![Star Wars vs Star Trek: a guide [Tommy Siegel]](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/d045faea-f6cd-41c9-852e-1e17eea16968.png){kind=link}
Tommy Siegel | Bluesky
Transcript
A Helpful Guide To Star Wars vs Star Trek
Star Wars
[Image of Han Solo in Tommy’s style]
- Don’t start with the ‘first’ movie, let me tell you where to start
- Looks like ruined farm equipment in space
- In summary: the past was horrible
- JJ Abrams ruined it
Star Trek
[Image of Jean Luc Picard in Tommy’s style]
- Don’t start with the first season, let me tell you where to start
- Looks like a cruise ship in space
- In summary: the future is incredible
- JJ Abrams ruined it
Really? Episode 7 forced episode 8 into such a narrative corner the best they could do was turn Luke into a green titty milk loving weirdo?
You say that like cow milk doesn’t come from a titty. Like you’ve been alienated from the source of your food. Luke isn’t alienated from nature, he’s connected to all the nature around him. He knows exactly where all his food comes from. He uses the force and his knowledge to survive.
Connecting with nature is an important part of spiritual enlightenment. The old Jedi lived up in a tower above a city. They were alienated from nature. Luke is practicing the way of the light side of the force every day. Remember, it’s an energy field that binds all life together.
You’re just like Rey: alienated from the land, afraid of titties. And that is not the way of the new Jedi. Luke may be disillusioned with the Jedi as heroes and peacekeepers, but he’s perfected his monk game in a way most Jedi never did.
First of all I grew up among cows, chickens and other farm animals. I’ve drank warm milk straight from a cows teat. I’ve collected chickens eggs from the nests. I’ve spend morning foraging mushrooms from the forest to make a mushroom stew. Unless you live in a land largely untainted by urbanism I’m probably far more connected to the land than you are.
And your little nature spiel is irrelevant to the movie because the movie doesn’t need to show cleaning out shit from a chicken coop to show how connected a character is with nature. The same way the movie didn’t need to show Luke drinking green titty milk to show he’s connected to nature. There was a million different ways to show that, just look at how Episode 5 introduced Yoda. Drinking milk was a deliberate decision to make him look weird because while I’m well aware where milk comes from other people aren’t and they’re going to think it’s weird.
And the milk thing is just a meme that everyone knows, there’s more wrong with the character. Such a throwing away his own lightsaber. Which would make sense if he considers lightsabers irrelevant to the new teachings of the Jedi, except he still uses that very lightsaber when going against Kylo. And perhaps the most damning fact about how the character was butchered came from Mark Hamill who’s been very public about disagreeing with how the character was written for episode 8.
And finally, nothing you said indicates the root problem with the character was that Episode 7 stuck Luke on an island.
Sorry, I need to come back to this one, I’m confused.
So you’re a titty milk drinker, and Luke is a titty milk drinker, and you don’t think there’s anything wrong with titty milk drinking. But you don’t like that Luke did it in the movie. Because… why?
Because it’s socially frowned upon? You don’t like that Luke defied social norms?
Of course because it’s socially frowned upon. This isn’t Luke defying social norms, Luke is not a sentient being here. Luke does what the director makes him do and the director made him to something socially frowned upon. I don’t like it because the director took a character I’m fond of and turned him socially unacceptable. Let me get my point across a different way because it’s not drinking the milk that I have an issue, it’s the socially frowned undertone that the director made the character subject to.
Would you be as defensive if the director had decided Luke would do one of the following:
All of those things are “normal” in the sense that somewhere in the world there’s a person who does one or some or all of those things. Generally none of those things are considered socially acceptable to do in the front of others. Unless you’re a 100% social weirdo there’s at least one thing in that list that you think is socially frowned upon. Would you not be critical if Luke had done that thing?
Luke has always done socially controversial things. He’s always been a rebel. On the farm, he rejected his parents’ expectations that he’d be a farmer, because he wanted to see the galaxy. He rejected the empire’s propaganda and joined the rebel cause. He rejected anti-Force norms pushed by Han to learn from crazy old Ben. He rejected Yoda’s pressure to stay and learn. And he rejected every norm of how people act in war, by choosing to give Darth Vader mercy.
Luke has always rejected the easy and safe path. He’s always chosen adventure and independence over comfort. The titty milk is consistent characterisation. He’s Luke Skywalker, he does whatever the fuck he wants and he doesn’t care all that much what others think about it.
So let me get this straight. If instead of drinking titty milk Luke had dropped his pants and started furiously masturbating your reaction would be:
Depends if it served the story. Can you describe a scenario where masturbation fits the story as well as the milk does?
You didn’t say it has to serve the story. You said he can do whatever the fuck he wants.
And the milk drinking doesn’t serve the either but you’re hellbent on defending that.
Nah, he views lightsabers as irrelevant, and he doesn’t use a lightsaber against Kylo. He uses an illusion of a lightsaber, and he doesn’t even attack with it. He just dodges and distracts. The lightsaber is nothing more than a symbol to distract Kylo. It’s serving the same function as a set of jangling keys.
And he had to have that pacifistic viewpoint, that anti-lightsaber viewpoint, because Abrams put him on an island during a war. The best answer RJ could come up with to that is that he’s become a pacifist.
Would a pacifist pick up a weapon to defend themselves and even hit back? Because that’s exactly what he did when Rey attacked him.
I don’t get your need to defend Rian Johnson. I have nothing against him. I loved Looper and I enjoyed Knives out movies. I’m simply calling out a stinker for what it is, a stinker. And the last Jedi is a godtier stinker.
Yes, a pacifist would.
I get that the movie has flaws, but it also has more vision and philosophy than any other Star Wars movie, and I prefer a movie with vision. The Canto Bight stuff was weak. They did a terrible job with Finn. Rose is unlikable. But the Rey and Luke stuff is peak Star Wars.