[ SECRET POST #6203 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #6203 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.


01.



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.



__________________________________________________



05.



__________________________________________________



06.



__________________________________________________



07.


































Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 45 secrets from Secret Submission Post #887.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

But OP isn't talking about people who pretend bad scenes and loopholes don't exist. They're talking about people who say, "you're not a real fan if you like X."

[(Anonymous)]

Oh that’s so cute you think everyone is saying that literally! Sweetie, it’s a way of sounding out other fans to find likeminded people.

[(Anonymous)]

AYRT

No, the way to sound out like-minded fans is to say, "I am a person who likes X and dislikes Y." Being a dick is just being a dick, regardless how people try to justify it to themselves.

[(Anonymous)]

Nope. That's literally gatekeeping. Jog on.

[(Anonymous)]

but...they are. you're lucky if you're in a fandom where they don't but lmao in Star Wars circles? they absolutely do say you're not a real SW fan if you like the prequels, or the sequels, or ROTJ for that matter. you're not a real fan if you like Rey. real SW fans only acknowledge the OG trilogy. so on and so forth. they really, actually, do say that.

[(Anonymous)]

"Sounding out other fans to find likeminded people" is part of the definition of gatekeeping.

[(Anonymous)]

Yes, that's exactly the shitty condescending tone these gatekeepers "true fans" strike. Well done, sweetie. It's cute and yet makes me want to smack you!

[(Anonymous)]

Op is talking about the people who hate TLJ not recognising TLJ fans as Star Wars fans. And since TLJ was so objectively bad that they had retcon it…it’s hardly a surprise that is the common attitude in the fandom. Especially when you consider the majority of vocal TLJ fans don’t like anything else in the Star Wars universe. Liking one objectively bad movie in a massive franchise doesn’t make someone a fan of the franchise.

DA

[(Anonymous)]

When it came out, at the time, there were a lot of TLJ fans who absolutely loved that previous Star Trek fans disliked it. They threw it in the faces of other fans every chance they got, even quoting the line from the Villain about killing the past while doing so. I don't like schisms in fandom much, not on any side, but as the movie has aged like milk on a radiator and popular opinion has turned away from them, they have to take ownership of those views and admit they brought a lot of this on themselves. They didn't mind creating a fan schism when they thought they were winning.

SA, Obvious correction.

[(Anonymous)]

I mean Star Wars, not Star Trek. Dumb me, dumb brain.

Now there is a goof that'd get me flayed from all sides in at least two fandoms.

Re: SA, Obvious correction.

[(Anonymous)]

Stargate fans can be vicious like that.

Re: SA, Obvious correction.

[(Anonymous)]

Hahaha tbf my favourite space operas are Spaceballs and Fanboys because I appreciate taking the piss out of the Oh So Serious fans more than I enjoy the source material.

[(Anonymous)]

AYRT

A retcon really isn't good evidence that something's "objectively bad." It can be the result of laziness; of poor planning; of a desire to keep something "fresh," or to appeal to a new/different demographic. I'm honestly also skeptical of most claims that something is "objectively bad/good," because it usually means, "I need a post-hoc rationalization for why my completely subjective opinion is more correct than the completely subjective opinions of others." As with most things, the emotion comes first; the "reason" comes second, functioning as an excuse for the emotion.

In any case, this all just seems like gatekeepers being upset that OP has called them gatekeepers. Own your gatekeeping, if you think it's a good or necessary thing!

[(Anonymous)]

The retcon isn’t base proof, it was the result. TLJ was objectively bad. Yes it was also subjectively bad for the majority of the fanbase but that’s incidental. If you need help, dictionary.com can explain the difference for you between objective and subjective. And if you like TLJ, food for you! There’s nothing wrong with liking objectively bad media.

[(Anonymous)]

SA

*good for you. My phone thinks I’m still discussing tomorrow’s dinner plans.

[(Anonymous)]

AYRT

My skepticism isn't the result of not knowing the difference between "objectively" and "subjectively;" it's from seeing people claim the former when they mean the latter. People want their likes and dislikes to be objective, because that would lend them additional weight, and make them "correct." It's status-seeking, at it's base.

That's what you're doing, right now. You're trying to position yourself as greater in status than me right now, through smugness and veiled insult.

[(Anonymous)]

Nah there’s no smugness or veiled insult. I genuinely thought you might have reversed the meanings. TLJ as a whole is objectively bad. Star Wars has loads of objectively bad stuff but only one movie that is in its entirety. And it happens to be the one fans hate and also the subject of the secret.

[(Anonymous)]

AYRT

What makes something objectively bad or good?

[(Anonymous)]

Plotting, pacing, editing, lighting, and sound are the biggest metrics. TLJ failed the first three dismally. They did somewhat better with lighting and sound.
They hung the major plot on a faked death and allies not communicating with each other, and a lot of the movie was a pointless subplot that had no impact on the movie. The movie would have played out exactly the same if they took out the Finn and Rose Vegas Vacation scenes, meaning Rose had no point whatsoever to be in the film. That makes what Kelly Marie Tran suffered a million times worse. She really was included as Tokenism and then the director and studio just hung her out to dry when the predictable backlash turned personal, sexist, and racist.

This is weirdly hilarious to me, gatekeeping in a secret complaining about gatekeeping.

[(Anonymous)]

I mean, honestly, if the movie counts as Star Wars, and they like it, they are fans of Star Wars. And if they complain about other things in the franchise, don't they fit right in with the fandom?

Re: This is weirdly hilarious to me, gatekeeping in a secret complaining about gatekeeping.

[(Anonymous)]

They could make an argument that there's value to gatekeeping. That'd be much more interesting than this defensive, "I'm not gatekeeping, YOU are" stuff.

Re: This is weirdly hilarious to me, gatekeeping in a secret complaining about gatekeeping.

[(Anonymous)]

Kinda see your point but also kinda don’t; almost everything that happened in TLJ was retconned. It’s ignored the same as Jar-Jar. Yeah it happened and there are some who like it but the majority don’t and all references to it have been removed by later works.

Re: This is weirdly hilarious to me, gatekeeping in a secret complaining about gatekeeping.

[(Anonymous)]

But it's still a Star Wars movie.