Game of Thrones petitions and Star Wars trolls? Fans have become far too entitled

[ray245]

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... s-entitled

It’s a common refrain from franchise movie directors when a film fails to set the critical world on fire that they have, in fact, not made it for those elitist critics in their metropolitan bubble of exclusive screenings and free canapes, but “for the fans”. But what happens when the fans decide they don’t want a particular project either?

Ron Howard, the director of Solo: A Star Wars Story, recently suggested that a fan backlash against the Star Wars saga as a whole, primarily driven by negative reaction to the preceding film The Last Jedi, was responsible for his own movie’s mediocre performance at the box office. Howard pointed to a concerted campaign to drive down “audience reaction” scores on sites such as Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic, arguing that Solo may have earned more than its $393m box office take had such “aggressive trolling” not occurred.


Star Wars trolls to blame for Solo's box-office failure, says Ron Howard
Read more
The director may have a point, but to blame angry internet fans alone for the film’s performance overlooks a number of other factors that will probably have contributed to its underwhelming reception. The critical press reaction was hardly much more enthusiastic (indeed, while Solo’s audience score on Rotten Tomatoes sits at 64%, the critical consensus only puts it marginally higher at 70%); Howard himself, while undoubtedly a talented filmmaker, was parachuted in to rework the film after the original team of Phil Lord and Christopher Miller were let go due to “creative differences”; and Disney’s chief executive Bob Iger has even admitted that yet another Star Wars release so soon after the previous instalment may have contributed to audience fatigue with the saga.

Fans, particularly the ones more inclined to get aggrieved at the slightest hint of a property not being made in the exact way they want it, would certainly like to believe that they have that kind of power over the mass cinema-going audience. But you only have to look at Captain Marvel, which earned well over $1n despite concerted boycott campaigning from “anti-social justice warrior” figureheads on YouTube and social media, to see that a good film is perfectly capable of rising above such petty trolling.

Whether successful or not, what these campaigns had in common was that they weren’t based on the quality of the products themselves – but on pre-emptive assumptions made by fans who had already decided they weren’t going to like it. It’s been a different story in the aftermath of the final season of Game of Thrones, where a widespread sense of disappointment with the quality and character direction – one that, it should be stressed, wasn’t universally shared by all the fans – manifested itself, in the most extreme quarters, in the shape of petitions for HBO to actually remake the episodes in a fashion more in line with fan expectations.

What’s at the root of these types of campaigns? In recent years we’ve seen a growth in entitled attitudes among some fans – a feeling that has always bubbled under the surface, but which has risen as the internet has given more and more amplification to their voices. As far as these fans are concerned, their beloved characters and universes are not “owned” by their makers – but by those who spend their hard-earned on going to watch them. And so criticism moves out of the realm of simply being a reaction, into something that drives a cause – the injustice will not stand, the wrong must be addressed.

But just as an author cannot claim complete ownership of a work once it’s been given to the world, so too an audience has no right to claim ownership while it’s being created. The only duty that a filmmaker has is to deliver the work as they see fit – and to deliver commercial success, of course, if that’s what they’ve been hired to do. In general, if the work is good, it has a chance of succeeding – even if it might make decisions that not every viewer would have made in the process.

Fandom has, and always will have, an important role to play in art and culture. To consume, to engage, to enjoy, to criticise, to analyse, to adapt. But demanding to have a say in the work itself isn’t part of the deal. It fails to take into account that not every other fan may even agree with one’s criticisms; not to mention that, frankly, fans don’t always know best what they actually want. And the time and effort that some groups expend campaigning against works they don’t like would surely be better spent encouraging, or even creating more of, ones that they do.

The bit about fans not knowing what they wanted holds very true in my opinion. Fans can comment on what they feel is wrong with a movie or a show, but they are usually a terrible judge at pin-pointing the exact reason why X movie didn't do well.

[The Romulan Republic]

The problem with fandom is that its a lot of points of view that tend to conflict, and a lot of it is viewing the first piece of a series they saw through rose-tinted glasses, and then holding that up as the ultimate standard of quality for all future works.

For example, I agree that the final few episodes of Game of Thrones sucked balls, but I am deeply disappointed that the main take away most fans seemed to have was "It sucked because it wasn't like the books".

