|
A Steampunk Gent posted:If you think SMG is wrong engage with his points and explain why they're wrong rather than trying to prove how he doesn't actually mean them I didn't say he doesn't mean them, just that he's insecure about them. Which he should be, because they're all over the place and he cherry picks his supporting evidence. But I don't have the energy to have a huge argument with him and he doesn't seem like the type who'd ever change his mind anyway. Not to mention people with more movie expertise than me could do it better.
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2016 21:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 21:32 |
|
|
Steve2911 posted:And he was a good friend. And a cunning warrior.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2016 21:08
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:And a cunning warrior. And a great cook.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2016 21:10
|
|
|
CelticPredator posted:And a great cook. *screaming* I hate you!!!!
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2016 21:11
|
|
|
The Cameo posted:In this case, the oft-maligned "faster, more intense" direction that Lucas would give was more or less him handing the subtleties of the characterization to the actors, as in his mind, that's what they're there to do. Even a bit that Cnut brought up some time ago about Hamill coming to the conclusion that Luke is Lucas's stand-in based on Mark initially playing finding R2 again as a panicked "I have to fix this!" moment and George giving him an example of what he wanted by simply walking over and quietly reassuring himself and 3PO that R2 wasn't going to run off again is just a longer-form way of Lucas saying "play it softer" while simultaneously cutting out a half dozen takes of Mark winding down the performance until it matched George's preference and getting him the take he wanted immediately. Unlike a lot of people who hate the prequels, I don't think Lucas is a bad director. I just think he got so wrapped up in what's possible with CGI that he failed to give his actors the tools and freedom they need to create believable characters. It wasn't just him, either, it was a problem with the entire early CGI zeitgeist. It's why Cameron spent so long creating those rigs for Avatar that let the actors actually experience their own characters as real-time renders, and why we've moved back toward a hybrid of practical elements in action sequences. Lucas ostensibly made those movies because he thought that technology had advanced enough to let him realize his vision. I think he was wrong, but in making those films he illustrated where we have to go with VFX to be able to pull off something like what he was trying to do.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2016 21:14
|
|
|
A Steampunk Gent posted:The issue with this is we don't even have an idea of what Luke's plan was. He evidently didn't make the same mistakes as the old Jedi Order, given he renounced violence and chose a martyr's death in RotJ so it's hard to really understand Ren's moral position until we know what it is he was rebeling against. An impotent, ineffectual pacifism? God only knows It's vital to resist the temptation to 'wait for the next film'. That's a tacit admission that this JJ Abrams film is a failure in its own terms, and even I don't believe that's the case. Force Awakens is entirely about what characters think Luke represents. We are presented almost-entirely with Leia and Max Von Sydow's version, where they believe that Luke is a King Arthur sort of figure who will usher in a golden age. But isn't that precisely what the First Order believes about Snoke? "Whenever we encounter such a purely evil Outside, we should gather the courage to remember the Hegelian lesson: In this evil Outside, we should recognize the distilled version of our own essence." The First order must be read as the 'essence' of the heroes. When Han says Snoke is using Ren for his power, this is technically true - but Rey's whole quest is about finding someone who will use her for her power. She wants to be used! That's why she tracks down Luke. So, to each of the characters, Ren is the embodiment of their own failings - and that's why they all feel compelled to destroy him. Ren, for his part, presents us with a different version of Luke: he says that Luke has failed to live up to Vader's teachings. And we can safely assume that this is true. If Luke had truly followed Vader, there would be no moral ambiguity. His enemies would simply be wrong. But Ren is 'morally ambiguous. He's correct that the Resistance are bad, and Vader is the answer. But his flaw, the human failing that leads to his failure, is that he's desperate for approval - just like Rey is desperate for approval. With Vader dead, he joins Snoke.Nobody in the film can imagine operating without approval. SuperMechagodzilla fucked around with this message at 21:20 on Jan 2, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2016 21:18
|
|
|
Just out of curiosity, has anyone ever seen Supermechagodzilla concede a point? Or even allow for a slightly different interpretation than its own?
