ST Colin Trevorrow NOT directing Episode IX

Colin Trevorrow: "Well [the loss of Carrie Fisher] was obviously a tragedy and very sad for all of us and it was especially sad for me because I had designed a film in which she was a major character [as Leia]. She's a very important figure in the Star Wars universe and to me personally and so it was especially tragic that we had to rethink what we were doing and rebuild something that had to keep her with us and keep her soul and her spirit alive even though we didn't have her." (June 13, 2017)

 

Is that intended as a defence of CT's intentions regarding women?

 

I don't know if you're talking about him or me.

I'm just going through all the Star Wars stuff he's been saying lately and posting it.

 

I think that's certainly possible for many people.

But if we're going to be honest here, we have to acknowledge that over the decades there have been countless outspoken morons who have claimed and done ridiculous things in the name of feminism which has contributed greatly to tainting the public image of an otherwise rational and noble humanitarian cause.

One has to be willfully obtuse to not see that there exists an ancient yet ongoing effort--very often an organized one--to discredit, undermine and stifle stifle any and all attempts to upset what is and always has been a male-dominated world.

But people who say "oh, he/she is just a feminist, that's what they say/do" or "this is just another example of the feminist agenda trying to..." as if it's some organization with the goal of disenfranchising or destroying a wide swath of the population and not simply a belief that women and men should have equal opportunity to achieve in any given society, yeah...they only make themselves appear stupid.

 

now that i have time, more BOH thoughts. i'll probably focus on the negative because it's um what i do. it's difficult to express the positive for me.

Spoiler

my criticisms, many of which indicate sexism in the film:

- henry gets on his mother susan's case a lot about stuff, even how she sits/leans while playing video games. there's a lot of criticism coming from him, he's constantly trying to correct her. part of this is really her doing because by depending on him to be more of an adult she gives him this power. it's happening because henry to some extent has to be a parent to his parent, and that is generally always problematic. between adults this can actually lead to verbal abuse.

- it isn't sufficiently explained why susan relies on henry to the extent that she does.

- certain lines/exchanges like the one in which susan confesses she feels she never knew how to be a mom, and henry responds with how he never taught her that, she always knew, simply feel like they don't belong in the film. although given the relationship between susan and henry (her dependency on him) the line actually makes sense (henry has an overblown sense of responsibility and of himself wrt his mother *because* she relies on him so/too much), i think this could have been communicated more subtly without these lines that just ring wrong. yeah, it comes off as sexist. and i don't see the necessity of it. the other line i thought needed to be kicked out of the film was the one in which susan says that there isn't a male of the species as mature as henry or something... this is a bit pathological. and if the film was intending to portray susan as pathological i think we needed more focus on that. but i suspect the movie isn't trying to portray her that way, so get rid of that line.

- henry is sick and has a brain tumor and this didn't seem terribly shocking as there are several moments where he experiences ringing in his ears/headaches and the movie begins with a class project in school in which the kids discuss what sort of legacy they would like to leave behind them (foreshadowing). it doesn't come out of nowhere, iow. henry tells the doctor at the hospital that it hadn't occurred to him he might have a tumor, he'd thought it was stress. i personally think the story would have worked better if henry actually did suspect that he was severely ill because given how responsible he feels for his family (he carries the burdens of an adult due to his mother's dependency on him) it would be in character for him to not want to confront that he might be sick because in his mind he can't afford to be sick (his family needs him). it's possible that henry actually did suspect and was lying or in denial, though.

- henry has apparently talked to the school principal at least once before regarding the signs of child abuse the girl next door exhibits. the principal is terrible and is not willing to do anything about this. it's not until the ballet performance from the girl at the climax of the film that she is moved to do the right thing--it seemed it was because the performance itself was moving. imo, it was too full of pain and emotion and could only be performed that way by someone who has suffered greatly (who understands suffering) and it finally reached the principal. i know this is a plot necessity in that the plot is trying to show a lack of options because the abuser has so much power and so many connections, so i'm not sure how to fix this.

- the film needed to show a little bit more of the abuse rather than blinking lights and the girl looking sad in her room. we needed to see her father come into the room, physically back her into a corner, or his shadow fall over her on the bed, or something. this wouldn't be graphic or anything. but i felt that as is the film wasn't communicating the extent of this well enough and the viewer is left to imagine it. interactions between father and daughter don't seem to hint at it well enough either. henry is recommending extreme action in response to this so we need to see that this is extreme.

- susan's friend does kiss henry on the lips while he's in the hospital and i really thought that didn't belong in the film. i actually perceived it as an adult kissing a child in a romantic way (and i felt it was intended to be that). i thought it was because he was dying, and this was susan's friend's strange response.