Oh, and the endless obsession with shipping. Can't forget that.

[Abacus]

Reminds me of people getting angry at Karen Traviss. There were so many neckbeards sprouting that I had to double check my own shave line.

Since we're on the subject of GoT -- I think the entire season was sped up and cut into weird shapes on purpose; not for the purpose of making a competent ending to the show, but because they honestly couldn't end the series the way GRRM is going to end the books. I strongly believe that GRRM asked them not to end the show with anything similar to how he intends it to end. Heck, if I'd been in GRRM's shoes (and hadn't finished my series) I'd have had it written into the original contract that gave them the rights that they were not allowed to end the show how he intends to end his books.

[The Romulan Republic]

Reminds me of people getting angry at Karen Traviss. There were so many neckbeards sprouting that I had to double check my own shave line.

Yeah.

As much as I think some of her creative choices were horrible, the vitriol of the attacks on Travis, in hindsight, feel like a precursor to Gamergate and the Alt. Reich campaigns against recent films.

Since we're on the subject of GoT -- I think the entire season was sped up and cut into weird shapes on purpose; not for the purpose of making a competent ending to the show, but because they honestly couldn't end the series the way GRRM is going to end the books. I strongly believe that GRRM asked them not to end the show with anything similar to how he intends it to end. Heck, if I'd been in GRRM's shoes (and hadn't finished my series) I'd have had it written into the original contract that gave them the rights that they were not allowed to end the show how he intends to end his books.

I truly hope that's the case.

[Elheru Aran]

Mind you, it's one thing to criticize bad writing, like Traviss claiming that the Grand Army of the Republic was only a few million clones or some such nonsense while wanking her pet Mandalorians. It's another to criticize it because you don't like WHO is writing it. You have to be able to separate the work from the person, unless their personal beliefs are so inextricably intertwined with the work that it's basically author-tract, Ayn Rand being an excellent example thereof.

I suspect a lot of this is from the Internet and social media being a thing now; you can directly address the people who made something now, rather than firing off angry letters to Paramount or whatever and getting a form letter in response if someone actually bothered to read the fan mail. You can make a group on Facebook in two minutes, "GoT S8 Angry Fans", and boom, you've got a few hundred thousand members all ready to rant about how Benioff and Weiss ruined their lives.

[Civil War Man]

I'm personally leery of any of these "entitled fans omg!" hot takes, since many of them are rooted in executives (or, in Ron Howard's case, directors) coming up with excuses to deflect blame from their own failings and missteps.

Because you see, it's never their fault, it's those entitled fans who are too stupid to understand the genius of what was given to them! Movie X isn't a hot garbage fire, its genre is dead. Video Game Y isn't a checklist of predatory business practices designed to prey off of gambling addicts, gamers are just entitled whiners who want everything handed to them.

Ron Howard's finger pointing at vaguely defined trolls reeks of this kind of excuse making. There is a long list of things that contributed to Solo's failure. On-set drama, mismanagement, lack of marketing (itself usually a big flashing warning sign that the producers have zero faith in the quality of production), and poor critical reception to name a few. Trolling may have made what was already going to be a disappointing return worse, but Howard seems content to use that to try to claim that it is the sole reason for the movie flopping.

As the Guardian article itself pointed out, other movies targeted by troll campaigns (they cited Captain Marvel, but I think Black Panther is a better example) still managed to be wildly successful. The difference there is that those were decent or good movies that people generally liked.

[ray245]

I'm personally leery of any of these "entitled fans omg!" hot takes, since many of them are rooted in executives (or, in Ron Howard's case, directors) coming up with excuses to deflect blame from their own failings and missteps.

Because you see, it's never their fault, it's those entitled fans who are too stupid to understand the genius of what was given to them! Movie X isn't a hot garbage fire, its genre is dead. Video Game Y isn't a checklist of predatory business practices designed to prey off of gambling addicts, gamers are just entitled whiners who want everything handed to them.