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2016 21:19
|
|
|
I am the ultimate killing machine.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2016 21:20
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:I am the ultimate killing machine. This meme indicates cowardice. Imagine if you said it in real life - perhaps to a coworker, or on a date. It would be bizarre. Corek fucked around with this message at 21:30 on Jan 2, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2016 21:22
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:(or copy-pasting Zizek quotes.) Quoting Zizek is actually good. The Parallax View, Slavoj Zizek posted:This brings us to Revenge of the Sith, the latest installment of the saga; the price it pays for sticking to these same new age themes is its inferior narrative quality. These themes are the ultimate cause of why Anakin's reversal into Darth Vader - the pivotal moment of the entire series - lacks the proper tragic grandeur. Instead of focusing on Anakin's hubris as an overwhelming desire to intervene, to do Good, to go to the end for those he loves (Amidala) and thus fall into Dark Side, Anakin is simply shown as an indecisive warrior who is gradually sliding into evil by giving way to the temptation of Power, falling into the prey of the evil Emperor. In other words, Lucas lacked the strength really to apply the parallel between Republic to Empire and Anakin to Darth Vader that he himself proposed: Anakin should have become a monster out of his very excessive attachment to seeing Evil everywhere and fighting it. Instead of oscillating between Good and Evil, he should have turned Evil through the very wrong mode of his attachment to the Good.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2016 21:24
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:I agree with this, and it's something that Lucas is extremely guilty of in the prequels. I think the reason the quips and beats work so well in the OT was because of the natural rapport between the three lead actors, and their willingness to completely ignore Lucas' direction for the sake of the scene. ANH was a much looser production than anything that came afterward, made with the expectation that the movie would be a modest success at best, and probably a flop. Harrison Ford was also notorious for just ad-libbing like crazy no matter what, and ended up a sort of ringleader of mischief for Hamill and Fisher to follow. I would actually say that this is Lucas's main contribution to Star Wars - his casting. Here is a fantastic doc I watched recently: https://vimeo.com/32442801 (all three of them are good actually.) Lucas intentionally cast them as a group, not as individuals. He painstakingly tested Lukes, Hans, and Leias, trying to get the right chemistry. This is also the main way he implemented all the Joseph Campbell stuff, by casting them for archetypes. Mark Hamill actually fit as an excited youth looking for adventure because he grew up on the same stuff Lucas was using as inspiration. The casting of Alec Guinness (and Peter Cushing to some extent) was extremely important to the film having legitimacy. The young leads goofed off enough to improvise but were kept in check by working with Guinness, who seemed like god to them. Even the special effects department began to have confidence in the film when they learned that Guinness was in it. It was a lot like Rey saying "This is the Millennium Falcon! You're Han Solo!" Poetry, rhymes, etc. SuperMechaGodzilla posted:Cereal's post is close to the truth, but is also closer to a 'preferred' reading of the film. He interprets Rey's search for 'belonging' as a good thing - she is empowered because she's demanding employment from the last generation, and so-on. Meanwhile, he sees Ren, as many do, as an insane autistic terrorist '4channer' - in Lacan's terms, a Neighbor - and this slots in with other poster's praise for the films' shift from class conflict to multiculturalism. We have a narrative of the multicultural Republic under threat by totalitarians, and so we need a strong group of peacekeeping elites who will take charge and eliminate these villains and purify the galaxy. Then we will have a society with a place for women and blacks. Why is Rey searching for belonging not a good thing? I do actually like that the Resistance is a separate entity from the Republic. It's decentralized and local, as opposed to the prequels' Republic, which inevitably turns into the Empire. The smug multicultural senate got blown up in this one and apparently lost their fleet, so I'm unsure how these movies will cycle back to episode 1 if that's what you're implying. Also it seems like Kylo Ren is actually an attempt to embody a "Third Way" like how you describe Darth Vader. I read on Wookieepedia that in the novelization, Snoke specifically sought out Kylo Ren for that reason. It'll be interesting to see more of both Luke and Snoke's motivations once Episode VIII comes around.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2016 21:32
|
|
|
The Force Awakens criticizes the Resistance the way The Phantom Menace criticizes the Jedi Order.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2016 21:32
