Hermit's Journey Part II

[Rodan56]

Not to derail the thread, but I don't get this when Apu is one of the most decent and admirable characters in the Simpsons. I haven't watched the show since around 2000 so I don't know what direction he went since the while marriage and baby disaster to his character development.

To me it's like a Christian being annoyed by Flanders before his exaggeration when he was one of the decent few characters in the show you could tolerate having around you alongside Apu. As I've heard people put it, "Who'd you want for your neighbor? Ned or Homer?".

All I can say is watch "The Problem with Apu", they answer that question of yours very early on. Suffice to say, it doesn't really matter if Apu is a decent or admirable or smart character. The problem remains he's a colored person voiced by a white guy doing an accent that is kinda racist because it sounds funny to some people and said voice has been used to belittle, harrass and bully those of Indian descent. And I only brought it up because it feels like a similar issue many concerned with Jar Jar as a stereotype, if not racist portrayal, and said it damaged Star Wars for them.

[Madner Kami]

Not to derail the thread, but I don't get this when Apu is one of the most decent and admirable characters in the Simpsons. I haven't watched the show since around 2000 so I don't know what direction he went since the while marriage and baby disaster to his character development.

To me it's like a Christian being annoyed by Flanders before his exaggeration when he was one of the decent few characters in the show you could tolerate having around you alongside Apu. As I've heard people put it, "Who'd you want for your neighbor? Ned or Homer?".

All I can say is watch "The Problem with Apu", they answer that question of yours very early on. Suffice to say, it doesn't really matter if Apu is a decent or admirable or smart character. The problem remains he's a colored person voiced by a white guy doing an accent that is kinda racist because it sounds funny to some people and said voice has been used to belittle, harrass and bully those of Indian descent. And I only brought it up because it feels like a similar issue many concerned with Jar Jar as a stereotype, if not racist portrayal, and said it damaged Star Wars for them.

And those who complain about Apu, are a bunch of dimmwitted retards. Apu is a caricature, he naturally needs to be that stereotypical, that is the point. There is no "Problem with Apu", there's a "Problem with people who try to find problems where there are none".

[Rodan56]

And those who complain about Apu, are a bunch of dimmwitted retards. Apu is a caricature, he naturally needs to be that stereotypical, that is the point. There is no "Problem with Apu", there's a "Problem with people who try to find problems where there are none".

Does he need to be a stereotype? Does he need to be a caricature? And if so, why must a white man do his voice then? If it was a white guy doing a stereotypical black person's voice ala wangsta talk, would that be acceptable?

That's why I'm bringing up Jar Jar in reference to this. It's a colored man, doing a performance and putting on a funny voice that was percieved by a lot of colored people as being racist. And I wondered, is it worse or better that this was not a white guy pretending to be a black person but an alien?

Like I said again, find the documentary, watch it, get an opinion outside your comfort zone from someone who feels marginalized by the performance of a cartoon character and why it bothers him and others. It's better to educate one's self on these questions then to close yourself off. I had to go through this concerning Jurassic World recently, and while I still defend that movie, I better understand the problems there.

This is why I like to see this series, along with others apparently, as a way of getting the bigger picture. We know how fans reacted to the Prequels. Why not find out what led to these decisions, why they failed or what was the goal behind them even if it was obscured by problems. I like the idea of giving Lucas a chance to have his point of view given instead of this narrative of a man who hated his work and ruined it intentionally for no good reason. (PS I was never really a fan of the whole George Lucas and Spierlberg episodes on South Park.)

[Madner Kami]

Does he need to be a stereotype? Does he need to be a caricature? And if so, why must a white man do his voice then? If it was a white guy doing a stereotypical black person's voice ala wangsta talk, would that be acceptable?

Have you ever actually watched the Simpsons? I'm beginning to have my doubts.

That's why I'm bringing up Jar Jar in reference to this. It's a colored man, doing a performance and putting on a funny voice that was percieved by a lot of colored people as being racist. And I wondered, is it worse or better that this was not a white guy pretending to be a black person but an alien?

Like I said again, find the documentary, watch it, get an opinion outside your comfort zone from someone who feels marginalized by the performance of a cartoon character and why it bothers him and others. It's better to educate one's self on these questions then to close yourself off. I had to go through this concerning Jurassic World recently, and while I still defend that movie, I better understand the problems there.

That's a bunch of patronizing and condescending mumbo-jumbo. If someone takes offense by something that is not intended to offend, then the one feeling offended needs to leave his comfort zone. Jar-Jar being an offense to someone, I completely get, because he's a literal joke in an environment where the characters are entirely serious in their setup. Apu, however? Everyone in the Simpsons is a caricature. He'd stick out like a sore thumb between the core characters if he weren't and that would be offensive SafeSpacing, because everyone is fair game to be made fun off in the Simpsons. Everyone.

[Rodan56]

Have you ever actually watched the Simpsons? I'm beginning to have my doubts.

I did not question your love of the series or your knowledge of it. I'd like you to give me the same curteosy. I've been a fan of the Simpsons since before I could even watch it because my Mom kept me from seeing it. I had to sneak viewings and got in trouble when I was caught. It was only when I got older that I was allowed and went on a full Simpsons marathon blitz. So much so my High School Agenda book where I was supposed to keep my homework assignments ended up being something different, mostly because I didn't need it to know what needed to be finished in time for school the next week. I could crack it open now and show you several dozen quotes from several classic episodes. I love the Simpsons... that doesn't mean I can't criticise when they do something wrong.