Ron Howard's finger pointing at vaguely defined trolls reeks of this kind of excuse making. There is a long list of things that contributed to Solo's failure. On-set drama, mismanagement, lack of marketing (itself usually a big flashing warning sign that the producers have zero faith in the quality of production), and poor critical reception to name a few. Trolling may have made what was already going to be a disappointing return worse, but Howard seems content to use that to try to claim that it is the sole reason for the movie flopping.

As the Guardian article itself pointed out, other movies targeted by troll campaigns (they cited Captain Marvel, but I think Black Panther is a better example) still managed to be wildly successful. The difference there is that those were decent or good movies that people generally liked.

I will argue that the ST as a whole was a reaction to "entitled OT" fans, at least EP 7 was. Ep 7 was successful in terms of appealing to those fans and to the wider audience, but it really did show studios now being more eager to "please" the vocal fanbase. What I argue about TFA is that Disney opened a can of worms by giving the fans what they wanted.

The fanbase is very interested in a recreation of the OT, especially ANH, and this is what we got with TFA. Now the fanbase believed they are the ones in charge of running the franchise and if they shout on the internet loud enough, Disney will be "forced" to listen to them. Ron Howard blaming the fans for failure goes to show even Directors and execs believed that the fans have a huge influence (when they don't in actual reality).

[Solauren]

One must remember there are 2 general categories of fans.

Casual Fans. This makes up 90+ of most fan bases. Ranges from 'seen it and remember it' to 'Knows alot about it and has merchandise related to it.
Can also include people with alot of mechanise over it/obsesive collectors, if there behaviour doesn't otherwise fall under 'Hardcore'

For example, Yes, I'm an Transformers Fan. Yes, I collect Transformers toys. (However, not to the point of obsesive/must have everything)
However, if I see something I don't like, I just don't buy it/watch it.
I don't bitch, cause there are more important things in live then 35+ year old animated cartoon designed to sell toys to children.

Hardcore Fans. The rest of the fanbase.
Which consists of everyone from 'Accepts it all', 'Only my view is right', and all the variants.
May or may not have 'lives' away from their obsession.

The Hardcore fans are the ones that do petitions, and troll people, and the like.

Despite being the smallest portion of the fandom, they are also, unfortunately, the loudest and most vocal.

Whenever I see anything like this article/opinion piece, I just roll my eyes and go 'ignore the hardcore fans'.

[ray245]

Whenever I see anything like this article/opinion piece, I just roll my eyes and go 'ignore the hardcore fans'.

Except studios are increasingly willing to engage with those hardcore fans, or at least pretend to give them more credit in influencing the movies than they deserve. And when those hardcore fans are in influential position within Hollywood, you got a problem. I mean one of those "Lucas ruined my childhood" was able to get hired as a scriptwriter for Rogue One, so those "hardcore" fans definitely think they could influence the direction of SW.

Ron Howard is also giving those fans an impression that they are somehow the one responsible for boycotting Solo.

[The Romulan Republic]

Whenever I see anything like this article/opinion piece, I just roll my eyes and go 'ignore the hardcore fans'.

Except studios are increasingly willing to engage with those hardcore fans, or at least pretend to give them more credit in influencing the movies than they deserve. And when those hardcore fans are in influential position within Hollywood, you got a problem. I mean one of those "Lucas ruined my childhood" was able to get hired as a scriptwriter for Rogue One, so those "hardcore" fans definitely think they could influence the direction of SW.

Ron Howard is also giving those fans an impression that they are somehow the one responsible for boycotting Solo.

Blame the power of social media, where creators are now expected to engage with fans, and its way easy to organize a mass media hate campaign.

Also the fact that many older franchises are now being run, at least in part, by long-term fanboys who have those same rose-tinted glasses and axes to grind, and bring it with them when they take over. Its why whenever they say that the new writer/director/showrunner is a fan, I don't think "Oh he's one of us, he'll get it right." Instead I feel a sinking feeling, because I know that its probably going to suck.

But I don't really care, at the end of the day, whether the people in charge are fans. I care that they're competent professionals.

[NeoGoomba]

I feel like the Mass Effect 3 ending debacle really opened the door to this disgusting hyper-trollish sense of ownership by these numbskulls. I mean, yeah, this kind of absurd, incel-ish entitlement was always there, but BioWare actually caving to them just added to their frothing bullshit.

