|
Noam Chomsky posted:it wasn't supposed to make sense since your question didn't and was a dumb question. thanks. How is it a dumb question if if doesn't make sense? Wouldn't u deciding it's dumb mean u understood it? I can explain it if you didn't understand and then u can decide how u feel and actually answer it? Trying to have a normal conversation here dude...
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 03:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 20:28 |
|
|
teagone posted:I was 13-19 when the Prequel Trilogy episodes were released and I really enjoyed them then, more so because I had a big group of friends in (my relatively small) high school who also really liked Star Wars—like 20 of us went to the midnight showing of RotS. After 8-10 years of growing as an adult, going through plenty of experiences good and bad, and generally becoming cynical about everything, I then realized how bad the prequels were. I appreciate what they were and how they embellished my teen years as a Star Wars nerd, but my perspectives, opinions, and general taste changed as I got older and, as such, I don't find them to be competent or well-made films. Is that weird? I'll still watch them because my godson loves the prequels (it was actually me during my high school years that first introduced him to Star Wars when he was around 3 years old). They're fun to watch for me without a doubt, but in no way would I call them good films. Especially Attack of the Clones. I've never sat down and watched episodes 2 or 3 all the way through at once. I think that I've seen every scene in AotC at some point and really only the Grevious fight and the last sequence of RotS. I was 20 when TPM came out and after seeing that in theaters I was done with the PT.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 03:27
|
|
|
zoux posted:I've never sat down and watched episodes 2 or 3 all the way through at once. I think that I've seen every scene in AotC at some point and really only the Grevious fight and the last sequence of RotS. I was 20 when TPM came out and after seeing that in theaters I was done with the PT. Congrats on not watching two movies?
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 03:28
|
|
|
zoux posted:I never saw Brick or Looper but he directed three very good episodes of Breaking Bad so I'm fer 'im. Yeah pretty much this. They were *really* good episodes. Honestly I'm not worried about the Jurrasic World guy either, the direction and action was fine, it was the story that was pretty lame. If the script is decent, he can do fine. Or maybe he won't, but he won't kill the whole franchise. Thanks to JJ "everyone thinks he sucks" Abrams MEATS BACK ON THE MENU BOYS
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 03:31
|
|
logical phalluses posted:He directed the fly episode, which is enough to make me think Ep. 8 will be good. The true measure of rationality, your opinions about three skiffy flix released between 1999 and 2005.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 03:32
|
|
|
Hat Thoughts posted:Congrats on not watching two movies? I was just sharing my PT experience with the person who shared their's apropos of the conversation of our age when we say the PT affecting our current day opinions of it. Congrats on being the dictionary definition of goonlord, though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 03:32
|
|
|
Phylodox posted:Again, and I'm not making any judgement on the prequels one way or another here, the guys tapped to direct the next Star Wars movies are hardly going to poo poo on the franchise. That, and they're professionals. And adults. Both good reasons why they're not going to get all publicly nerd-ragey about those movies. On the other hand what have they got to lose? Lucas is out of the game, he has no say in anything. At least two of the Godzilla movies made after 1998 threw some shade on the Devlin/Emmerich flick. The animated Batman stuff contained some potshots at Joel Schumacher. It's not uncommon for a reboot to specifically distance itself from less well received prior installments. So far the Sequel Trilogy has kept it classy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 03:35
|
|
|
zoux posted:I've never sat down and watched episodes 2 or 3 all the way through at once. I think that I've seen every scene in AotC at some point and really only the Grevious fight and the last sequence of RotS. I was 20 when TPM came out and after seeing that in theaters I was done with the PT. Yeah, I was 13 when Episode 1 came out back in '99. I vividly remember the feeling of euphoria watching the lightsaber duel on opening day. I even remember what I was wearing when I first saw it, lmao. I don't think TPM is that bad, but the more I got older, the more I wanted the film to be something entirely different, especially regarding Anakin's character. Attack of the Clones was my first midnight movie showing ever, and I remember losing my poo poo at the Yoda lightsaber reveal, and I gushed over it with my English AP teacher the following day (she was a huge Star Wars nerd who also went to a midnight showing). [edit] Now I'm remembering my Algebra 2/calc teacher spending like 15-20 minutes of class ranting about the Death Star reveal in AoTC a few days after release and how it was loving horrible, lol. Good times 
teagone fucked around with this message at 03:41 on Dec 25, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 03:36
