Boba Fett's Ship Losing Slave I Moniker?

[coopasonic]

I didn't pay any attention to this movie (or Lin Manuel Miranda in general, tbh...I'm the only person in the world who thought "Hamilton" was meh).

[Isgrimnur]

[Daveman]

So does this mean it's "Forced Dancing Girl Leia" now?

[Sudy]

So does this mean it's "Forced Dancing Girl Leia" now?

They call that "Huttslayer" now. (Seriously.)

[Holman]

kids playing with a toy that references slavery is at least worthy of an eyebrow raise

Even then, Fett was a bad guy. It wasn't a glorification. Before the 2000's Star Wars a white hat/black hat western in space.

Right. And since the prequels and Mandalorian have basically rewritten Fett as grey-to-possibly-good, his flying around in "Slave I" makes as much sense as Han and Chewie flying the "Millenium Porgstomper."

[Skinypupy]

Hamilton was fine, I just wasn't blown away with it like everyone else seemed to me. Mainly because it's so far out of my typical musical spectrum that it was tough for me to connect with on any level. I could certainly recognize the immense talent on display, I just didn't particularly enjoy it (and I actually generally like musicals).

I also recognize that I'm in the extreme minority on that opinion.

That actually made it worse. Ssounds like Limp Bizkit covering Hamilton.

[Sudy]

...since the prequels and Mandalorian have basically rewritten Fett as grey-to-possibly-good, his flying around in "Slave I" makes as much sense as Han and Chewie flying the "Millenium Porgstomper."

Noted, but I think it depends on the intent of the name. And there doesn't even need to be an intention. You can name you ship/boat/car/toaster something negative without espousing that thing. Is it named Slave 1 because Boba (or Jango) Fett likes slaves? Because he captures and creates them? Because his dad was one? Because he views his ship as his slave? For a completely unrelated reason?

[LawBeefaroni]

So does this mean it's "Forced Dancing Girl Leia" now?

They call that "Huttslayer" now. (Seriously.)

I mean she was literally a slave. The writing may be in poor taste but not sure how you call her anything else.

[LordMortis]

I didn't pay any attention to this movie (or Lin Manuel Miranda in general, tbh...I'm the only person in the world who thought "Hamilton" was meh).

I've still haven't seen or heard Hamilton. *shrug*. I did see Lin Manuel in House as it aired every week in like 2008, 2009, 10? I dunno. That's all I really know him from.

[ImLawBoy]

Hamilton was fine, I just wasn't blown away with it like everyone else seemed to me. Mainly because it's so far out of my typical musical spectrum that it was tough for me to connect with on any level. I could certainly recognize the immense talent on display, I just didn't particularly enjoy it (and I actually generally like musicals).

I also recognize that I'm in the extreme minority on that opinion.

Maybe it was because Hamilton was so hyped that it couldn't possibly live up to billing or maybe because I only saw the Disney+ version, but I certainly wasn't blown away by it. It was good and the staging was tremendous, but it was just "good" to "really good" to me. I think I actually liked In the Heights better.

[Freyland]

This isn't about representation though. I think this is more like recent discussions of how the word holocaust should be used. Those of us who haven't directly felt the effects of events and systems like these can't know how our casual uses of these terms affect those who have. Similarly, do direct allusions in creative works that have nothing to say about the events themselves water down the meanings and effects of these words. This is a worthy discussion.

Retconning the name of a fictional spaceship because you want to sell more merchandise is something else.


As for the Miranda thing, I'm not quite informed enough to have an opinion, but it wasn't quite as black as white as that (no pun intended). The under-representation of darker skin tones and veneration of lighter (i.e. whiter) ones is an ongoing issue, even if it's not always intentional.

I'm of the opinion that I don't get to criticize someone's action/reaction too harshly unless I'm a member of the class that's potentially been wronged. But when someone speaks out against fat white bearded men with glasses, I'll be there with my pitchfork.

Well, Santa *does* seem to have an enslaved underage workforce....

[hitbyambulance]

I'm in agreement with most that this doesn't mean much *alone*. In aggregate, it is part of a trend of appeasing the 'hypersensitive' that tickles the 'trouble over the horizon' sensor in me.

it is Disney (a massive multinational lowest-common-denominator entertainment industry), after all. their track record on this is quite reliable.

If this was an adult-centric franchise I would be bothered, but what we're really talking about is toys.

most valid point here

[Unagi]

Considering that toys are bought by parents (of the generation that originally lived the franchise), I’d actually not be so quick as to dismiss this as a non-adult franchise.

[Zarathud]

George Lucas edited StarWars while it was in theaters, and afterwards. Star Wars is not your divine revelation which can never be changed.

