People are so caught up (rightfully) with flying Leia, Skywalker titty milk, and the porgs that they're forgetting about the single most insulting element in the entire film. I'm referring to the bizarre sophomoric anti-capitalist message that was awkwardly shoehorned into the plot. The entire point of the casino mission subplot was basically to say that "capitalism=bad". With moronic reveals like "GASP, the weapons dealers work for both sides!" or absurdly cheesy dialogue about making the bourgeoisie hurt, it would be easy to groan at all of this in any film. But what makes this theme so offensive is the fact that this message is being presented in what is the second most egregious offender of turning movies into soulless products this year (the Emoji Movie is the only one that beats it). A movie that tries to tell its viewers that capitalism is evil is simultaneously operating as a poorly masked advertisement for Disney's new line of toys. The largest film corporation which truly turned Star Wars into nothing more than a soulless product is trying to tell it's viewers that a free market is evil. It's absolutely disgusting.
People are so caught up (rightfully) with flying Leia, Skywalker titty milk...
Other urls found in this thread:
youtu.be
youtu.be
twitter.com
Yep its truely disgusting Disney is dying slowly that's why they are panic buying everything since the 00s
First Pixar then marvel fox etc
Hopefully the trajectory will continue and they will go full Netflix by 2030
>Porg tattoo
Serious question what makes one become this way and when did it happen? At which point in human history did the concept of a 20something male tattooing a plush advertisement on his leg first seem realistic?
In 1999 when we accidentally the everything and now live in a bizzaro world
They are actual Disney shills, which again makes it all the more ironic that Disney is pushing anti-free market messages in their film while simultaneously paying people to use their bodies as fucking billboards.
2007 user. 2007.
Nah shit wasn't the same after 2001
GROWN
MEN
Glad I’m finally seeing someone else articulate this. It’s literally only thanks to consumerism that shitty movies like this are even made/so ridiculously profitable, so the film trying to critique capitalism was just bizarre. I’m sure that there was slave labor involved in making those sets and costumes too, or at least a shitload of underpaid workers, so the whole scene pretty much amounted to self-parody. It was one of the most hollow, forced, and utterly self-unaware scenes I’ve ever watched in a film.
Jews are parasites. Ever since Eisner Disney has been dying a slow death, Iger has merely accelerated it.
It's called social engineering, they wanted to cater to the Bernie Sanders audience with that part of the plot. Notice that it's the black dude and the fem chink that were involved in that plot. This narrative wan't pushed with the white characters. In no way does this anti-capitalist aspect reflects the views of Disney. Bob Iger is a right winger obsessed with paying less taxes and laying off as many Disneyland workers as he can. He was more than happy that Trump won the election and was on his corporate board until it was disbanded.
Proof here : youtu.be
...
>multi-billion dollar company that sells multi-billion products
>capitalism is bad
what did they mean by this?
Not making a stance on capitalism, don't turn this into another Sup Forums vs reddit thread, just highlighting the hypocrisy of disney.
merch is an afterthought, the real profit margins come from the source material... movies, comics, games ect.
and those are selling like shit so they're fucked, don't worry
what toys do they have to make next year? nobody even buys the nuwars toys except kylo
OP is just pointing out the revolting hypocrisy of the film, you commie faggot. If you truly hate capitalism then you should hate the bullshit Disney is doing.
capitalism is good when you have capital
>weapons dealers work for both sides
i.e. Globalists
Trully, this is white genocide by commies.
Tattoos are for people who have no identity themselves and just proves they like whatever is popular since they don't want to go against the norm and be ostracized. I do find it hilarious they always use the most surface entry level shit to show how unique and special they are from everyone else.
You mouseshills are really desperate. OP is making a valid point, stop trying to twist this thread into Sup Forumstards vs commietards.
Yes, I completely agree, OP. This trilogy is shamelessly reactionary and its attempts to pass itself off as somehow 'subversive' are hilariously bad. It doesn't even know it's reactionary, either.
>I’m 16 and just read Karl Marx for the first time
Capitalism isn’t the problem.
If this were actually a Marxist film then Rose and Finn would have taken over the casino and given control of it over to the workers.
I don't get the porg thing, they're not cute, it's just a bird with a pug's face
>bizarre sophomoric anti-capitalist message
people didnt pick up on that because they are not poltards who only see everything in "us vs them"
i bet you could look at an onion and say its anti capitalistic for reasons
your pathetic and nobody gives a fuck about this
id kill myself if i were your father
Did you not see the film?
The anti-capitalist message was practically spelled out in the scene. If you didn’t pick up on that you’re a complete idiot.
Actually several leftists from the Guardians picked up on that and were quite pleased with it, calling the movie as leftist as Jeremy Corbyn.
They were literally just designed to sell toys. They were hoping to recreate they baby-groot phenomenon, luckily it doesn't seem to be working out for them. I'm at the very least happy these weak willed whores in the pic are permanently stuck with the constant reminder that they sold their bodies to the mouse.
You're fucking retarded. I'm not Sup Forums at all but the message was so blatant if you didn't pick up on it then you're blind. And it's not anti-capitalist messages that I'm opposed to, it's the actual way the message was handled in the movie, and the sickening hypocrisy of it. If this was some indie film with the same message I would not have been bothered by it.
Here's the thing about Porgs. Their whole popularity feels forced and you can tell without a doubt Disney intended them to be in a movie before finally deciding to shove them into Star Wars, that much is obvious, they wanted to see how audiences would react to their presence before giving the greenlight to solo projects and more merchandise. Everything about them feels manufactured and shows just how little effort they put into this new trilogy. They clearly weren't confident about them being shoved in their own movie otherwise they'd get called out on wanting the Minions, Pokemon Go, etc. Audience, they figured if it had the Star Wars brand IP behind it these things would be an instant sell out but fortunately that seems to be false. If they didn't have Star Wars behind them they'd be forgotten and quickly faded into the obscure parts of memory where they should remain.