- i thought the film could have dialed down henry's omniscience a bit, as it was slightly unbelievable.

- susan's revelation that henry is just a child and she will not follow his instructions just didn't make much sense because i couldn't understand why she'd be following them in the first place. i think the movie failed at this.

---

some counter-negatives:

- i remember reading criticisms about the girl next door being a prop for henry/others to save, and barely having any lines. although it is true that she barely has any lines, i was okay with this because i thought it was fitting with her situation. child victims of abuse may sometimes behave just like that. they may be silent, tired, disempowered, and they may live in fear.

- susan does go temporarily off the rails in response to henry's death. her behavior becomes neurotic and strange, e.g. deciding that they will only eat dessert for all meals from now on. i think the movie showed well enough that she is not operating in her right mind. as someone who has gone a bit insane due to grief in the past, i didn't take issue with this. but it's not quite enough to explain why susan considers actually following henry's instructions from beyond the grave. the movie does try to show her trying to stop the abuse through other means, e.g. calling child protective services. and i think the viewer is just kind of expected to suspend their disbelief that none of these efforts lead anywhere. a major thing that is absent is talking to the girl herself and trying to encourage her to report what is happening to her. but i understand the movie just can't go in this direction if it is to have the plot it does.

- i didn't have any issue with the doctor checking up on susan and her other son. they weren't okay and they needed help, and he was a compassionate character. i didn't expect them to be okay. it's a huge loss. and it's understandable that the grief might push susan over the edge for a while.

all of this aside there is a lot of love in this movie. i think it comes from a good place, not a bad place. i could follow the emotional currents in the film. the issue is that they sort of defy logic in a lot of ways. i cried through a good chunk of the film, but after it was over i was left feeling rather confused. more needed to be there to make this make sense. susan's character being dependent isn't what i take issue with (there are people irl who depend on their kid(s) way too much, and there are kids who have to be a parents to their parent(s)). but i needed to understand *why* she is dependent. it's like that was just left out.

i remain concerned about CT's portrayal of female characters, but i think that with the assistance of others this doesn't have to be an issue in episode IX. i kind of think the issue isn't solely female characters. his films seem plot-driven > character driven. the plot needs to flow from the characters rather than the plot dictating who the characters are and what they do. and i think there needs to be more to the psychology of the characters. i don't believe CT is incapable of these things, though he might need assistance. the other issue is that the "master plans" in SNG and BOH come from male characters. and i think it would deeply suck if in episode IX, rey simply carries out luke's master plan. please, no.

 

STUPID MISTAKE POST

 

Glad another individual understands what the movie is actually trying to convey. My main criticism of the movie is mostly towards the tone and style of the cinematography. Those two should have shifted completely(darken the color of the film, slow down the plot, have more wide shots/still shots etc).


Otherwise a great post...Here is where you don't make sense..

Kylo is also carrying out Vader's plan(who happens to be a male)and Kylo is also shown to be weak and pathetic at heart. Due to this being SW, it would make sense for there to be some sort of "duality" in the ST. It is interesting though...Father And Sons still being pitied against each other..

 

Is Colin Trevorrow the kind of person who is constantly putting their foot in their mouth?

 

My Book of Henry review, which I give a pass at a 3 outta 5. (Shameless plug, new reviewage every week at www.viewmag.com Plug, I sez!)

Spoiler

The Book of Henry is not fantastic but it’s not awful. If anything, it’s guilty of being tonally confused. It isn’t exactly consistent from moment to moment as it’s basically three movies crammed together: genius kid quirky comedy, sick child melodrama and a revenge thriller that doesn’t gracefully flow from one to the other. But there’re some fun performances and an oddball earnestness. Even though the movie inelegantly mashes many styles, it’s rarely boring.

Susan (Naomi Watts) is a single mother looking after her two kids. Henry (Jaden Lieberher) is a genius in a public school who organizes his mom’s life and the not so genius but good hearted brother, Peter (Jacob Tremblay). Henry notices when their neighbour, Christina (Maddie Ziegler), is depressed and withdrawn because she is being abused by her wicked step father, Glenn (Dean Norris). Eventually, Henry is sidelined by a devastating illness so Susan decides to carry out Henry’s plan to kill Glenn. But following her son’s explicit instructions may not be easy.

First off, the central conceit of the film which dominates the third act is flat-out nuts. Henry has written in his red book every single step of covertly murdering his next door neighbour. Oddly, this is only slightly played for laughs but overall the movie never questions the morality of it, it simply has to be done. Still, there is some funny stuff in there like when Susan is pep-talking her son Peter for his impending talent show competition and she’s clearly just trying to psyche herself up.

