The PC crowd just loves the movie, and will defend it vigorously, because the protagonist are not white men...
This almost isn't worth responding to, but...
I defend this movie because it's a good movie. There are a lot of good movies I defend that have only white male protagonists (
2001: A Space Odyssey, for instance - I don't think a single woman shows up in it who isn't either a stewardess or someone's child, but I love the movie to death because there are other reasons to love it). There are also a lot of terrible movies with great representation (
Jupiter Ascending, for instance, has a very diverse cast but is an absolute mess of poor writing). Representation is important -
very important - but it's not everything. It can't make a terrible film good. And although it's a weakness when a film glaringly lacks diversity, it's obviously totally possible to enjoy a film that isn't diverse.
When you simplify the defense of the movie to "the PC crowd" being happy about the protagonists being more diverse (which, gee, what a terrible and phony reason to celebrate a film? Apparently? So many little girls are so happy to see a character like Rey, that's a good reason to celebrate even for shitty movies like
Jupiter but I digress) you're turning what could be a nuanced conversation into something very one-sided and regressive. Is
Star Wars Episode VII a perfect film? Hell no, that doesn't even really exist. I will freely discuss the massive plot holes in the film, which are definitely there. But plot is just one element of a film, and not even close to the most important one. There are great films that barely even
have a plot.
Basically, I have yet to see a criticism of the film that doesn't amount to people either being pissy about the fact that the characters aren't white men, people being pissy about Rey being a competent and powerful woman, people nitpicking the plot instead of just actually watching the damn movie and enjoying everything else it has to offer, or people complaining because they didn't like one actor or another (which I guess is a valid criticism, to each their own, but with a few exceptions it can't make or break a script unless the performances are rock bottom awful).
I firmly believe plot nitpicking is the lowest form of critique.
2001 is one of my favorite movies, and I'm certainly not the only one who thinks highly of that film. It's often praised for its realism. Artificial gravity is explained by way of centrifugal force generated by a giant wheel constantly turning on the ship. There's a sentient computer with an excellent performance by Douglas Rain. The film explores questions of the place of humans in the universe and all that good stuff, which I'd delve into if I were writing an analysis of
2001, but I've done enough of those to last me a few more years, so whatever. But there are a
lot of inconsistencies in the film. Dave inhales before jumping into space which would kill him in real life. The stars twinkle in space without an atmosphere. Hell, in one part, there's even gravity in the pod bay, which doesn't have any sort of rotational mechanism to provide it! What an awful mistake on the filmmakers' part! But when you're watching the film, you typically don't give it a second thought. You're too busy being caught up in the tension of the crew's situation, or maybe you're snoring, because
2001 is a really goddamn slow movie and I wouldn't fault anyone for falling asleep in the middle of it, but that's beside the point. Also
Citizen Kane. Who hears him say "Rosebud" for everyone to report on? Absolutely no one. And it's widely considered one of the best films ever, because there is so much there to like that doesn't hinge on that one stupid oversight.
Basically, if you go into even the best of films nitpicking the **** out of it, you're not going to enjoy yourself. Movies are about enjoying yourself, they're not about who can be the most cynical and factual.