|
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:On the other hand what have they got to lose? Lucas is out of the game, he has no say in anything. Even the opening line can be interpreted as being a reference to the prequels without being a jab at them. The prequels also metaphorically describe what happened between the original trilogy and the seqel trilogy. Anakin's backstory also informs us about Ben's backstory, Luke probably learned about the downfall of the Jedi during his quest for the temple, etc. A lot of poo poo went pear-shaped during those thirty fictional years, and the reason for the problems is clearly demonstrated in the tragic stories that were told during the real thirty years. There's a lot that needs to be made right. Yeah, it's a bit of a stretch.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 03:45
|
|
|
Jurassic World was terrible and I hope the director does better with Star Wars.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 03:46
|
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:On the other hand what have they got to lose? Lucas is out of the game, he has no say in anything. You said it yourself, they're keepin' it classy. Roland Emmerich and Joel Schumacher probably wouldn't be terribly hurt if you slammed Godzilla or Batman & Robin because those movies aren't the culmination of their lives' work. Insulting George Lucas' prequels while working on the sequels is...well, it's literally bashing a genial old man who was kind enough to give his blessings for you to play in his universe, even though he didn't have to.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 03:46
|
|
|
Honestly, in the very few pages of star wars chat I've seen pre-TFA, it seems like prequel-defenders spend a lot of time passive-aggressively insulting prequel-haters while also insisting that they are persecuted for liking the movies.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 03:51
|
|
Neurolimal posted:Honestly, in the very few pages of star wars chat I've seen pre-TFA, it seems like prequel-defenders spend a lot of time passive-aggressively insulting prequel-haters while also insisting that they are persecuted for liking the movies. Things are not what they seem/skim milk masquerades as cream.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 03:54
|
|
|
That 1980 quote of George saying the prequels were more soap opera-ish is pretty enlightening though. Where was that quote from again?
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 03:57
|
|
|
I made a supercut of all the lightsaber fights from the PT for my godson so whenever he could come over and we would watch it for 2 hours straight while he ate popcorn and bacon and played with my Star Wars figures 
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 04:04
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:Honestly, in the very few pages of star wars chat I've seen pre-TFA, it seems like prequel-defenders spend a lot of time passive-aggressively insulting prequel-haters while also insisting that they are persecuted for liking the movies. Well it's something you have to consider in the broader context. The internet consensus against the prequels is strong enough that any site or article suggesting they might be actually good is met with a wave of skepticism (e g: the AV Club). This arises from the early perception that there were a lot of fanatical SW fans who would take anything they were offered, so something like Simon Pegg denouncing the movies or RLM's dissection was seen as bold, edgy, taking a risk. But the reality is that anyone now bashing the prequels is likely to garner more support than disagreement. The pendulum has swung far to the other side and it's much harder to argue for the movies than against. Of course in the midst of all this the prequels enjoyed as much commercial success as one might hope for. But there's a sense that actually owning up to not only liking them but thinking they were good is a risky statement. My dream is that one day we will all live in harmony, whatever incarnations of Star Wars one enjoys. Just as I hope fans of 4th edition D&D and the 1998 Avengers movie will find their place in the sun. I just want everyone to get along.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 04:04
|
|
|
It was never risky to criticize the prequels except possibly right after TPM came out. TPM was a heavy target of criticism even before AotC came out. Both AotC and RotS were "this is the one that'll do it RIGHT" in the buildup. There's also nothing wrong with liking the prequels but with the exception of Cnut who makes really worthwhile effortposts on the subject the vast majority of it comes across as "nerds dislike a thing? Time to be contrary!" with a lot of snide and frankly tedious bullshit that's more interested in shakes its fist at nerds than garnering conversation. ImpAtom fucked around with this message at 04:10 on Dec 25, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 04:06
|
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:My dream is that one day we will all live in harmony, whatever incarnations of Star Wars one enjoys. Just as I hope fans of 4th edition D&D and the 1998 Avengers movie will find their place in the sun. change 1998 avengers to Roger Corman's Fantastic Four and i can agree w/ this