Watts manages to infuse a fairly schizophrenically written character with a bit of charm. She has some genuinely heartfelt interactions with her kids which helps a lot because her character is often neglectful, letting Henry basically run their lives. Lieberher has to be a know it all kid and not come off as snarky or irritating but he pulls it off. It’s not that Henry is condescending to others; it’s just that they aren’t keeping up with him. Tremblay nicely plays the more normal one which counterbalances Lieberher’s outlandishness. As the neighbour kid being abused, Ziegler just has to be sympathetic. Norris is the step-father and he’s going into full overbearing jerk mode, which makes him hateable. Popping up in about three scenes is Saturday Night Live alum Bobby Moynihan as Susan’s boss and he does a decent small part that doesn’t rely on his broad comedy work. There’s also a briefly sketched out sub-plot about Doctor Daniels (Lee Pace) who is looking after Henry and the good doctor may have some romantic leanings for Susan which feels completely superfluous.

There are some nicely constructed scenes. One of the early ones is when Henry is trying to cheer up his little brother so he sets up a doorway pantomime of himself as a mountaineer, complete with a fan blowing fake snow and plungers as climbing implements. The middle portion of the film where Henry gets sick has a genuinely stirring and dramatic conclusion. There’s also an extended montage in the third act climax that intercuts with the kids talent show and Susan setting up a sniper rifle to lure out her neighbour that, oddly, is rather propulsive.

Of course, there are moments that fall flat as well. Henry has a contentious relationship with Susan’s friend Shelia (Sarah Silverman) that is good for more than a few yuks but their final interaction is … really awkward and not in a fun way even though the movie is straining to present it as such. Also a significant chunk is devoted to Susan talking to an extensively pre-recorded message Henry left for her. It’s like he was seeing into the future for her exact reactions and with appropriate pauses and responses. Now, it could be read as more metaphorical, her kid is on her mind, but the movie never states such.

What’s kind of a cheat is the lead up to a single very important point in the confrontation between Susan and Glenn which the script pulls back from and the solution is not satisfying. Also after the life or death thriller stakes in the third act the movie actually climaxes with a race to the talent show cliché which is in almost every single family comedy/drama.

Even if it’s not reflected in box office, there are a lot of eyes on this film as it’s directed by Colin Trevorrow who had made the small scale Safety Not Guaranteed and the large scale Jurassic World. And his next movie is a little film called Star Wars: Episode IX. So watching this film may be way to see how he’s going to manage Star Wars. Happily, this a good looking flick and Book of Henry is genuinely nuts and cobbles together a lot of disparate tones and stylistic elements. Another franchise that looks good, is genuinely nuts and cobbles a bunch of different tones and stylistic elements? Star Wars.

There is almost too much stuff in The Book of Henry that is sometimes inelegantly glommed into one film. But at least it’s actively trying to be different and unique. This may not entirely hold together but it’s interesting to watch.

 

i disagree. kylo isn't the protagonist and he's wrong. rey is the protagonist. just as luke was able to decide what he was going to do about the vader/emperor situation in ep. 6, rey as the protagonist, should be able to make her own decisions in IX, rather than having them dictated to her by the male characters. rey iow can't be dependent like susan, she can't just go along with someone else's plan like darius in SNG, or have her path shaped by male intervention like claire in JW. rey needs to actually be a real independent character. you know, like a.. person.

 

.. Even if Kylo is wrong, his "savior" is still male, evil or not. Rey seems to be amazed by this "master character" in 7. And he's already training her how to be a better Jedi(an old white male mind you). If we go by the logic of "he is a male who shows a young girl the right way" why the **** did Wonder Woman not get panned? It is correct that she's "strong and empowered" female character yet is mostly passive throughout the movie and has to follow Steve's orders(With the exception of no mans land and the boss fight). Even the intimate love relationship is old fashioned and stereotypical.

I'm not getting what your on about when discussing "male characters dictating her decisions". Anakin was dictated by his decision all the time by both males and females(mostly Padme of course). There was a scene in AOTC where he was shut down by Padme and told him to listen to her, there was another scene where she wanted to handle things her way(she was in charge) and another where she decided to save Obi-Wan. Rey isn't going to be whipped..

 

rey needs to be a more complex character and a more independent character than all of the CT female characters that i've seen, is what i'm on about. she needs to be the protagonist and have agency. this isn't a story about what luke decides must be done. he isn't the hero in this trilogy.

 

After BoH seems to be such a success I hope he will use his ideas in Episode IX

Kylo gets seduced by his stepfather-like Snoke and the two most talented Jedi younglings from Lukes academy (Luke = BoH Mom) try to kill Snoke.
BUT: As Kylo is already having too much of a Stockholm syndrom he turns against the younglings and kills them all.
Would be a nice forceback vision



Remark: Kylo was also angry on Luke because instead of training with lightsabers they had to use toilet plungers.

 

https://twitter.com/JackJShepherd/status/876725574961692673
Gutted Colin Trevorrow has pulled from our interview tomorrow. Apparently not doing UK print interviews anymore for Book of Henry

 

This. I also have to say (because I like to poke you about this) that precisely the opposite is the case with Jyn. She develops into a compassionate person herself, driven by her own growing sense of Imperial injustice. Cassian puts her down for it, and she stands her ground. Then Cassian, the put-downer, reforms himself as a result of Jyn's force of will, and accepts her leadership. From that point on, they work together as a team in a 100% equal partnership. There are no questions about her abilities as a warrior, spy and leader of men. She's neither a subordinate, nor placed on an awkward pedestal/ an island as some directors who are feminists, but don't quite understand feminism, often do (Whedon, for example). She and Cassian are just straight up leaders of a Special Ops team. In my wife's words, Jyn was perhaps the most rounded feminist hero she'd ever seen in a genre film. No leather body suit and no "look at this hot chick kicking ass" faux-feminism. She was just a true blue warrior, making the ultimate heroic sacrifice. Rey was a feminist avatar in TFA (who my wife appreciates on that level), but Jyn was a real, human feminist at the helm the mission that would ultimately lead to the galaxy's salvation. For female members of the armed services that I know well, she's the most inspiring person they've ever seen in the genre.

Don't get any sense that Trevorrow is capable, or even interested, in treating Rey with that level of respect.

 

100% this. Any kind of female character can and should be depicted - the more different kinds of women are depicted on screen, the better. The reason why people are taking issue with Trevorrow is because there is a worrying pattern in his filmography of female characters choosing one path and then being relentlessly guilt-tripped/shamed over it by a male character until they recognise their faults and (ideally) change according to the man's expectations/plan for them. I think this happens in literally every film he's made, even Safety Not Guaranteed, which is usually considered to be his best effort.

No one is saying that female characters can't be compassionate or typically feminine - to have a female character whose badassery is defined solely in terms of her lack of feminine traits is just as bad as having a career woman who is guilt-tripped into changing her ways and fulfilling her destined role as a maternal figure (which is basically Claire's 'arc' in Jurassic World). Along the same lines, it's a fallacy to say that a female character is somehow made stronger if she doesn't have a romance. Patty Jenkins put it really well when talking about Wonder Woman:

It's like ThreeDeathstickProblem says - it ultimately comes down to respect. You can tell any kind of story you want about a female character, but it's important to tell that story with empathy and some base level of respect. These things are generally afforded to male characters by default, but Trevorrow has demonstrated issues with presenting his female characters as individuals whose life choices are understandable and to be respected. Instead, his women are more generally presented as illogical creatures that need to be sorted out and put back on track by a straight-talking male character. Women and men can be shown to collaborate and build each other up, as Diana and Steve do in Wonder Woman, without either party lecturing the other on the error of their ways and the importance of fulfilling their assigned gender role. That kind of depiction of male/female relations is retrograde and demeaning, and it should be consigned to the past.

The very fact that Trevorrow was drawn to the story of a useless mother who basically has to be taught to parent by her 11-year-old is quite worrying in itself, and it doesn't sound like he had the capacity to tell the story of that character in a way that didn't make her seem infantalised and dependent on her own child. I just hope that this criticism makes him acutely aware of these issues going into Episode IX, and helps him to create a satisfying story for Rey that is about her choices rather than the choices others make for her.

 

I'm guessing Trevorrow quits Star Wars sometime this week.

 

Are there signs of this?

 

I wonder how badly CT's brain would short circuit if someone told him there are career minded women that are (*gasp*) also mothers!

I doubt it. We're probably stuck with him. Not a great thought for the final film in the ST!

 

None that I know of, but this could be indicative of something going on behind the scenes:

It's just a theory, but at the same time that he's either gotten sick of defending the movie or been advised against doing more interviews about it, he could also be involved in some related ongoing conversations with LFL / Kennedy about the future. I think that's especially possible if this situation has caused them to reassess his resume at all.

 

That's a nice riposte to anyone trying to shut down this conversation.

 

That's somewhat comforting ...

 

I don't believe he's going since I think that would be a potentially disastrous move from a PR and production morale perspective, but I fully expect he's been told to 'go dark' and allow the worst of the press about BOH to die down. He's been very quiet on Twitter, too.

 

This. Have I missed something substantial?