[The Romulan Republic]

I feel like the Mass Effect 3 ending debacle really opened the door to this disgusting hyper-trollish sense of ownership by these numbskulls. I mean, yeah, this kind of absurd, incel-ish entitlement was always there, but BioWare actually caving to them just added to their frothing bullshit.

While a lot of the fan backlash tends to be very offensive, and very Alt. Reich-ish, I think that you're swinging too far the other way by basically equating fan anger or protest with being a fucking incel.

If I said something like this, half the board would probably jump on me for "calling anyone who disagrees with me a fascist".

[Civil War Man]

Yeah, I mean, there were a lot of legitimate gripes about ME3's ending, especially with regard to how it made it so effectively none of the choices made during all three games mattered in the end. And I would hardly call Bioware putting out the expanded ending caving, considering it kept the core part of the original ending intact.

The complaints about studios constantly caving to the demands of entitled fanboys is at best exaggerated and at worst completely divorced from reality. And these fantasies really get perverse, as they start painting these scenarios as anonymous keyboard jockeys, many of whom don't even have full control over their own lives much less others, suddenly being these evil bullies picking on the poor defenseless multi-billion dollar international corporate conglomerates.

As others have pointed out, fewer problems are caused by loud internet fanboys than by the fanboys who manage to grow up and assume some role where they get full or partial creative control. And even then, the potential damage of that could be easily mitigated if not for the hubris of the executives.

And I think hubris is the best way to describe the problems that have plagued post-Lucas Star Wars. That much became clear when, after buying the rights to the franchise, Disney immediately started talking about how there were going to put out a Star Wars movie every single year forever. To me, it seems as though the executives were operating under the assumption that Star Wars was such a massive cultural touchstone that it was, in essence, too big to fail, and so they could put out pretty much anything, slap a Star Wars logo on it, and still make bank. And by basically hiring directors and just letting them do whatever, they could make that cash without having to put in any work themselves. If anything, that kind of attitude shows more contempt towards the fanbase than obsequiousness.

If there is any kowtowing to the internet fans, it's because the splitting of the fanbase by The Last Jedi and the failure of Solo caught them off guard, and so they are just furiously trying to backpedal and course correct. And even then, just the fact that Rose is returning for Episode IX is evidence that they are not just caving to the whims of the loudest online complainers.

[The Romulan Republic]

Another thing is that I think a lot of things are getting conflated. That's at least partly the Alt. Reich's fault, for piggy-backing on more ordinary fan dissatisfaction to gain support for their hate campaigns, and then claiming they're the victims when people try to call them on it. But we need to collectively get better at differentiating between bigoted hate campaigns, personal dislike, and actual substantive critiques of writing, directing, etc. There is a big difference between: "They cast a woman in the lead role! SJW WAR ON WHITE MEN" (or veiled insinuations that mean much the same thing), "I just personally didn't like this", and "This is objectively bad writing/direction/acting etc." Those are all very different positions. Serious critiques should not be lumped in with bigotry, but neither should bigotry be able to hide behind claiming to be a serious critique. Likewise, people should stop pretending that not adhering to their personal tastes or wishes is the same thing as being a bad film/show/book/game. Obviously, there are going to be disagreements on which is which. But we should be better at differentiating between these things.

[ray245]

Blame the power of social media, where creators are now expected to engage with fans, and its way easy to organize a mass media hate campaign.

Also the fact that many older franchises are now being run, at least in part, by long-term fanboys who have those same rose-tinted glasses and axes to grind, and bring it with them when they take over. Its why whenever they say that the new writer/director/showrunner is a fan, I don't think "Oh he's one of us, he'll get it right." Instead I feel a sinking feeling, because I know that its probably going to suck.

But I don't really care, at the end of the day, whether the people in charge are fans. I care that they're competent professionals.

Creators don't have to do so, because doing so for an established franchise is never going to be that helpful to begin with. The problem is competent professionals can become incompetent when it comes to dealing with their childhood series. Because as professional as you might be in other projects, the fanboyism can be overwhelming once you're in charge.

It's not surprising that the two directors sent to "fix" R1 and Solo are not Star Wars fanboys.