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 04:11
|
|
|
zen death robot posted:The prequels were pretty boring and the "it's a visual medium" thing is a dumb retort to people who think the dialog was badly written. I think it's a hallmark of the SMG style film analysis that's prevalent around here, that focuses heavily on technical and thematic side of filmmaking while largely disregarding the more human elements like dialogue and performances. The prequel trilogy, with its stilted dialogue and flat characters, but George Lucas' flair for visual storytelling and grand political themes, lend themselves to a positive view from that point of view.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 04:11
|
|
|
MisterBibs posted:I think it was this thread, didn't JJ say that Rian told him we're getting back the more fast-paced/acrobatic style lightsaber combat? That would fit well with where we saw Rey and Kylo at the end of TFA.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 04:19
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:There's also nothing wrong with liking the prequels but with the exception of Cnut who makes really worthwhile effortposts on the subject the vast majority of it comes across as "nerds dislike a thing? Time to be contrary!" with a lot of snide and frankly tedious bullshit that's more interested in shakes its fist at nerds than garnering conversation. It just seems insane to me to assume so many ppl are operating purely out of willfull contrarian urges instead of just holding that opinion . Different worldviews I guess
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 04:21
|
|
|
Here's Carrie Fisher playing the Ghost of Christmas Future for poor Daisy on Graham Norton. http://imgur.com/a/rodsu
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 04:24
|
|
|
The dislike for the prequels is far out of proportion with the films' problems.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 04:27
|
|
|
Hat Thoughts posted:It just seems insane to me to assume so many ppl are operating purely out of willfull contrarian urges instead of just holding that opinion . Different worldviews I guess What? No, this subforum absolutely thrives on intentionally contrarian viewpoints. That isn't insane it's a literal description of the atmosphere of the subforum. It's lead to some of the best posts on the subforum but it also means that you can put money down on what will happen in discussions. Intentionally contrarian viewpoints are one of the interesting things about posting on this subforum in fact, when it isn't more interested in being snide than conversational.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 04:29
|
|
|
Bongo Bill posted:The dislike for the prequels is far out of proportion with the films' problems. My problem is the personal attacks on George Lucas, who has taken the billions of dollars from SW and the Disney sale and donated that to worthy causes. He's one of the most generous philanthropists to ever live but the way he gets personally lambasted in PT mock threads and topics is really gross. I'm not saying that's happening here but in other places, and especially when the RLM stuff was hot, yeesh.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 04:34
|
|
|
zoux posted:My problem is the personal attacks on George Lucas, who has taken the billions of dollars from SW and the Disney sale and donated that to worthy causes. He's one of the most generous philanthropists to ever live but the way he gets personally lambasted in PT mock threads and topics is really gross. Someone donating to charity in no way, shape or form earns them a reprieve from criticism. I think the GL hatred is overblown but claiming that someone donating money to charity means it is wrong to criticize them is weird. If you think George Lucas shouldn't be criticize for his films then argue about his films, not how much money he donates.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 04:38
|
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:Of course in the midst of all this the prequels enjoyed as much commercial success as one might hope for. Commercial success has never been a reliable indicator of the film's actual quality nor will it ever be, and it has no place in actual serious critical discussion. If you want to talk about how good the film's marketing was, that's a different story.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 04:39
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:What? No, this subforum absolutely thrives on intentionally contrarian viewpoints. That isn't insane it's a literal description of the atmosphere of the subforum. It's lead to some of the best posts on the subforum but it also means that you can put money down on what will happen in discussions. Intentionally contrarian viewpoints are one of the interesting things about posting on this subforum in fact, when it isn't more interested in being snide than conversational. I just disagree my man, that's all it is.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 04:40
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:Someone donating to charity in no way, shape or form earns them a reprieve from criticism. I think the GL hatred is overblown but claiming that someone donating money to charity means it is wrong to criticize them is weird. If you think George Lucas shouldn't be criticize for his films then argue about his films, not how much money he donates. His films are fair game, I mean the attacks on him personally.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 04:40