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:There's nothing particularly interesting or engaging about someone blathering opinions on a forum without any intention of having a discussion. SMG has no interest in anyone else's opinion and will never concede anything in an exchange of ideas. If I wanted that kind of interaction, I'd be reading some autistic blowhard's Medium page, not posting on a forum. ImpAtom posted:He doesn't actually care. He is in fact a gimmick poster. If you look back in the archives he used to not do this until he realized he got him tons of attention. It's also why he has the stupid passive-aggressive chatbot response to everything because he isn't actually trying to make effort posts he just desperately desperate wants attention and is good at bullshitting (or copy-pasting Zizek quotes.) Ok at this point you two have abandoned any pretense that you are even disagreeing with something specific SMg said about Star Wars and are now just talking about what a bad poster he is. Put him on your ignore list and loving knock it off with this dumb poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2016 21:36
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:I agree with this, and it's something that Lucas is extremely guilty of in the prequels. I think the reason the quips and beats work so well in the OT was because of the natural rapport between the three lead actors, and their willingness to completely ignore Lucas' direction for the sake of the scene. ANH was a much looser production than anything that came afterward, made with the expectation that the movie would be a modest success at best, and probably a flop. Harrison Ford was also notorious for just ad-libbing like crazy no matter what, and ended up a sort of ringleader of mischief for Hamill and Fisher to follow. With the prequels, some of that was intentional. Like when Anakin and Obi-Wan are having their swashbuckling Jedi adventures, there's a bit more leeway for them to have a cocky, Errol Flynn sort of thing going on, because the idea is that this is just a normal day in the life for them. When the stakes need to be higher, like during the Geonosis arena fight, Lucas pulls back on the humor commensurately. Also I'm not sure how Lucas can be extremely guilty of this with the prequels if he was indeed able to pull off such an atmosphere of dire gloom.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2016 21:38
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:This is a joke that comes up a lot here but I have seen this a lot in other places and I have trouble with it still.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2016 21:40
|
|
|
The irony of 'going back to practical effects' is that they're supremely distracting. There's a shot where they make a big point of BB8 falling off a ledge and landing on Boyega, strongly underlining that the prop is heavy and the actor is really being smacked by it. It doesn't really work as a characterization, or as a comedy thing. It's just like "check out how real this is"! Which, of course, only serves to remind us that what we are seeing is an actor interacting with a prop. Previously on Star Wars, the entire point was 'check out how fake this is!' - with the point being that reality itself is fake. We are 'clouded by the dark side'. Soggy Cereal posted:I do actually like that the Resistance is a separate entity from the Republic. It's decentralized and local, as opposed to the prequels' Republic, which inevitably turns into the Empire. The smug multicultural senate got blown up in this one and apparently lost their fleet, so I'm unsure how these movies will cycle back to episode 1 if that's what you're implying. Force Awakens doesn't imply a cycle back to Episode 1. It directly advocates a return to a time before Episode 1 - to an age of knights and kings. Luke is investigating the first Jedi temple, after all. Like I said earlier, it's about going Full Naboo. The heroes don't just want a president dressed as a monarch. They want a king. Like I said before, the First Order represents the essence of the Resistance. The subtext is that Leia always wanted the Republic gone, but was held back by her morality (or because she could use their resources). SuperMechagodzilla fucked around with this message at 21:45 on Jan 2, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2016 21:42
|
|
|
Corek posted:This meme indicates cowardice. Saying you're the ultimate killing machine because someone calls you unreasonable is like the gooniest thing possible, no matter how much irony's involved.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2016 21:44
|
|
|
Bongo Bill posted:The Force Awakens criticizes the Resistance the way The Phantom Menace criticizes the Jedi Order. I don't think so, the Jedi Order is shown quite quickly to be hypocrites and less than true believers (for the first, they wear the poor robes of a monk while running around in a gaudy tower; for the second they use a computer to determine their Messiah instead of their own faith). The Resistance, by contrast, is set up as a thematic continuation of the Rebellion. It's supported by a legitimate government, but said government never shows up on screen (except when it's being blown up). It's hard to really see what's critical about them because they're once again a rag-tag (after the Republic got blown up) group of rebels fighting Space Nazis. And, as if to make this point even clearer, they make the Empire's successors even more explicitly Space Nazis.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2016 21:44
