Not commenting about her death at a relatively young age which is sad, nor about any personal choices that may have led to that death for which I am not at all qualified to judge.

But I always thought she was the weak link in the first Star Wars trilogy (or second for purists). She was the love interest by default. The only other female characters were non-human so of course she was a source of tension between the male leads. But she had no qualities that would make the male audience member feel that he could also fall in love with her. She wasn't beautiful, she wasn't cute and she didn't have much personality. Her hairdo was the opposite of sexy.

Maybe if she'd done the bikini slave scene in episode IV when I was fifteen or sixteen it would have had more impact. By the time that one came out, I was twenty or twenty-one and it was a yawner.

"Maybe if she'd done the bikini slave scene in episode IV when I was fifteen or sixteen it would have had more impact. By the time that one came out, I was twenty or twenty-one and it was a yawner. "

Fag.

Discuss.

Carrie was okay. No, she wasn't especially gorgeous or anything.

None of them were very strong actors. They were all virtual unknowns who took jobs just to work in the industry, in this odd movie they thought was a "children's show" certain to flop and quickly vanish into obscurity.

None of them "got it" or had any understanding of what they were doing, or what George was trying to do. Plodding pedestrian actors with limited intelligence and imagination.

They all were.

Spielberg "got it" instantly. That's why he's Spielberg.

>>3

None of them were very strong actors. They were all virtual unknowns who took jobs just to work in the industry, in this odd movie they thought was a "children's show" certain to flop and quickly vanish into obscurity.

There are a lot of the original audition tapes on youtube. Carrie Fisher's is the most intelligent, and prepared.

It's rather shocking to see most of the actors floundering. I realize they're young, but most of them are obviously out of their depth.

She was a subversion of the princess archetype-- helpless, passive, and dependent on the male heroes to save her-- found in the old serials and sci-fi stories that Star Wars took its influence from.

I think that made her immediately appealing, given the era. She had spunk. She stood up to Vader, she gave crap to Han Solo, and she knew how to use a blaster and how to take care of herself. She wasn't just some ditzy damsel in distress.

It's dismissive to say she was just there as a love interest or eye candy. That is missing the point of her character.

She was also very cute and sexy. I was just watching Empire the other day and she had such a cute ass in those snow base scenes.

He's saying she wasn't helpless...passive or dependent on the males heroes to save her.

Which is true....and shows how silly 2016 feminism is when they argue that there are no strong women in film. There are and have been at least for decades.

I recently rewatched the African Queen and Hepburn is the driving that makes Bogart take on the Germans instead of running and that was in the 50s.

He's saying she wasn't helpless...passive or dependent on the males heroes to save her.

You're right. My mistake.

Which is true....and shows how silly 2016 feminism is when they argue that there are no strong women in film. There are and have been at least for decades.

I recently rewatched the African Queen and Hepburn is the driving that makes Bogart take on the Germans instead of running and that was in the 50s.

Yup. That Bechdel test is one of the dumbest things I've ever heard of.

And it WOULD only apply to movies and not TV shows where women have been solely leading or co-leading dramas and comedies since Day One.

Yup. That Bechdel test is one of the dumbest things I've ever heard of.

I find the Bechdel test interesting from an analytical standpoint but it truly is worthless as a means to determine whether a piece of fiction is egalitarian or not. You could write a story of two women who are depicted as stereotypical bimbos who are completely outwitted by and subservient to men and it would still pass the Bechdel test if they talk about the weather for five minutes.

This might be a tangent but I think the larger reason why men are predominantly featured in films is not some latent sexism but because the majority of screenwriters are men (only somewhere around 11-15% are women.) You write what you know and many men struggle to write women convincingly because, frankly, they don't completely understand them. It's just easier to write another man (because you are one), a kid (because you were a kid once), or even an alien (because you can just make sh!t up) than it is to write for a woman and have women say "Yes, that's exactly how I'd think and feel if I were that character in that situation."

I'm not saying men can't do it (a good many can), I'm just saying most are standoffish about it because of their unfamiliarity with the opposite sex. So they either write women as men with boobs or they try to avoid getting too many women into the mix to begin with.

Whether Hollywood is sexist and female screenwriters just can't get their scripts produced, well, that is a whole other issue.

This might be a tangent but I think the larger reason why men are predominantly featured in films is not some latent sexism but because the majority of screenwriters are men (only somewhere around 11-15% are women.)

Yes, I believe that women only make up 15% of the WGA.

I wonder why there is such a wide gap there?

When it comes to columnists and poets and fiction writers, women seem to make up at least half. And playwriting too.

Why the difference when it comes to writing scripts for film and TV?

I don't know enough about the particulars, honestly.

I think I can say without controversy that Hollywood is unwilling to take risks and change their formula. They're very traditional as a whole. If men have traditionally written the majority of screenplays that make them money, seeing a woman's name on the cover page might make them second guess it.

That's just speculation, of course.

>>1
Your libido was dead by the time you were 21?

You didn't think her in the ROTJ bikini was hot?

Somebody check the OP's papers.

I would have gargled circa-ROTJ Carrie Fisher's bath water and used her panties to make sun tea with when I was 21.

Wow, you're an even sicker fuck than I thought.

So what branch were you in?

When Chewbacca dies I'm going to be really sad.

The only other female characters were non-human

The only non-Leia women with speaking roles in the OT are Aunt Beru, a random rebel at Hoth, and Mon Mothma. All human. You could really just save everybody some time by saying that you don't know what you're talking about.

Wow, you sure schooled that guy about Star Wars. 💯🆒

And you just schooled him about schooling that guy about Star Wars and I just schooled you about schooling him about schooling that guy about Star Wars.......when Lord.......when will this madness end?

>>17
I know, right? To ever keep up with Edmund the G Man on Star Wars trivial, I'd have had to have spent decades living in my parents' basement watching old VHS tapes on a hand me down tube television.

>>20

In typical Ollie fashion, he starts a thread based on a FACTUALLY INCORRECT argument, then tries to pass other people off as losers when they correct his FACTUALLY INCORRECT statements.

You could, anon, try not starting a thread when you don't know what the fuck you're talking about. But, I guess that would mean we'd see/hear markedly less of you on this board, wouldn't we?

I don't entirely disagree. I thought she had a strong showing in the first two because she was feisty and played off Solo/Ford well.