han-coded vadergirl

"i like tcw anakin better than prequel anakin because he's more suave and charismatic" that's the problem!! that's ooc! he's not supposed to be suave and charismatic and the fact that he wasn't in the prequels isn't a problem that needs to be fixed! aotc anakin is an insanely mentally ill teenager talking to his crush for the first time and his swagless looks and cringefail personality are what captivates padme so!

Hm. Your interpretation of this character displeases me. Guards! Take them away! Make them read the source material once more, and if that fails, the stocks.

ok so this is peak

i think the key difference between george lucas’s star wars and disney’s star wars is that lucas is a man with an ideology. someone with a point of view, and all that entails. which comes with ideas of revolution, anti-imperialism, challenging the status quo, cultural appropriation and racist stereotypes. complex and contradictory ideas because that’s how artists are: complex and complicated people. disney is not. disney is a corporation. a corporation can’t have ideology, because ideology defeats the purpose of profit. and when the only thing you do is to turn on the movie manufacturing machine before you sit down and plan what ideas are you trying to convey to the audience, then your results are going to be washed out corporate garbage. and because when you’re a giant corporation who only cares about selling to the widest audience possible, you can’t take sides. you can’t decide on an idea. because you want to sell your product to people who are on the entire political spectrum. which results in movies without ideology, without purpose, without soul.

I have been looking for this post for years after I came across it and it’s finally here and I need to reblog this because it is absolutely and entirely accurate.

#as I always say: lucas was making a samurai film and a ww2 flying ace film and a western film and adding laser swords#because he fundamentally LIKED samurai films and dambusters films and westerns and 40’s adventure serials#but disney are making a ‘star wars film’ and adding nothing because it already had laser swords and they have nothing else to say#xerox of a xerox baybeeeee (via harrietvane)

i knew some of what would come up in the rots novelization but nothing could have prepared me for just how much love there is in this. implied as well as plain and spelled out. padme asks obi-wan if he loves anakin. palpatine asks anakin if he loves obi-wan more than he loves padme. obi-wan just goes right out and says he loves anakin multiple times, right to the end as he's facing darth vader. obi-wan pulls anakin back from a furious meltdown just by softly saying his name. as soon as they're apart they miss each other like a limb. obi-wan thinks about he'd like to tease anakin in the middle of a deathly fight. anakin, at one the lowest points of his life, says that all he needs his obi-wan to guide him back to the light. obi-wan can't imagine a better way to spend the rest of his life than looking out for anakin's son, alone in the desert. and all this is only, like, half of it. i need to get my hands on whatever matthew stover was smoking when he wrote this

don’t care didn’t ask + you’ve projected onto this character to the point that your characterisation is unrecognisable to the source material

and it shuts down any further conversation. Your projection is so powerful that any criticism of the character at that point becomes "so you think that about me????" and any differing analysis becomes "so you think I shouldn't exist as a person?????" and man. I'm too tired to hold your hand through that crisis. Go away.

“ooohhhh this teenage girl character is so annoyinggg because she didn’t react to extreme stress in a way that was reasonable or what i consider to be normal oooooooohh” well i’m launching the missile

i love you foils i love you gothic doubles i love you clones i love you alter egos i love you twins and false identities and shadow selves and reflections and ghosts and eidola and puppets and masks and

i swear to god if people don't start understanding that responding to doylist critique of a piece of media with watsonian exonerations is not an actual rebuttal

somebody saying "hey i don't like that the only gay man in this story is a weird pervert and it portrays gay sexual promiscuity as a moral failing and character flaw" cannot be rebuked by arguing about how the character's backstory or personality traits explain their behaviour. the choices made by a writer are all fundamentally mutable; somebody saying an author's choices should have been different is not going to be persuaded by an argument that takes those choices as immovable fact