Another thing is that I think a lot of things are getting conflated. That's at least partly the Alt. Reich's fault, for piggy-backing on more ordinary fan dissatisfaction to gain support for their hate campaigns, and then claiming they're the victims when people try to call them on it. But we need to collectively get better at differentiating between bigoted hate campaigns, personal dislike, and actual substantive critiques of writing, directing, etc. There is a big difference between: "They cast a woman in the lead role! SJW WAR ON WHITE MEN" (or veiled insinuations that mean much the same thing), "I just personally didn't like this", and "This is objectively bad writing/direction/acting etc." Those are all very different positions. Serious critiques should not be lumped in with bigotry, but neither should bigotry be able to hide behind claiming to be a serious critique. Likewise, people should stop pretending that not adhering to their personal tastes or wishes is the same thing as being a bad film/show/book/game. Obviously, there are going to be disagreements on which is which. But we should be better at differentiating between these things.

That's what people on this forum and many place online has been saying for years. Except many people refuse to listen because getting all tribalistic is more attractive than having a reasoned boring discussion.

[NeoGoomba]

Yeah, I mean, there were a lot of legitimate gripes about ME3's ending, especially with regard to how it made it so effectively none of the choices made during all three games mattered in the end. And I would hardly call Bioware putting out the expanded ending caving, considering it kept the core part of the original ending intact.

I just felt that the fact that BioWare was harassed and shouted at (one goof even tried to sue them) to the extent that they felt the need to cater to the online backlash, no matter how small or inconsequential, simply emboldened more negative demands once they realized they can start to have an impact, either on a large-scale like games adjusting, or on a smaller-scale by targeting individuals related to the property and harassing them/getting them removed. Like with James Gunn (initially anyways). But I basically agree with everything you're saying.

I wonder just how often has input of fans really forced entertainment to alter course? Star Trek, Futurama, and Family Guy (gah) were all saved by fan campaigns. Then there was the ME3 ending. Films I suppose do this quite frequently with test screenings. I guess now it is just far more public since social media is so readily available? Sorry, kind of a rambling tangent there.

[Bob the Gunslinger]

The sad fact is that Solo was a better film that TFA (what isn't?) but TFA made so much money that it destroyed any hope of objectivity among executives when it comes to SW's next step. Then you have the double-backlash to TLJ* killing Solo in a way that muddied the waters beyond hope of recovery, and now you have a franchise where the studio is afraid to make smaller, more enjoyable side movies while having no clue how not to fuck up the bloated overcooked mainline movies.

*Fanboys boycotting Solo for TLJ and critics slamming Solo for not being more like TLJ.

[The Romulan Republic]

The sad fact is that Solo was a better film that TFA (what isn't?) but TFA made so much money that it destroyed any hope of objectivity among executives when it comes to SW's next step. Then you have the double-backlash to TLJ* killing Solo in a way that muddied the waters beyond hope of recovery, and now you have a franchise where the studio is afraid to make smaller, more enjoyable side movies while having no clue how not to fuck up the bloated overcooked mainline movies.

*Fanboys boycotting Solo for TLJ and critics slamming Solo for not being more like TLJ.

I am extremely skeptical of the assertion that Solo's poor performance was simply due to backlash over TLJ. Because being critically panned never stopped a movie from getting an audience, and Solo, with its OT setting, heavy reliance on references and callbacks (who but a hard core fan would be anything but baffled by the Maul appearance?), and white male protagonist (for those who care about that) seemed like it was a movie made, in many respects, for the OT fanboy crowd. And it flopped like a dying fish.

I think if anything Solo showed that a movie catering to die hard OT purist fanboys alone is not viable.

[Bob the Gunslinger]

The sad fact is that Solo was a better film that TFA (what isn't?) but TFA made so much money that it destroyed any hope of objectivity among executives when it comes to SW's next step. Then you have the double-backlash to TLJ* killing Solo in a way that muddied the waters beyond hope of recovery, and now you have a franchise where the studio is afraid to make smaller, more enjoyable side movies while having no clue how not to fuck up the bloated overcooked mainline movies.

*Fanboys boycotting Solo for TLJ and critics slamming Solo for not being more like TLJ.

