I'm not planning to see it unless reviews suggest something much better than anticipated. At this point, I'm tracking spoilers out of morbid curiosity.

Quote from: Spinachcat;1115183LOL, if its true the paid audience tried to walk out during the test screening, this should be hysterical.
https://www.oneangrygamer.net/2019/11/rumor-star-wars-test-screening-so-bad-paid-audience-wanted-to-leave/97521/

Of course, internet rumors are most likely false, but apparently, the leaked script (which JJ Abrams claims is real and Boyega admits to losing) actually confirms the disastrous discussions that have been coming out of the "leaks" from screeners, but who knows.

The leaked plotline sounds utterly idiotic, but way too in line with the previous two flicks. Hopefully, its just a smart troll.

I don't think that using a Neo-Nazi...

...who thinks that black vampires are stealing our white women...

...as a source of news rather than someone to laugh at...

is a good idea.

It's 2019 where "Neo-Nazi" means "anyone a SJW disagrees with" and "far right" means "anyone not to the left of Chairman Mao", so color me utterly unimpressed.

Also, the "test audience walked out" story is not originally from One Angry Gamer's post apparently. It comes from some dude named Doomcock who runs a YouTube channel.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeCJB88u93eq91U0rlJsW-A

I have no idea (nor care) what the ideologies of either OAG or Doomcock may be, but if they are horrific wrongthinkers who express unapproved thoughts without SJW certification, that's perfectly fine too.

Quote from: Libertad;1115461I don't think that using a Neo-Nazi...

Linking unironically to David "Child Porn" Futrelle.

http://theantifeminist.com/monsterboobz-david-futrelle-disturbing-defence-film-sexual-abuse-torture-children/

Quote from: Ratman_tf;1097724I think the main problem running through the first two nuTreks (I coulnd't finish the third, it was so boring.) is that they were heavily borrowing from original Trek. Not storylines or characters, but the zeitgeist, the essence of these characters that had existed since the late 60's, through the animated series and six feature films. The new movies set themselves before the original series, but expected us to treat the setting and characters through the lens of having already done the establishing work. For example,  Khan from the new movie. He's a nothing character with no backstory or build up, and yet the movie treats him as some kind of big deal. Spock sheds a tear at Kirk's death, but they did hardly any work to build up their friendship. The Abrams Trek universe is all flash and no substance.

So your example of original Spock telling new Spock to let Kirk be in charge is a great example of that. They won't do the work of having Kirk earn Spock's respect, they just have old Spock tell him to do it.

That's the difference between a real story and a Brand Exercise.  Nutrek is just giving us reskins of OldTrek so they can cash in on the IP.

Quote from: HappyDaze;1115338Doesn't Disney already assume that the naysayers don't actually see their films? Don't the naysayers assume that positive reviews are Disney shills?

Considering how many companies now really do put up shill reviews. Its really hard to trust any positive ones. Ive seen this in action over on IMDb for example.

Quote from: Omega;1115502Considering how many companies now really do put up shill reviews. Its really hard to trust any positive ones. Ive seen this in action over on IMDb for example.

I see that you are a naysayer.

I mean, you say you've seen it, but do you actually have solid proof of it?

And yes, I'd ask Disney the same about the negative reviews if they had someone posting here.

Quote from: Spinachcat;1115467It's 2019 where "Neo-Nazi" means "anyone a SJW disagrees with" and "far right" means "anyone not to the left of Chairman Mao", so color me utterly unimpressed.

Also, the "test audience walked out" story is not originally from One Angry Gamer's post apparently. It comes from some dude named Doomcock who runs a YouTube channel.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeCJB88u93eq91U0rlJsW-A

I have no idea (nor care) what the ideologies of either OAG or Doomcock may be, but if they are horrific wrongthinkers who express unapproved thoughts without SJW certification, that's perfectly fine too.

He referred to a Pokemon mod which turned a black anime characters' skin white as an "improvement to her character" so his racism isn't entirely mythical:

QuoteNintendo and Game Freak managed to capture quite the attention (for better and for worse) with the release of Pokemon Sword and Shield. The game has its fair share of troubles, as well as highlights. One of those highlights has been Nessa, a very popular new character added to the franchise, but some people saw some imperfections with the character and decided to improve her where the designers may have had a misstep in her design.

Quote from: Ratman_tf;1115490Linking unironically to David "Child Porn" Futrelle.

http://theantifeminist.com/monsterboobz-david-futrelle-disturbing-defence-film-sexual-abuse-torture-children/

I'd be interested in hearing from a source whose mission statement doesn't involve regressing women's rights back to the pre-1960s. All the same, Futrelle is a gross hypocrite if this is true, but he was not my only source regarding One Angry Nazi. A man who interestingly is in favor of sexualized children in media himself. This is not a feminist or lefty blog I'm linking to, but straight from the horse's mouth.

My overall point is that legitimizing white supremacists by treating their speech on par with an actual news source is a bad look for this site and emboldens them to infest social spaces even further. And even if you "don't care," the people who are cognizant about racism are going to get the impression that you're a fellow traveler by linking to them in a positive manner.

Quote from: Libertad;1115522I'd be interested in hearing from a source whose mission statement doesn't involve regressing women's rights back to the pre-1960s.

You can hear it from the horse's ass himself.

http://www.unz.com/print/InTheseTimes-1994aug22-00010a02/?View=PDF

QuoteAll the same, Futrelle is a gross hypocrite if this is true, but he was not my only source regarding One Angry Nazi. A man who interestingly is in favor of sexualized children in media himself. This is not a feminist or lefty blog I'm linking to, but straight from the horse's mouth.

My overall point is that legitimizing white supremacists by treating their speech on par with an actual news source is a bad look for this site and emboldens them to infest social spaces even further. And even if you "don't care," the people who are cognizant about racism are going to get the impression that you're a fellow traveler by linking to them in a positive manner.

My point being, if you want to play the association game, we can now say Libertad is the guy who links to child porn supporters. Not a very good look for you.

Quote from: Libertad;1115522He referred to a Pokemon mod which turned a black anime characters' skin white as an "improvement to her character" so his racism isn't entirely mythical:

So what? The vast majority of all humans prefer their own racial and ethnic groups. It's been that way since the dawn of time and isn't changing anytime soon. I live in LA. I know all about everybody hating everybody because of their skin color. And if they don't hate each other for different skin tones, there's plenty of other easy reasons, usually economics.

Quote from: Libertad;1115522My overall point is that legitimizing white supremacists by treating their speech on par with an actual news source is a bad look for this site and emboldens them to infest social spaces even further.

I don't believe "actual news sources" exist in 2019. It's all just pick your bias and pick your shill.

The speech of a white supremacist is free speech. It has the exact same value as your speech. No more, no less. Same goes for all the black, brown and Asian supremacists. I'm not afraid of freedom of speech for people I disagree with.

If a BLM supporter, an AOC voter, a Greta worshiper or other variety of imbecile posts a scoop on this "Star Wars audience walks out" rumor, I'm happy to quote their posts too. My only semi-interest in this whole Rise of Skywanker debacle is whether this "scoop" is made up anti-Disney bullshit or whether it really happened and the "leaks" can be confirmed.

As for "bad look for this site", that's not even possible. TheRPGsite is a free speech site. People who value free speech value the freedom of theRPGsite. Those who don't, don't and won't so there's no reason to care about their opinion.

Quote from: Libertad;1115522And even if you "don't care," the people who are cognizant about racism are going to get the impression that you're a fellow traveler by linking to them in a positive manner.

Numero Uno: People who are cognizant about racism can go fuck themselves. And by fuck themselves, I mean they should get a blindfold, play in traffic and make the world a better place.

Numero Dos: I couldn't give a flying fuck what impression "they" get. As Eleanor Roosevelt said, "what other people think of me is none of my business".

Quote from: Ratman_tf;1115526You can hear it from the horse's ass himself.

http://www.unz.com/print/InTheseTimes-1994aug22-00010a02/?View=PDF





My point being, if you want to play the association game, we can now say Libertad is the guy who links to child porn supporters. Not a very good look for you.

Just looking at the sides, the website you linked to has some anti-Semitic undertones. One such article below (including but not limited to the "Jews have dual loyalty" thing, or neglecting to mention the extremely massive presence of fundamentalist Christian Zionists who donate more to Israel than any US Jewish group):

https://www.unz.com/pgiraldi/the-international-zionist-conspiracy/

Spinach Cat has a point about how hard it is to find reliable news media these days. Playing the "international Jewish conspiracy" card in my view hurts the person's credibility to the point that it's not out of bounds for them to say, crop photos or edit footage or jump cut videos to make their point given that Nazis are notorious liars. Googling Futrelle and the 120 Days in Sodom only brings up similar websites within the first few pages. My only reliable source I found, Wikipedia, definitely makes it sound like a gross exploitation product in the vein of Cannibal Holocaust or Serbian Film, and while I cannot speak from a legal standpoint (given the wide scope of where porn/obscenity begins and ends in the USA is something still fought over) it doesn't sound like something worth defending from a moral standpoint and Futrelle committed an error in judgment unless the article's been shopped or cut out some larger context.

But going back to One Angry Gamer, we can agree that wanting to keep lolicon content in video games is equally terrible, right? And that combined with his other views he's someone we should not take seriously in the future? I remember the days back when people on this site were justifiably upset over the Maid RPG hinting at child sexual abuse but being softer on Carcosa, which Pundit called out as equivalent to "having our own cool kid's club." Let's show how we evolved as a community from those dark times!

QuoteI don't believe "actual news sources" exist in 2019. It's all just pick your bias and pick your shill.

The speech of a white supremacist is free speech. It has the exact same value as your speech. No more, no less. Same goes for all the black, brown and Asian supremacists. I'm not afraid of freedom of speech for people I disagree with.

If a BLM supporter, an AOC voter, a Greta worshiper or other variety of imbecile posts a scoop on this "Star Wars audience walks out" rumor, I'm happy to quote their posts too. My only semi-interest in this whole Rise of Skywanker debacle is whether this "scoop" is made up anti-Disney bullshit or whether it really happened and the "leaks" can be confirmed.

As for "bad look for this site", that's not even possible. TheRPGsite is a free speech site. People who value free speech value the freedom of theRPGsite. Those who don't, don't and won't so there's no reason to care about their opinion.

Asking out of curiosity, are we using the legal definition of free speech in regards to government action only?

If so it's not relevant to my initial point of it not being a good idea to link to OAG in a noncritical manner. I have just as much freedom of speech to tell someone playing with dynamite to put down the match.

Quote from: Ratman_tf;1115526You can hear it from the horse's ass himself.

http://www.unz.com/print/InTheseTimes-1994aug22-00010a02/?View=PDF

Quote from: Ratman_tf;1115526My point being, if you want to play the association game, we can now say Libertad is the guy who links to child porn supporters. Not a very good look for you.

The link just shows that Futrelle condemns censorship of the film Salò, or the 120 Days of Sodom.

To my mind, the key issue is the claim that the film makers actually sexually abused the underage actors -- as opposed to the film being about *fictional* depravity. I haven't seen the film and don't know definitively about the production. However, there are many movies that have nudity by underage actors and/or portray fictional sexual abuse of children -- like film adaptations of the novel Lolita (1962 and 1997) that used an underage actress to portray the girl Lolita. That doesn't make them child pornography.

As far as I can tell, Futrelle's claim is that the film is simply about fictional depravity, and further condemns that depravity. I haven't seen the film, and I haven't seen any confirmations of those claims online.  

If it's true that the actors were sexually abused in shooting the film, then condemning the film is absolutely justified. It's not clear to me that is the case. The rant from theantifeminist.com doesn't distinguish well between what is fictionally portrayed in the movie and what happened to the real actors. Were the actors actually made to eat shit and/or have their nipples burnt off? That seems like an extreme claim that I can't see confirmation of.

Quote from: jhkim;1115566The link just shows that Futrelle condemns censorship of the film Salò, or the 120 Days of Sodom.

To my mind, the key issue is the claim that the film makers actually sexually abused the underage actors -- as opposed to the film being about *fictional* depravity. I haven't seen the film and don't know definitively about the production. However, there are many movies that have nudity by underage actors and/or portray fictional sexual abuse of children -- like film adaptations of the novel Lolita (1962 and 1997) that used an underage actress to portray the girl Lolita. That doesn't make them child pornography.

As far as I can tell, Futrelle's claim is that the film is simply about fictional depravity, and further condemns that depravity. I haven't seen the film, and I haven't seen any confirmations of those claims online.  

If it's true that the actors were sexually abused in shooting the film, then condemning the film is absolutely justified. It's not clear to me that is the case. The rant from theantifeminist.com doesn't distinguish well between what is fictionally portrayed in the movie and what happened to the real actors. Were the actors actually made to eat shit and/or have their nipples burnt off? That seems like an extreme claim that I can't see confirmation of.

That just blows this complaint-

Quote from: Libertad;1115522A man who interestingly is in favor of sexualized children in media himself.

-out of the water. Since the "sexualized children" are not only fictional, but cartoons.

I can make similar defenses for all of the "points" Libertad is making, but it all boils down to guilt by association, and ad-hom attacks. "YOU LINKED TO A NAZI?!?!?!" and I'm not interested in playing his game. Only revealing it for what it is.

Quote from: Libertad;1115563If so it's not relevant to my initial point of it not being a good idea to link to OAG in a noncritical manner. I have just as much freedom of speech to tell someone playing with dynamite to put down the match.

I don't take advice from someone who uncritically links to a child porn supporter, and then backpedals when caught out.

We have hard evidence that the mainstream media uses incorrect footage. I would go so far as to say it's a blatant lie. A stark contrast to your "maybe, sorta, coulda" insinuations.

Quote from: Ratman_tf;1115573That just blows this complaint-

-out of the water. Since the "sexualized children" are not only fictional, but cartoons.

I can make similar defenses for all of the "points" Libertad is making, but it all boils down to guilt by association, and ad-hom attacks. "YOU LINKED TO A NAZI?!?!?!" and I'm not interested in playing his game. Only revealing it for what it is.

The whole thread here seems to be about rumor-mongering. I don't support Libertad's ad-hominem attacks, but I also don't support spreading the rumors that started the thread. If someone wants to actually defend a claim as solid, then that at least seems solid (about Rise of Skywalker, or the film Salo, or something else). But most of this seems like casual shit-throwing.