At what point do people at Disney connect the dots on the common denominator for all of the failures for Star Wars....Kennedy has to go.

The Collective said:

---

I'm slowly getting on board with TCTTS. I personally loved Filoni so much for the animated world and some of the early creative decisions, and I've been a complete fan boy of his. But the deeper we get into this **** - the more the story failure has to be attached to him.

---

If what's being reported about his level of involvement is correct, then a comment TCTTS made a while back is starting to ring true. Filoni can create great cartoons but just doesn't understand the differences that need to go into making live-action programs. If you think about it, the character and plot depths and motivations in The Acolyte were on par with weekly 30-minute kid's animation.

The Collective said:

---

I'm slowly getting on board with TCTTS. I personally loved Filoni so much for the animated world and some of the early creative decisions, and I've been a complete fan boy of his. But the deeper we get into this **** - the more the story failure has to be attached to him.

---

Everyone needs to go. I love Filoni's work on the cartoons, but many of these failures are at his doing.

Saw and had to share

Filoni has been hit-and-miss the whole time and for some reason many people ignored his misses and wanted to give him the keys to the kingdom based only on the hits. The Clone Wars is a good show, but there is a reason why there are lists online of which episodes to skip.

I love the guy because he brought Thrawn into the new canon, but I don't think anything they've done with the character on screen is anywhere near as good as the way Zahn writes him.

TCTTS said:

---

I've noticed more and more that a certain group of people have been increasingly referring to anything that prominently features or is made by minorities as "DEI," and in the process correlating minorities with a lack of quality. Which is starting to get reeeaaalllly close to being code for "this thing sucks because it doesn't prominently feature/isn't prominently made by white men."

---

At this point it has become a pavlovian response and it isn't because it features women or minorities, it is how those groups are featured. The trigger isn't women and minorities it is the pre-media blitz telling us how great the show is because it features women and minorities. they then use this as a shield to deflect criticism legitimate criticism.

Name one movie or show that learned heavily into its diversity prior to its release that has been good?

Look at Fallout. Was there some grumbling, sure, but it was easily drowned out by the excitement. The marketing i was exposed to we focused on how they thought they told a great story and all of the effort they made to make that universe come to life. I didn't see anything that said please watch us because we got a woman and a black guy.

This is a great answer!

One that makes perfect sense.

Thank you for expressing it in these terms. Sincerely.

AgDev01 said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

I've noticed more and more that a certain group of people have been increasingly referring to anything that prominently features or is made by minorities as "DEI," and in the process correlating minorities with a lack of quality. Which is starting to get reeeaaalllly close to being code for "this thing sucks because it doesn't prominently feature/isn't prominently made by white men."

---

At this point it has become a pavlovian response and it isn't because it features women or minorities, it is how those groups are featured. The trigger isn't women and minorities it is the pre-media blitz telling us how great the show is because it features women and minorities. they then use this as a shield to deflect criticism legitimate criticism.

Name one movie or show that learned heavily into its diversity prior to its release that has been good?

Look at Fallout. Was there some grumbling, sure, but it was easily drowned out by the excitement. The marketing i was exposed to we focused on how they thought they told a great story and all of the effort they made to make that universe come to life. I didn't see anything that said please watch us because we got a woman and a black guy.

---

IYKYK

Yeah fallout is a fantastic example of a show that was actually a really diverse cast and audiences loved. It even has a trans actor but no one review bombed it like other shows. I don't know why that is other than the fact that it was an insanely better show vs the acolyte.

Madmarttigan said:

---

Yeah fallout is a fantastic example of a show that was actually a really diverse cast and audiences loved. It even has a trans actor but no one review bombed it like other shows. I don't know why that is other than the fact that it was an insanely better show vs the acolyte.

---

You answered your own question

I guess it also had to do with these executives patting themselves on the back for inclusion. Fallout just did it but you didn't see them bragging about it. They put out a good show and let their diversity speak for itself vs saying look at us we did good making a diverse show.

I think we're finally onto something. THIS is how these arguments/complaints should be framed. Otherwise, it always sounds like posters *****ing about queers and brown people on their TV.

People have been saying that on this board for ages though. Diversity pandering for the sake of diversity is stupid because the story takes a backseat to THE MESSAGE. The vast majority of people dgaf who is on the screen as long as it is secondary to the story or makes sense in the context of the story.

This is what people have been saying all along, you just haven't been listening.

But that isn't what happened here. The show just wasn't good.

Sometimes you read that in when it wasn't said. You did that to me a couple days ago. There's a difference to me in simply making shows have a reasonably diverse cast within a strong production, versus a DEI pandering project with a terrible plot and characters built around that.

