Is it ok if I point you in the general direction of two years of the writers strongly implying it in every relevant article, and a lot of people outright saying as much in every relevant comment section? (Not just here - basically everywhere)

Sure, canon can be a restriction on creativity, but you’re exaggerating a bit, because I’m not saying or implying TLJ disrespected canon because it disregarded something that was said in passing on page 47 of an obscure EU book 30 years ago. I’m talking about pretty fundamental things. Any fantasy universe needs rules…

“There’s nothing special about Disney Star Wars. They’ve turned the franchise into any other forgettable blockbuster series. That’s not something you can say about any of the original six (no matter how good or bad they were.)“

Exacty. Rebels was amazing, and so was Clone Wars. Dave Filoni should have at least been consulted on the Disney trilogy.

You just proved my whole point. Your thoughtful reply just now was already a better examination of the Disney sequels in comparison to the prequels than anything I can remember from io9.

“I don’t think there are “canon” or “plot” related issues. Most of those arguments feel petty and miss the focus of what’s actually wrong with the movies. I will happily hash that argument out right now with you.”

You’re not wrong about the Rotten Tomatoes score, but RoS global box office was what, 1.3 billion? That’s a lot of money, but compared to The Force Awakens or the bigger Marvel movies that’s a considerable disappointment, especially for the final piece of a series 40 years in the making. So there are a lot of people…

Why does this website refuse to delve into the plot and canon related reasons why a considerable amount of people strongly dislike The Last Jedi and Rise of Skywalker?

You'd almost think they didn't put any thought into it whatsoever.

Clickbait, unfortunately.

I’m just going to leave this here.

Agreed. He’s capable of being very funny, but the overdose of jokes in Ragnarok combined with the fact that a lot of them were right after deadly serious moments (Asgard being annihilated for example) was a poor creative choice. I know I’m in the minority on this though.

I suddenly feel really, really bad for all the people that were young in 1969 and thought they were going to see colonies on the Moon and Mars in their lifetime. Here we are over half a century later, and what do we have to show for it?

I never watched Devs and wasn't planning on it, plus somebody accidentally spoiled it for me anyway, but this whole premise sounds a whole lot like Whiterose's alleged plan on Mr Robot. Even the Deus name is important in both shows. Kind of crazy...

I must say, we started off disagreeing (albeit over a massively trivial topic) and perhaps we kind of still do a little bit (although I definitely see your point), but I thoroughly enjoyed reading your thoughtful replies. You sir, are a gentleman and a scholar.

“The great skill of an academian is to talk about books they’ve never read.

Thanks for clarifying. Perhaps I came off more hostile towards Germain than I meant to (even in multiple posts), but my primary emotion was feeling gobsmacked. I honestly was just a bit baffled.

“So that’s why I got so hostile. Having looked at your posts in other threads, you seem like a very reasonable, stand-up guy, so I’m sorry to have come at you with heat like you were some common troll. Again, I apologize if I was too harsh.”

In my experience it’s extremely rare for a comedy show to already be hilarious in the first episode. Most need some time to find their bearings and establish some characters.

Genuinely asking: how does gatekeeping apply to a professional writer on an actual sci fi website? I thought that term applied to new fans that would “not be welcomed” by older fans? (I think it’s a silly concept, some people are mean, some people are nice, but that’s beside the point in my question)