I have altered your Slave-1. Pray I do not alter it further.

[YellowKing]

Just because you have the right to do something doesn't mean you're not a bit of a dick for doing it.

[Daveman]

Hamilton was fine, I just wasn't blown away with it like everyone else seemed to me. Mainly because it's so far out of my typical musical spectrum that it was tough for me to connect with on any level. I could certainly recognize the immense talent on display, I just didn't particularly enjoy it (and I actually generally like musicals).

I also recognize that I'm in the extreme minority on that opinion.

Maybe it was because Hamilton was so hyped that it couldn't possibly live up to billing or maybe because I only saw the Disney+ version, but I certainly wasn't blown away by it. It was good and the staging was tremendous, but it was just "good" to "really good" to me. I think I actually liked In the Heights better.

I've only watched Hamilton on Disney+, but for what it's worth I loved the first half but didn't care for the second half much at all.

[hitbyambulance]

George Lucas edited StarWars while it was in theaters, and afterwards. Star Wars is not your divine revelation which can never be changed.

maybe this is something else Lucas took from Joseph Campbell... the process of altering (enhancing? degrading?) of a myth-in-the-making in real human time. a millennia from now, historians of the Jedi religion may or may not be able to find evidence for each of the multitudes of changes, large and small, that occurred through the ages to the origin. i guess if it makes a fan feel better, it's adapting to the times to ensure its survival... we just happened to be around for the origin, that's all.

[LordMortis]

George Lucas edited StarWars while it was in theaters, and afterwards. Star Wars is not your divine revelation which can never be changed.

I have altered your Slave-1. Pray I do not alter it further.

Maybe true. Doesn't mean I have to like it. Though in truth, I'm over it. I waited so long for Star Wars to be re-released that by the time we got to Han shot first, I didn't really care. Phantom Menace pretty much took my romanticism of the movies of my youth and an moved me to 'meh', the Crystal Skull begged me to bury that romanticism and never let anyone else near it and the cynicism became deep in this one.

[noxiousdog]

Considering that toys are bought by parents (of the generation that originally lived the franchise), I’d actually not be so quick as to dismiss this as a non-adult franchise.

Grandpa: "Hey grandson. I know you wanted an x-wing for Christmas, but I still can't get over them renaming Slave-1"
Grandson: "The what?"

[Sudy]

I think that generation is buying the toys for themselves.

[Combustible Lemur]

I think that generation is buying the toys for themselves.

Which frees up grandpa to gift "Clerks" to teach the real atrocoties outlined in Starwars.

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

[Unagi]

Considering that toys are bought by parents (of the generation that originally lived the franchise), I’d actually not be so quick as to dismiss this as a non-adult franchise.

Grandpa: "Hey grandson. I know you wanted an x-wing for Christmas, but I still can't get over them renaming Slave-1"
Grandson: "The what?"

My experience would have generated a different hypothetical exchange.

Grandpa: “Hey, I know you didn’t want it, but I got you an x-wing!”
Grandson: “I never wanted the x-wing, grandpa “
Grandpa: “That’s ok, let’s check out how the wings open and close.”

Btw , I’m not making a point about Slave 1 here.

[Blackhawk]

They didn't change the name. It's still Slave 1. They just stopped using the name. Stopped mentioning it.

[Holman]

They didn't change the name. It's still Slave 1. They just stopped using the name. Stopped mentioning it.

This, I think. It isn't that the ship is no longer "Slave 1," it's that the Lego set is now "Boba Fett's Starship."

[Jaymann]

They didn't change the name. It's still Slave 1. They just stopped using the name. Stopped mentioning it.

This, I think. It isn't that the ship is no longer "Slave 1," it's that the Lego set is now "Boba Fett's Starship."

The BFS.

[Unagi]

They should call it Lake Shore Drive

[Archinerd]

They should call it Lake Shore Drive

[Jeff V]

So, are they trying to wash history and pretend slavery wasn't a thing long, long ago?

[Holman]

So, are they trying to wash history and pretend slavery wasn't a thing long, long ago?

They're probably just trying to erase the implication that a beloved and cool character was a slaver.

[LawBeefaroni]

Boba Fett, bounty hunter professional reunion planner.

[Pyperkub]

I'm perfectly fine with not selling children's toys named slave

[Anonymous Bosch]

So, are they trying to wash history and pretend slavery wasn't a thing long, long ago?

Long, long ago? Slavery is very much still a thing here and now:

What is modern slavery?
We believe everyone, everywhere has the right to a life free from slavery. But right now, millions of children and adults are trapped in slavery in every single country in the world. Including yours.

Modern slavery is the severe exploitation of other people for personal or commercial gain. Modern slavery is all around us, but often just out of sight. People can become entrapped making our clothes, serving our food, picking our crops, working in factories, or working in houses as cooks, cleaners or nannies.

