full of that stuff and hugely successful. Plus another GoT prequel was also ordered. Sometimes TV shows don't get past pilot. It happens.
Terminator, also, seems like a weird example. The franchise has been dying for a long time now, but Dark Fate made slightly more than Genisys in its opening domestic weekend, and has been praised for the quality of the action - audiences just aren't interested in the Terminator any more.
Let's look at some other examples:
- The Marvel films. Marvel executive Ike Perlmutter blocked the development of "Black Panther" and "Captain Marvel", and advised DC not to make "Wonder Woman", because he thought films led by black people or women would not succeed. When Perlmutter lost control following the takeover of Disney by Marvel, those two films were fast-tracked and both made over $1bn - more than any of the solo Captain America or Thor films. The recent Avengers: Endgame has a cringeworthy "girl power" sequence but still became the bestselling film of all time.
- DC films - DC/Warner Bros ignored Perlmutter's advice and made "Wonder Woman" anyway. It made over $700m, not a huge success but a big profit and more money than "Man of Steel", their most recent Superman film.
- Harry Potter - the franchise itself is very progressive, but its big moment of controversy was the play that cast a black woman as Hermione. The play has been a huge success. The New York showing grossed over $2.5m in a single week, the record for a play.
- Star Trek - the franchise itself is very progressive and that has continued through to the modern day.
- Doctor Who - both throughout its history and then specifically with the casting of the Thirteenth Doctor, which increased viewing figures despite a decline in storytelling quality.
- Avatar - the formerly most successful film of all time is about deforestation and colonialism
- The Alien franchise - famously used gender-blind casting and still launched a very successful film franchise
- Star Wars - the three protagonists of the Star Wars sequels are a woman, a black man, and a Latino man. Still made more money than the original trilogy or prequels (though I suspect less than the originals when you adjust for inflation).
- The Handmaid's Tale - Margaret Attwood's best-selling book, adapted into a hugely popular TV show and now a sequel. Clearly Attwood's biggest financial success.
- Stranger Things - Netflix's most popular TV show has only got more popular as it has introduced more female characters, and now a gay character.
- Society as a whole. Society has outlawed racism, sexism, homophobia, and other forms of bigotry, and nearly every business will have HR policies forbidding those things and stating their commitment to diversity and inclusion, and yet the economy has continued to grow.
In short - I find no good evidence for the phrase "get woke, go broke". There are "woke" brands that have failed, yes, but there are also "non-woke" brands that have failed. Brands fail. If anything, it seems that "getting woke" is a good money-maker, but at worst it does no harm.
You're missing the point. It's when wokeness gets shoved front and centre to the detriment of the product that things bomb. That's what the get woke go broke failures have in common. Because they stop being first and foremost about being a good product and are instead first and foremost about being a woke product.
Fnord wrote:
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for fair and equal treatment, but I'm concerned that the PC Police, the Social-Justice Warriors, and the socially-progressive population in general do not fully realize the economic impact of their efforts.
They don't care. All they care about is forcing their ideology on everything they come into contact with.
Fnord wrote:
XFilesGeek wrote:
... Male "power fantasies" don't get nearly the same amount of criticism that female ones do.
Male "power fantasies" don't get nearly enough criticism, in my opinion.Personally, I like the Rose Tico character better than Rey. She showed that a woman doesn't have to look like a half-starved ballerina and do back-flips to prove her competence as a human being.
If I'm not mistaken, the actress who played her got chased off Twitter after being constantly harassed by neckbeards.
As for "power fantasies," it just annoys me that movies/shows/books that celebrate blatant machismo are deemed just dandy, but woe betide any movie/show/book that puts "girl power" at the front and center. It's clearly a double-standard.
_________________
"If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced."
-XFG (no longer a moderator)