I am extremely skeptical of the assertion that Solo's poor performance was simply due to backlash over TLJ. Because being critically panned never stopped a movie from getting an audience, and Solo, with its OT setting, heavy reliance on references and callbacks (who but a hard core fan would be anything but baffled by the Maul appearance?), and white male protagonist (for those who care about that) seemed like it was a movie made, in many respects, for the OT fanboy crowd. And it flopped like a dying fish.

I think if anything Solo showed that a movie catering to die hard OT purist fanboys alone is not viable.

Bad reviews kill movies every year. With so much competition at the box office in the summer, any disadvantage can sink a movie. That's not even getting into speculating how much the summer release instead of a winter release cost the film. And keep in mind Solo was not well advertised, but very much was known for production problems.

I also think you are really blinkered by seeing everything as either catering to die hard or catering to casuals. How about movies that are fun vs movies that are epic, or small stakes vs big stakes? This summer we are seeing that the big, final culmination films like Endgame are succeeding, and everything else is flopping.

[Bob the Gunslinger]

Just to reiterate, I think you have a real problem with fandom and Star Wars. When Toy Story 4 comes out, I doubt you will complain or even notice how much it "caters to the die hards" by taking continuity seriously. The idea that a film in a series can either respect the previous installments or tell an engaging story--but not both-- is a very limiting idea. That's the kind of mindset that really kills franchises.

[ray245]

I also think you are really blinkered by seeing everything as either catering to die hard or catering to casuals. How about movies that are fun vs movies that are epic, or small stakes vs big stakes? This summer we are seeing that the big, final culmination films like Endgame are succeeding, and everything else is flopping.

Endgame is a movie made for the fans and basically ignores the causal audience. If the casual audience don't mind getting lost in the plot and characters, that's good for them. But the movie does not slow down to explain the character's backstories and relationship with each other to the non-fans.

Endgame works because a substantial portion of the casual movie audience are massive MCU fans. While this might be true for Star Wars, the problem with Solo was that it catered too much to a specific generation of fans. What people were excited about isn't Han Solo returning, but Harrison Ford returning to play Han Solo.

Solo as a character played by another actor never had any major appeal to most casual SW fans.

[Avrjoe]

Yes, fans can be awful and the levels of entitlement and agnst are unreal. The megaphone effect of social media has given a torch and pitchfork into the hands of idiots.

I still don't think producers directors writer and studios get to pass the buck. Maybe a 2 or 3 dimes but not the full buck. I've seen lazy writing bad direction and cheep production passed distilled down into swill and slopped into a hog trough while being told it was gourmet dining. It was not long ago the excuse was that piracy was ruining everything and movies couldn't make money because pirates were stealing everything.

There is currently a drive back up in production value lows of Uwe Boll and the 90's lot of smash and grab cheep chase in dross. Still I see parts of projects that feel phoned in and it's a shame. It's like eating a nice stew and getting a piece of undercooked potato. It could just be a low point of the meal it could ruin the whole experience.

In neither case does it merit a blood feud with a kitchen staff. The trolls who talk like that sound like psychopaths.

[Vympel]

I feel like the Mass Effect 3 ending debacle really opened the door to this disgusting hyper-trollish sense of ownership by these numbskulls. I mean, yeah, this kind of absurd, incel-ish entitlement was always there, but BioWare actually caving to them just added to their frothing bullshit.

In hindsight, I think this is right. It seemed Incredibly Important at the time, but now it seems really embarassing.

[Feil]

Undoubtably talented filmmaker Ron Howard should probably learn that if you're going to release a movie with a lot of dark scenes in the era of the unmanned digital projector with non-standardized luminosity, you need to turn the contrast way up or 30% of cinema audiences are going to get unwatchable garbage and then go give your film bad reviews.

[Vympel]

Undoubtably talented filmmaker Ron Howard should probably learn that if you're going to release a movie with a lot of dark scenes in the era of the unmanned digital projector with non-standardized luminosity, you need to turn the contrast way up or 30% of cinema audiences are going to get unwatchable garbage and then go give your film bad reviews.

I saw Solo on 4K at home last week in dark lighting and it was still IMO unacceptably dark. And there's nothing wrong with my settings. Natural lighting can go get fucked.