That's a bunch of patronizing and condescending mumbo-jumbo. If someone takes offense by something that is not intended to offend, then the one feeling offended needs to leave his comfort zone. Jar-Jar being an offense to someone, I completely get, because he's a literal joke in an environment where the characters are entirely serious in their setup. Apu, however? Everyone in the Simpsons is a caricature. He'd stick out like a sore thumb between the core characters if he weren't and that would be offensive SafeSpacing, because everyone is fair game to be made fun off in the Simpsons. Everyone.

No... if you won't take the few minutes out of your day to listen to why someone is offended or angry or upset then you're just being purposely dismissive for no good reason. That shows a lack of empathy for the feelings of others or the willingness to reach an understanding. Jar Jar wasn't offensive to some because he was a joke character in a serious setting. He was offensive because some people felt he was a modern day minstrel show. White people described him as an annoying character that pissed them off with his antics, people of color felt he was targetting THEM as a carictature.

Specifically I know how one person was affected by Phantom Menace negatively. A guy I know had a group of friends, one of them Jamaican-American, and Star Wars was the one thing they knew was a safe movie discussion that would never feel awkward or problematic. Then Phantom Menace came out and after the movie, apparently, they had to spend the entire night trying to talk about anything but the movie they just saw because they all felt so profoundly uncomfortable addressing the feelings they had about what they saw on screen. That was their problem with it, not because he was a childish, goofy or stupid. He made them uncomfortable and unwanted within the movie theatre.

The issue with Apu is that he's not funny because he does particularly funny things. He's funny because of his silly voice. If all he did was speak like a normal person and was not presented as a stereotype constantly as the only regular Indian-American on the show, it would probably work. And frankly, "Problem with Apu" addresses that very subject you bring up. Yeah, the Simpsons do stereotype everyone. But Apu is specifically the silly foreigner and his accent is specifically used to accentuate that. An accent, that unlike Jar Jar, is being voiced by a WHITE guy. Have you seen Short Circuit? Same problem there.

Look, I'm not sure of your background and this is getting way off topic. I'm going to stop now. Again, all I can ask, is that you seek out the documentary yourself and try to understand someone else's point of view on this subject.

[Morgaine]

No idea actually, GandALF claims it's "Lucas' stuff" and admittedly I'm too lazy to check.
Even if not the writer it's possible it was his idea. Either way it's just not a very good "fix". Either something is scientifically quantifiable or it isn't, trying to have it both ways seems silly to me.

His role was the same as with V & VI: his story, other writers/directors doing the leg work. My point was is that it conformed to his vision, it wasn't a novel or comic book that Disney ditched and he had nothing to with.

It's not "trying to have it both ways", it's left up to the audience's interpretation: if you want a spiritual answer then they're tiny magic space angels, if you want a scientific answer then its microbes, which is just as "scientific" as the telepath gene in B5 or whatever Vulcans and Betazoids have

It certainly is trying to have it both ways. Lucas introduced midochlorians for no reason and then oversees a dishonest bsckpedal but not really.
It clutters up the story, and for what? If it had been scientific to start with, then fine. But this all began as space wizardry, so why change it? And if he did decide to change it, why not stick with it?

Hell making it quantifiable opens up so many inconsistencies. Why are the Jedi a mystical order of monks and not a Republic police force with set breeding rules to produce offspring with high midochlorian counts instead of demanding celebacy and kidnapping random children?

All this shows it was something Lucas made up on the spot because he thought it was cool and was possibly.... "inspired" by a certain Japanese novel from 1995 which was followed by a videogame in 1998 dealing with mitochondria enabling superpowers in humans. He clearly put no thought into the effect of integrating this explanation into a setting that had already established it as space magic wielded by wizards.

[Dînadan]

I’m going to throw my name onto the pile of those that think midichlorians were unnecessary. As has already been mentioned it could have been handeled by having the Jedi sensing power within him and possibly even with them having full blown visions conveyed in the same manner as Luke’s visions in ESB.

If midichlorians were to be included, I think it would have been better if the dialogue had been structured to more strongly imply (or outright state) that they were parasitic/symbiotic and fed off Force energy so were drawn to those with a greater connection to the Force rather than implying they caused the Force (ie Anakin has so many because he’s strong in the Force as opposed to being strong because he has so many),

[Morgaine]

To be honest even on that level I dislike midichlorians because while it would solve the issue of why Force eugenics isn't a thing, I feel there is something fundamentally wrong and cheap with waving a device in front of someone and finding out they are X powerful with the Force.

"His midichlorian count is higher even than Yoda's!" why should that even by relevant? It takes away all wonder about it, it's basically the DBZ "over 9000!" power level all over again.
Yes like others said just having Qui Gon go "I've never sensed such raw power." Would get the point across without feeling so arbitrary. In fact that's what they did with Revan in KotOR and it worked out far better in the narrative.

[Independent George]

I'm not familiar with the EU at all - what typically happens to force sensitives who never get training from either Jedi or Sith? Do their talents fade, or do they end up learning all the wrong things from misusing those powers? It's an awful big galaxy to expect the few Jedi out there to find all of those kids early enough for training.

[FakeGeekGirl]

That example of the scene with the little kid from Close Encounters was a very welcome example of how to direct kids right. That little one's performance was very genuine ... because Spielberg basically forced him to go full method. And it's one of the few examples of that that isn't super horrifying. There's a reason the phrase No Kids No Dogs is so common in the entertainment industry, and it is so unfortunate that the prequel trilogy was basically built around one massive misjudgment.