From the outside, it can look like a normal job. But people are being controlled – they can face violence or threats, be forced into inescapable debt, or have had their passport taken away and are being threatened with deportation. Many have fallen into this oppressive trap simply because they were trying to escape poverty or insecurity, improve their lives and support their families. Now, they can’t leave.

40 million people are estimated to be trapped in modern slavery worldwide:

• 1 in 4 of them are children.
• Almost three quarters (71%) are women and girls.
• Over 10,000 were identified as potential victims by the authorities in the UK in 2019.

Forms of modern slavery
Modern slavery takes many forms. The most common are:

• Human trafficking. The use of violence, threats or coercion to transport, recruit or harbour people in order to exploit them for purposes such as forced prostitution, labour, criminality, marriage or organ removal.
• Forced labour. Any work or services people are forced to do against their will under threat of punishment.
• Debt bondage/bonded labour. The world’s most widespread form of slavery. People trapped in poverty borrow money and are forced to work to pay off the debt, losing control over both their employment conditions and the debt.
• Descent–based slavery. Most traditional form, where people are treated as property, and their “slave” status was passed down the maternal line.
• Slavery of children. When a child is exploited for someone else’s gain. This can include child trafficking, child soldiers, child marriage and child domestic slavery.
• Forced and early marriage. When someone is married against their will and cannot leave. Most child marriages can be considered slavery.

People end up trapped in modern slavery because they are vulnerable to being tricked, trapped and exploited, often as a result of poverty and exclusion. It is these external circumstances that push people into taking risky decisions in search of opportunities to provide for their families, or are simply pushed into jobs in exploitative conditions.

[Blackhawk]

So, are they trying to wash history and pretend slavery wasn't a thing long, long ago?

They're probably just trying to erase the implication that a beloved and cool character was a slaver.

Given that he was designed as a throwaway minor villain - they had no idea he'd become amazingly popular when they designed him.

[Jeff V]

So, are they trying to wash history and pretend slavery wasn't a thing long, long ago?

Long, long ago? Slavery is very much still a thing here and now:

I see the reference went over your head. Star Wars takes place in a galaxy long, long ago.

[Anonymous Bosch]

So, are they trying to wash history and pretend slavery wasn't a thing long, long ago?

Long, long ago? Slavery is very much still a thing here and now:

I see the reference went over your head. Star Wars takes place in a galaxy long, long ago.

[Combustible Lemur]

So, are they trying to wash history and pretend slavery wasn't a thing long, long ago?

Long, long ago? Slavery is very much still a thing here and now:

I see the reference went over your head. Star Wars takes place in a galaxy long, long ago.

But also apropos that disney would be hesitant for one of their favorite characters to be a blatant and proud human trafficker.

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

[Unagi]

So, are they trying to wash history and pretend slavery wasn't a thing long, long ago?

Long, long ago? Slavery is very much still a thing here and now:

I see the reference went over your head. Star Wars takes place in a galaxy long, long ago.

Actually, only long ago. The galaxy though; was far, far away.

[Unagi]

So, are they trying to wash history and pretend slavery wasn't a thing long, long ago?

Long, long ago? Slavery is very much still a thing here and now:

I see the reference went over your head. Star Wars takes place in a galaxy long, long ago.

But also apropos that disney would be hesitant for one of their favorite characters to be a blatant and proud human trafficker.

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

Wasn’t he always a bounty hunter? Is that synonymous with human trafficking?

[Sudy]

Yeah, and there's a whole lot of carbonite going on in the current show. (I really hate they've made it seem like freezing in carbonite was something bounty hunters/Mandalorians "always did", and that it wasn't something thought up just for Han.)

Still, I never thought of the original character or bounty hunters in general as slavers. Some of them might be, but that seems to be a step further. Within the canon of the universe I mean, and the general cinematic bounty hunter archetype. They often turn over people to very bad people, but they don't inflict the badness themselves. Until their morality is woken up by that "one special bounty" etc. who's usually either a child or a love interest. (But not good 'ol Boba. At least I sure hope not.)

[Combustible Lemur]

So, are they trying to wash history and pretend slavery wasn't a thing long, long ago?

Long, long ago? Slavery is very much still a thing here and now:

I see the reference went over your head. Star Wars takes place in a galaxy long, long ago.

But also apropos that disney would be hesitant for one of their favorite characters to be a blatant and proud human trafficker.

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

Wasn’t he always a bounty hunter? Is that synonymous with human trafficking?

Yes, No. He did name his ship slave one while he delivers people to Jabba and Vader. It wasnt unpaid intern 1.

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk