Because it doesn’t jibe with the world they explicitly set-up. Snoke coming to power in the 30 years between RotJ and TFA makes about as much sense as the end of Tim Burton’s Planet of the Apes. People arguing that it makes sense are stretching.

Oh, shit! I forgot he was in that. Yea, that’s great.

But that was world-building. He doesn’t need a backstory because they told us “This is the Empire, controlled by the Dark Side and led by this guy” In The Force Awakens, creating someone out of whole cloth creates inconsistent questions throughout the mythology.

I believe he was Force-inseminated by the Force itself, reacting to Plagueis’ manipulation of the Dark Side. So the Skywalkers are special, but still coming from nowhere. All I’m saying is that it’s in-universe that Rey could be strong by happenstance. Or that the Force “chooses” people, but it’s not all about lineage.

The issue is that it doesn’t make sense that some sort of Force-powerful non-Sith existed during the time of films we’d already seen. Either The Force Awakens exists within the mythology of the world and Snoke/First Order is a frustratingly non sequitor plot point. Or it’s its own thing, which makes the other 80% of…

I will. I’ll also point out that I think Love and Death in Long Island is a near perfect movie.

But what was he doing, for instance, during Return of the Jedi? He’s seemingly old enough to have been around then. His problem is the same as The First Order’s problem... the ending of Return of the Jedi makes it unlikely that they’d be in power, so not drawing that line is a failure of TFA.

Also, not much of a “fuck you”. The whole thing in the prequels is that Anakin was a no-name slave on a shit planet.

I appreciated that Luke’s error wasn’t in trying to kill Kylo Ren, but he admits that it was his own arrogance thinking he could even train new Jedi... which ended up being a self-fulfilling prophecy, because who knows if Ren would have gone full dark side if he hadn’t seen Luke standing over him with a lightsaber.

“But given that Priestley is, well, a he, something tells us that Weinstein took it on the chin (so to speak) better than he would have if a woman had dared punch him.”

An obviously, the proof of that is Jason Priestley’s illustrious post-1995 acting career.

@is it about my cube nailed it, but also, this is the rare case of the government moving faster than private companies. We’re so set in our “TV is king” ways that we stopped huge abuses of internet access before the storm hit.

Also, this is a bigger issue with more media consolidation. Every ISP that is also a content…

The only thing about your #4 is in regards to food. Shouldn’t food be a utility under that logic? Or is that too utopian (or dystopian? Who even knows)

Jesus Christ, why are there so many comments that don’t get you were joking?

I guess all the smart people stopped commenting post-Kinja.

Like, this piece has some problematic elements: http://bravebelle.com/saying-no-to-men/

But it exists not because some percentage of men are rapists, but because a HUGE chunk of men literally think “no” means “maybe”. A lot of them are taught that and a college seminar isn’t likely to change that. Changing the culture…

I guess I’m not really referring to convincing predators that rape, abuse, and harassment are wrong. I just think it’s more that the most common things are the borderline cases. Maybe women don’t always feel victimized by these cases, but they contribute to an environment where women largely feel unsafe. I think maybe…

By ‘97 they woulda recruited you for the lacrosse team!

I thoroughly disagree here. The amount of guys who came forward after the #metoo stuff and was like, “Now that I’ve seen all this, I realize some of my behavior might be rough” or people that think women DO need to convinced to have sex because society’s been saying that for decades. I don’t know man, I think you live…

That’s not the same thing. The culture problem is WITH the gun nuts. They’re the ones that have all the guns. The “culture / people’s hearts / rap music.” is a racist denunciation of a culture that is NOT their own. The problem is an American culture that fetishizes guns. What you’re describing isn’t really analogous.…

It’s so frustrating when an interpretation of a movie ignores, like, the facts of the movie.
“Rose informs Chris that her parents (Bradley Whitford and Catherine Keener) “would have voted for Obama a third time if they could.” Any audience who laughs at that is either scornful or regretful, so why the applause at…

Man, in Good Time... when he starts making out with the teenager it was super shocking but had like, a logical reason for happening. And then they move to the bed and it puts Pattinson’s scheming character in a new light (which is good, because without it, his assault on Barkhad Abdi would feel out-of-character).