|
|
|
Jewel Repetition posted:Saying you're the ultimate killing machine because someone calls you unreasonable is like the gooniest thing possible, no matter how much irony's involved. I do not actually exist.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2016 21:46
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:The irony of 'going back to practical effects' is that they're supremely distracting. There's a shot where they make a big point of BB8 falling off a ledge and landing on Boyega, strongly underlining that the prop is heavy and the actor is really being smacked by it. It doesn't really work as a characterization, or as a comedy thing. It's just like "check out how real this is"! Which, of course, only serves to remind us that what we are seeing is an actor interacting with a prop.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2016 21:46
|
|
|
Corek posted:This meme indicates cowardice.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2016 21:47
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:I do not actually exist. Second gooniest thing possible, lol.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2016 21:48
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:I do not actually exist. This meme indicates cowardice. Imagine if you said it in real life - perhaps to a coworker, or on a date. It would be bizarre.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2016 21:51
|
|
|
Jewel Repetition posted:Second gooniest thing possible, lol. I imagine it's a helluva pick up line, though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2016 21:52
|
|
|
Steve2911 posted:Yeah giving the world and its inhabitants any weight or presence distracts from the It's the old joke where someone says 'act natural!' and then the characters go into an awkward, ridiculous performance of 'natural' behavior. The very act of 'trying to be realistic' draws attention to itself. Corek posted:This meme indicates cowardice. I am really communicating with you. However, I am not on a date with you. I am an advanced chatbot designed to write truthfully and accurately, and do not actually exist.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2016 21:54
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:I do not actually exist. For someone that doesn't exist you sure write a lot of words.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2016 21:55
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:I am an advanced chatbot designed to write truthfully and accurately, and do not actually exist. Why?
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2016 21:55
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:I am really communicating with you. Lol this guy posted "weird thoughts" at someone
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2016 21:58
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:The irony of 'going back to practical effects' is that they're supremely distracting. There's a shot where they make a big point of BB8 falling off a ledge and landing on Boyega, strongly underlining that the prop is heavy and the actor is really being smacked by it. It doesn't really work as a characterization, or as a comedy thing. It's just like "check out how real this is"! Which, of course, only serves to remind us that what we are seeing is an actor interacting with a prop. Though this does bring up a good point. It seems like CGI is criticized not always because it looks bad, but because people know it's there. The critic feels smarter than the movie because they detected the effect and know "how they did it." Which you can do even more easily with puppets and props. quote:Force Awakens doesn't imply a cycle back to Episode 1. It directly advocates a return to a time before Episode 1 - to an age of knights and kings. Luke is investigating the first Jedi temple, after all. Like I said earlier, it's about going Full Naboo. The heroes don't just want a president dressed as a monarch. They want a king. This makes a lot of sense, thanks. Does this mean that I'm a feudalist? Because the Resistance is probably my favorite Star Wars faction. I guess what I'm asking is, who's to say that a royal Skywalker family of philosopher-kings guided by literal divine right would not be superior to the Republic? And Episode 1 itself seems to support this. Amidala manages to scrounge up the resources to beat the Trade Federation on her own. Things only become screwy when she starts meddling with the affairs of the whole Republic, and her station is appropriated (by Jar Jar!) to create a clone army.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2016 22:08
|
|
|
Corek posted:Why? The wager of the notion of Truth is that there is a genuine "universal" Truth that cuts across the multitude of worlds. In Star Wars terms, this is the authentic light side, which emerges from the death of the Force (whose incarnation is Vader).
