Return of The Jedi

[clearspira]

As SF Debris pointed out, this attitude came from one of the creators behind the show, Richard Marquand. He wanted a more "feminine" Leia one could argue was character assassination. So no, I don't buy it. And this is someone who didn't like Leia. I thought she was a stuffy and uptight bitch. I prefer Padme. But, yeah. Even I'm aghast at what they did to her. Seriously, read some interviews about how Boba Fett could see into "forbidden areas."

Regardless of how the idea came about, it made for a badass scene and one of the many things that puts her ahead of Vice Admiral Gender Studies. Good art can come from trash. Look at Voyager.

[Yukaphile]

Is it worth it for poor Carrie Fisher so that the actor who played Boba Fett could see into her private areas? No, I don't think so. That's degrading and objectifying a real woman over a fictional character. At least with something like the Ewoks dolling her up, it's hurting no real people.

[clearspira]

Is it worth it for poor Carrie Fisher so that the actor who played Boba Fett could see into her private areas? No, I don't think so. That's degrading and objectifying a real woman over a fictional character. At least with something like the Ewoks dolling her up, it's hurting no real people.

Carrie Fisher is irrelevant to a discussion about the CHARACTER of Princess Leia though. I feel sorry for her, but its hardly unique. We could have the same discussion about hundreds of women who have been in great films. Should none of them have been filmed too?

[Yukaphile]

I feel if they were going to give her that outfit, they should have made it more... serviceable, so that kind of thing didn't happen. But we know what was going through the creators' heads. They were leering, sexist pigs who got all hung up seeing female flesh. And no, that it happens to hundreds of other women doesn't make it right.

[clearspira]

I feel if they were going to give her that outfit, they should have made it more... serviceable, so that kind of thing didn't happen. But we know what was going through the creators' heads. They were leering, sexist pigs who got all hung up seeing female flesh. And no, that it happens to hundreds of other women doesn't make it right.

Didn't say it made it right, i'm saying that it often makes for a better film. Look at how many male actors have been injured doing dodgy stunts; doesn't mean that the finished product didn't look great on screen. Every Bond actor has a laundry list of injuries playing the character, but I assume that you enjoyed the spectacle regardless if you like Bond.

[Yukaphile]

What if a stunt looked epic, but the stuntman died? How about that? In this case, I think the person who's alive takes precedent over a fictional work. Whether that's sexually degrading women or doing something so dangerous someone might die, doesn't matter to me. Both are important to prevent. To better humanity.

[clearspira]

What if a stunt looked epic, but the stuntman died? How about that? In this case, I think the person who's alive takes precedent over a fictional work. Whether that's sexually degrading women or doing something so dangerous someone might die, doesn't matter to me. Both are important to prevent. To better humanity.

There is a middle ground between injury and death. Clearly death is too far.
I also think the fact that these are consenting adults is also important to consider. They do have tongues if they don't like what's going on. Carrie Fisher wasn't some pup at the start of her career, she was the biggest woman in Hollywood at this point. You telling me that if she REALLY hated wearing that bikini, they would have had the power to force her? Or that Hamil and Ford wouldn't have backed her up? Sorry, no dice.

[PerrySimm]

Quite liked the "Lando: Master Gambler" spiel!

[Yukaphile]

@clearspira You are victim-blaming. Women's protection in the workplace was far from what it is today. It's not as simple as "she could say no, and they'd stop it." Hell, didn't SF Debris himself say only Harrison Ford was the one not contracted for future sequels? Meaning no, she had no freedom at all.

@PerrySimm I thought the joke about Hayden Christen was hilarious, though I'd have been a bit happier if he'd have run down the ways it didn't work, but then... that should be obvious to everyone. Only Lucas somehow thinks it's logical that "Anakin died as a young man, so he should show up as a Force ghost."

[clearspira]

@clearspira You are victim-blaming. Women's protection in the workplace was far from what it is today. It's not as simple as "she could say no, and they'd stop it." Hell, didn't SF Debris himself say only Harrison Ford was the one not contracted for future sequels? Meaning no, she had no freedom at all.

1) They couldn't have made the film without her, so yeah, she had plenty of freedom. When it comes to ''no film'' and ''no bikini'' there is only one choice they are going to make. 2) This is 1983 we're talking about, not 1883. Stop making out that she didn't have any agency.

And as far as i'm concerned, victim blaming is a fine defence when it comes to murder or sex crimes. When we are talking about one of the most powerful and richest women in 1983 Hollywood wearing a bikini on a film set then that is a cop out. I'm sick of people applying the victim blaming tag to minor things.