Don't bother searching for logic. Misogynists gonna misogyny....
L3 was a lot of fun in Solo, they killed her off way too soon.I’ll be honest, my only knowledge of her is voice work as L3-37 in Solo: A Star Wars Story.
I think that’s where a good amount of backlash is coming from. If she plays it like a human version of L3 the movie will be in trouble.
Huh? No one is "riled up" because it'll be a "perceived jab" at Tomb Raider. That's patently ridiculous.I'm personally indifferent. If she does end up playing a large role (and as a strong female lead in an adventure film) it will seem like a bit of an unnecessary jab at Tomb Raider, though. I think that's what has a few riled up.
There's zero chance she's in the movie as a love interest.Also, she's significantly younger than Harrison Ford. So, that's a little odd. Again, maybe it'll work in context, but I don't think the startling reaction by some is solely down to prejudice or anything. It's just a sort of unexpected decision.
Hopefully they don't kill Marion off (especially not off-screen a la Indy 4's treatment of Marcus and Jones Sr.). If she ends up being the 'new Indy girl' I think that would be just as upsetting for the feminists. Perhaps more so since, again, she's so much younger than Ford.
If you need me to hunt them down for you, I will. But the only controversy I ever saw was a few articles linking her casting to a dig at Tomb Raider. Not sexist fueled in the slightest.Huh? No one is "riled up" because it'll be a "perceived jab" at Tomb Raider. That's patently ridiculous.
There's zero chance she's in the movie as a love interest.
The initial negative reaction is based on nothing but stupidity and/or sexism. There's literally no rational reason behind it at all.
I literally don't believe this was uttered by more than, at most, a single individual. In no way will she be playing a Lara Croft-esque character. Except that they're both British, I guess....If you need me to hunt them down for you, I will. But the only controversy I ever saw was a few articles linking her casting to a dig at Tomb Raider. Not sexist fueled in the slightest.
People can dislike a casting choice in a movie without it being something else. Subjective opinion, remember. Everybody's got one.
That is wise!Then again, I stay off of the toxic cesspool that is social media. I'm sure there were trolls and the like on there.
If you need me to hunt them down for you, I will. But the only controversy I ever saw was a few articles linking her casting to a dig at Tomb Raider. Not sexist fueled in the slightest.
Not "Tomb Raider looking," but rather how Lucasfilm was apparently offended by the Tomb Raider games. (How it IS kind of just a female Indiana Jones in the present day) to the point where they contemplated lawsuits. Back in the day, at least.I can't see how anyone could twist it around as seeing a Tomb Raider slight in her being in it. She's not exactly known for dressing up like Angelina Jolie. That's bonkers- there's no correlation there.
Not "Tomb Raider looking," but rather how Lucasfilm was apparently offended by the Tomb Raider games. (How it IS kind of just a female Indiana Jones in the present day) to the point where they contemplated lawsuits. Back in the day, at least.
Having a "lead, female adventurer" from Lucasfilm is kind of a slight against the TR series. Just as if they had a new, male adventurer called Nathan would be a slight against Uncharted.
Or all three at the same time.It's either parody, homage, or insult.
I agree. That part's yet to be seen.But how is this any worse than having Marion in the last one? Or any woman in an Indy film?
That's the best part about this whole thing—we know absolutely nothing at all about the character she'll be playing. While I imagine she'll at the very least have a substantive role, all this outcry online about her becoming Indy's successor or whatever have no basis in reality.Do we even know what type of character she is even going to play ? Is she even gonna have more than a few lines of dialogues?