|
|
|
zoux posted:His films are fair game, I mean the attacks on him personally. Fair enough, I misunderstood you then. Sorry.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 04:42
|
|
|
Augus posted:Commercial success has never been a reliable indicator of the film's actual quality nor will it ever be, and it has no place in actual serious critical discussion. If you want to talk about how good the film's marketing was, that's a different story. But there is this assumption that only a small cadre of undiscriminating fanatics who like them, and that anything with the right marketing would have done as well. It's the argument that nobody really likes the prequels, we were all just suckered in by the promise of New Star Wars. It's the argument that everyone knows that I'm dismissing as bullshit.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 04:48
|
|
|
zoux posted:Here's Carrie Fisher playing the Ghost of Christmas Future for poor Daisy on Graham Norton. This whole interview is extremely funny https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GVB4ghl0mJo When Graham told Boyega he was in the issue of People Magazine that had David Beckham on the cover as the sexiest man alive, Boygea's response was so good lmao.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 05:01
|
|
|
Isn't it more interesting to discuss movies outside of the question of whether they're good or bad? There's not an objective answer to that question, and even if there is its not really constructive pursuit. It's a dead end. The forum is Cinema Discusso, not Cinema Verdict
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 05:03
|
|
|
TFA, inasmuch as it's talking about fannishness and enjoyment, draws its like between appreciation and mimicry. The First Order (bad) mimic the Empire. Rey (good) appreciates Han Solo but distinguishes herself from him. The Resistance, however, mimics the Rebels. Captain Phasma, the only original character among the First Order, appears to have reasons for working for them. What does this say?
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 05:03
|
|
|
teagone posted:This whole interview is extremely funny Carrie Fisher is a national treasure and I love her like a crazy aunt, but she really stuck out like a sore thumb in the movie imo. I know why she's so rough and she should totally be in the movies but I was like " goddamn, the ravages of time" whenever she was on screen.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 05:06
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:TFA, inasmuch as it's talking about fannishness and enjoyment, draws its like between appreciation and mimicry. The First Order (bad) mimic the Empire. Rey (good) appreciates Han Solo but distinguishes herself from him. Maybe "there are heroes on both sides." I expect that it is setting up for Episode VIII to challenge the false moral clarity of Episode VII, just as V did for IV and II did for I and the prequels did for the originals.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 05:07
|
|
|
zoux posted:Carrie Fisher is a national treasure and I love her like a crazy aunt, but she really stuck out like a sore thumb in the movie imo. I know why she's so rough and she should totally be in the movies but I was like " goddamn, the ravages of DRUGS" whenever she was on screen. Fixed that. I liked her in the movie, she did her part and her scenes with Han were so
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 05:08
|
|
|
Phylodox posted:I think it's a hallmark of the SMG style film analysis that's prevalent around here, that focuses heavily on technical and thematic side of filmmaking while largely disregarding the more human elements like dialogue and performances. The prequel trilogy, with its stilted dialogue and flat characters, but George Lucas' flair for visual storytelling and grand political themes, lend themselves to a positive view from that point of view. Emperor Palpatine is not stilted or flat.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 05:11
|
|
|
zoux posted:Carrie Fisher is a national treasure and I love her like a crazy aunt, but she really stuck out like a sore thumb in the movie imo. I know why she's so rough and she should totally be in the movies but I was like " goddamn, the ravages of time" whenever she was on screen. I think it works when you assume that Leia has lived a pretty tough life. She's lost everyone she's ever known on her home planet, she's been fighting an endless, futile war for her entire adult life, and her son is a war criminal who lives to tear down everything she's fought for.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 05:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 20:28 |
|
|
Frackie Robinson posted:I think it works when you assume that Leia has lived a pretty tough life. She's lost everyone she's ever known on her home planet, she's been fighting an endless, futile war for her entire adult life, and her son is a war criminal who lives to tear down everything she's fought for. That's a good reading. For the last 30 years she's been stressed as hell. I guess that's equivalent to like maybe a decade's worth of coke.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 05:14
|
|