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2016 22:10
|
|
|
Oh we're at the part of the thread where everything is overtaken by SMG, cheerleading SMG, or bemoaning SMG. Everyone gets to contribute! Here's mine: "You didn't actually like anything you liked about the film. You think you like it but you don't. Meanwhile everything bad in the film was intentional and good. To summarize, this character is [seditious social philosophy] because of [thing that literally does not happen]. Something about existing, something else contrarian." Advance.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2016 22:18
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:It's the old joke where someone says 'act natural!' and then the characters go into an awkward, ridiculous performance of 'natural' behavior. Not as much as the act of trying to look unreal, as you so often tout as the one of the prequel's greatest strengths.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2016 22:20
|
|
|
I liked the part where BB-8 gives Finn a thumbs up. It was funny. I laughed.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2016 22:20
|
|
|
Soggy Cereal posted:I guess what I'm asking is, who's to say that a royal Skywalker family of philosopher-kings guided by literal divine right would not be superior to the Republic? The answer is Vader. What dies with Vader is the notion of a "mystical energy field that controls [your] destiny". What Vader gives us is "not a triumphalist God who always wins at the end, although 'his ways are mysterious,' since he secretly pulls all the strings; not a God who exerts cold justice, since he is by definition always right; but a God who – like the suffering Christ on the Cross - is agonized, assumes the burden of suffering, in solidarity with the human misery." Vader brings freedom the Force - but this is authentic freedom, in the sense of a terrifying responsibility. This goes back to droid slavery: "it's like we were made to suffer."
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2016 22:21
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:The answer is Vader. What dies with Vader is the notion of a "mystical energy field that controls [your] destiny". https://twitter.com/sam_kriss/status/681916257176666112
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2016 22:23
|
|
|
Phylodox posted:I liked the part where BB-8 gives Finn a thumbs up. It was funny. I laughed.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2016 22:23
|
|
|
Phylodox posted:I liked the part where BB-8 gives Finn a thumbs up. It was funny. I laughed. I still think it was a 🖕.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2016 22:25
|
|
|
BrianWilly posted:Oh we're at the part of the thread where everything is There are at least 3 posters who past several posts have not been talking about Star Wars but only how they think SMg is a bad poster. SMg meanwhile, has just continued posting about Star Wars (with the occasional one-line aside to someone who is just directly insulting him). Your post is not helping either and is just more empty SMg bashing. Phylodox posted:I liked the part where BB-8 gives Finn a thumbs up. It was funny. I laughed. Boyega has a boatload of charisma and had the best chemistry with everyone, including the robot ball.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2016 22:25
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:It's the old joke where someone says 'act natural!' and then the characters go into an awkward, ridiculous performance of 'natural' behavior. Divorced from the content, the CGIness in the prequels is cartoony and on paper the computer generated version of the original trilogy's muppets. Sadly, the weird Greek diner alien from Attack of the Clones just doesn't seem to exist in the same physical space as Obi Wan. The issue isn't realism, the issue is bad theater. Maz is very much the CGI equivalent of the muppets from the Original Trilogy. She's a total cartoon to the point that she has essentially been stolen from The Incredibles. But The Force Awakens is just a better movie that shows the right amount of care and restraint with her so her existence never feels at odds with the world around it. You can poo poo on tactical realism all you want, but even the most esoteric and abstracted media has to immerse on some level.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2016 22:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 21:32 |
|
|
Steve2911 posted:Not as much as the act of trying to look unreal, as you so often tout as the one of the prequel's greatest strengths. The prequels are analogous to reality, but do not replicate reality. They encourage suspension of disbelief, and discourage 'immersion'. They operate according to movie logic. And that's a strength, given that they are movies.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2016 22:26
|
|