Minions are significantly more popular than Despicable Me, though.
They were trying to replicate the Minions success from that movie and failed.
>The next anthology film after Solo will be Porgs: The Movie
Calling it now
First off, "muh Sup Forums -------> Sup Forums"
Second, what exactly does any of that have to do with capitalism? Are you 12? I'ts actually just a satire on the real way the world operates as an engine for war profiteering, I mean we did that shit in real life, sold Isis our own weapons, now we fight them, sell weapons to all the mudslime states as profit and as technical trails, watch them destabilize the entire middle east blowing eachother up with our weapons and Russia can't even into any reliable allies. Cold war never ended noob.
Theyre in the flick for about 5 minutes and will never be seen again.. why would you do this.
>will never be seen again
They've infested the Millennium Falcon, the only ship the Resistance has left. If they aren't in the next movie, it's because a) they've been blown out the airlock between films or b) there's a gaping continuity error.
One way or another there is no way to write a third part of this trilogy without Porgs. Just like there's no way to write the next part of this story without BB-8's coin gun.
>With moronic reveals like "GASP, the weapons dealers work for both sides!"
I actually thought this was interesting and could have made for a neat plot. It also would have tied in nicely to Kylo's insistence to bury the past and start anew, and to not just go by typical light side/dark side stuff
But of course the movie abandoned all the interesting narrative threads
Learn to edit jesus christ,
>he doesn't think there will be a sub-plot in the next movie where chewie has to help them find a new Porg-World
>sub-plot
>Implying that isn't what the whole movie is about
read Guy Debord OP. This is all spectacle.
They'll do a Porgs cartoon or some shit like that to generate hype and interest. Everyone complains about every aspect of The Last Jedi but Porgs seem practically invisible to audiences. Funny though how they hyped them up to be a breakout character like they did with Phasma but people are too busy complaining about the actual movie rather than focusing on buying Porg dolls and shit, the exact opposite of what Disney were expecting.
No, you're wrong. People love Porgs. YOU don't like them, Sup Forums is shitting on the movie, but they're one of the most recognizable images from the new movie.
i though that the whole finn/rose bullshit was blm propaganda
>a black and a slave
>they bond over their hatred of the rich and powerful (who are slave owners)
>they go to fight an army of white soldiers
>>they win, because he literally rises above the white totalitarian leader while bashing her helmet, and the only things we see of her are that she's white, blonde and blue-eyed
>she also makes one last remark about how he is scum
i only could think about this during the film
Well the first thing I noticed about ops pic is the blue hair, then there's the soyboy,
Need I say more?
Who iss "Funko" the SJWs other dick?
I think 'funko pop' is a toy company but I'm not sure
Good movie
It was 2005 / 2006 when the world went to shit. Lots of shit head kids got laptops for college and were suddenly online.
Idk, there were two Porgs dolls sitting at my grocery store for weeks and weeks after Force Friday. Maybe not as bad as Finn figures sitting on the shelves for two years, but that's still pretty bad.
People like this are why I don't donate or give a shit about human loss. Humans are selfish narcisstic assholes. And the internet has only amplified that because people can disconnect even more by ordering everything online and hardly having to interact with people outside their shitty little cult.
stop drawing Rey as a pretty woman
They were talking about slave traders and arms dealers not capitalism. Did you people even watch the movie?
>thinking those arent part of capitalism as well
Fucking shills I swear to God
At least TRY would ya
There's a difference between a merchant and a capitalist.
>gone porg
hahahaha fantastic that is just so geeeeeky so nerd xD xD im' lauighng porg is so cute! geeky star wars haha so nerd! cool geeks! :DD
capitalism?
I think they were criticizing slavery of children.
Ya, one gets payed to trade and the other pays for the other one to bring him stuff.
LOL was wondering who that was.
I don't agree. You can criticize arms dealers without criticizing capitalism.
and even if you criticize capitalism, that would mean Disney isn't censoring any critics in their movies, what is a good thing since they own everything now.
Maybe it is henna
I tattoed my team's name with henna once, but I used times new roman. A friend asked if it was a stamp.
I disagree, there was a clear analogy for consumerism implied. The inhabitants of the planet were extremely wealthy and materialistic and owned a lot of beautiful things. It was revealed that they acquired all this wealth through immoral means - animal cruelty, child abuse, arms trading. The point was that they did these evil things SOLELY to obtain money and “things.” So, yes. It was a thinly veiled critique of consumerist culture (consumerist might be a more accurate label than capitalist). If you don’t get that then you don’t get subtext. And yes, that a nu-Star Wars movie is critiquing consumerism is absolutely ironic considering that it is the foundation on which the success of these films sit.
You know its also funny. Some fucks like to complain about what a sellout George Lucas was for trying to create kid-friendly stuff like the Ewoks and Jar Jar made specificlaly to sell merchandise. And when Disney does it, nobody complains about it. I am not defending Lucas either, I just find this hypocrisy amusing.
>And when Disney does it, nobody complains about it
Except that people on this board cannot stop bitching about them 24/7?
At least those lousy characters had some use in the movies. the ewoks somehow spear chucked the death star to death. There's strong evidence pointing to a plot line where jar jar was a powerful sith.
I obviously wasn't referring to this board. I was talking about people outside of it like Jeremy Jahns.
it's a jewish trick to control the masses
>look, the heroes of the film unveiled the conspiracy and defeated the oppressive wealthy ruling class
that way the audience feels satisfied and doesn't actually try to bring change IRL