No, it's never this clear and this concise. Because more often than not the complaints come with all kinds of extra *****ing and moaning, virtue signaling, dog whistles, etc and generally sound somewhat unhinged, if not straight up racist/homophobic. I'm not saying people haven't expressed their complaints in these terms before - of course they have - I'm saying it's hardly ever *just* in these terms.

I'd also put up Star Trek Strange New Worlds and Lower Decks as shows that have a diverse cast, tackle broad political topics, and well received because they are good.

Heck Strange New Worlds even recast Spock, Uhura, and Kirk and the fandom has embraced the shows. Also, had a musical episode that people liked.

Maybe you should given posters here benefit of the doubt until they've said something you're assuming they mean. Crazy, I know.

Again, I've never once ACCUSED posters of being racist/homophobic. My entire point is that the *****ing often SOUNDS that way. We all know that 95% of people here don't actually hate seeing gay people and minorities in their shows/movies. Granted, a very select psychotic few clearly do. But most people here are obviously good, sane people. Rather, my wish has always been that if people are going to complain about this stuff, that they simply choose their wording better, and articulate themselves in a way that doesn't sound so deranged, and isn't a complete embarrassment should the outside world stumble across this board.

TCTTS said:

---

Again, I've never once ACCUSED posters of being racist/homophobic. My entire point is that the *****ing often SOUNDS that way.

---

"Tell me sir, have you stopped beating your wife?"

Board note - pass your complaints to TCTTS for proper vetting prior to making them public.

Or, before posting, simply ask yourself, "Do I sound like a racist, homophobic *******?"

Cliff.Booth said:

---

Sometimes you read that in when it wasn't said. You did that to me a couple days ago. There's a difference to me in simply making shows have a reasonably diverse cast within a strong production, versus a DEI pandering project with a terrible plot and characters built around that.

---

But the truth of the matter is that most things fall somewhere inbetween.

The Acolyte absolutely had some early promotion that discussed the creator's background and viewpoint, though I'd argue it wasn't nearly as prominent as some made it out to be. But we did know about how the creator was somewhat atypical when it comes to past SW showrunners.

But the show itself wasn't particularly pandering, keyed around diversity, or have a lot of virtue signaling. It just wasn't good.

fig96 said:

---

Cliff.Booth said:

---

Sometimes you read that in when it wasn't said. You did that to me a couple days ago. There's a difference to me in simply making shows have a reasonably diverse cast within a strong production, versus a DEI pandering project with a terrible plot and characters built around that.

---

But the truth of the matter is that most things fall somewhere inbetween.

The Acolyte absolutely had some early promotion that discussed the creator's background and viewpoint, though I'd argue it wasn't nearly as prominent as some made it out to be. But we did know about how the creator was somewhat atypical when it comes to past SW showrunners.

But the show itself wasn't particularly pandering, keyed around diversity, or have a lot of virtue signaling. It just wasn't good.

---

He was too big to flip over and check, it's a fair question.

fig96 said:

---

He was too big to flip over and check, it's a fair question.

---

That stupid beaver caused a lot more problems than he, or they, solved.

DrEvazanPhD said:

---

fig96 said:

---

He was too big to flip over and check, it's a fair question.

---

That stupid beaver caused a lot more problems than he, or they, solved.

---

Lot of life truth in that sentence

In early drafts of the show, Kennedy straight up told her, "You've written a great Star Wars show, now go write a Leslye Headland show." It's really hard to argue that Kennedy just wants a good Star Wars story and not activism when that's exactly what we have from the horse's mouth.

I've said this before, and I'll say it again, this entire show is the equivalent of the kid who got an assignment, focused on an idea they were passionate about and thought was really awesome, and then completely failed because they focused on that instead of meeting all of the requirements in the rubric. Headland, the writers she hired, and (at least some of) the actors she cast were so focused on the woke points of the show they failed to pay the requisite attention to anything else. Her activism and not leaving it at the door to focus on production quality is why she was unsuitable for the role.

And yes, she and everyone else at Disney/LF were hyperfocused on the wokeness of the show. That's how they marketed it and their main focus before release. Others have mentioned Fallout as a show that was very diverse, had what make would consider woke themes, and yet was incredibly well received. Why? There's was no overriding intent or focus on diversity. No one went on a media tour touting it as a super queer feminist wet dream. They focused on story and successfully bringing the Fallout universe to screen. Shows and movies that are hyperfocused on their inclusivity and wokeness rarely do well. Inclusive and even woke shows do well when their creators focus on the the story and getting it right and let inclusivity and wokeness take a backseat.

So yeah, it was woke, the wokeness did it in, and that wokeness is what Kennedy wanted.

TCTTS said:

---

I think we're finally onto something. THIS is how these arguments/complaints should be framed. Otherwise, it always sounds like posters *****ing about queers and brown people on their TV.

---

That's always been the argument