|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:The prequels are both popular and well-reviewed. Anyways going back to The Force Awakens because prequel discussion is loving boring and done to death, ironically enough one of my favorite bits of the movie is the really stilted exchange between Ren and Hux early in the film, reminiscent of lines like "Good, OUR first CATCH of the DAY" from Empire: quote:KYLO REN: It's in a droid — a BB unit. So deliberated! The best nostalgic touches are the ones where you can't be sure if they were intentional or not.
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 19:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 14:41 |
|
|
korusan posted:Assuming well-reviewed is above 80, not one of the three has an aggregate number above that if you were to do a quick Google search. Aside from Phantom Menace these were neither huge cultural events or long remembered favorites Hahahaha what
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 19:43
|
|
|
Soggy Cereal posted:I might be the only one. In what way does making Leia and Luke total failures who couldn't bring back a good Republic or Jedi Order start with the notion that they were right? I don't agree with SMG and co. that the Jedi or the Rebels are bad as a whole, I just think the PT Jedi had lost their way a bit, but TFA is the most cynical of all the movies. The PT enhances the sense that Luke and Leia are a new breed, ushering in a new era, by showing us the mistakes the Jedi and Republic of old made, but TFA makes it seem like it's just an endless cycle of being replaced by newer, younger heroes where no one really learns anything or corrects the mistakes of their forebears.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 19:46
|
|
|
Soggy Cereal posted:I might be the only one. If you've got something to say about Star Wars, then 
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 19:49
|
|
|
Beeez posted:In what way does making Leia and Luke total failures who couldn't bring back a good Republic or Jedi Order start with the notion that they were right? I don't agree with SMG and co. that the Jedi or the Rebels are bad as a whole, I just think the PT Jedi had lost their way a bit, but TFA is the most cynical of all the movies. The PT enhances the sense that Luke and Leia are a new breed, ushering in a new era, by showing us the mistakes the Jedi and Republic of old made, but TFA makes it seem like it's just an endless cycle of being replaced by newer, younger heroes where no one really learns anything or corrects the mistakes of their forebears. There are no "happily ever after"'s in the real world. If you are to read into films in such a way that requires comparing them to historical moments, real people, and real countries, then you must accept this. Reality is a constant struggle to push towards "better", not "good". As of the opening of the film the empire has been shattered, free planets exist, and all the old heroes are held in immense esteem; Luke himself is treated as a deity due to his heroism. Leia has finally returned to her people. Han got to go on plucky smuggler adventures again. This is better than the situation of the OT. In a thread that belittles people for being immature in their desires for a film, "this movie moves on from MY characters! How dare the universe continue! I" Is a pitiable statement.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 19:58
|
|
|
Beeez posted:TFA is the most cynical of all the movies. The PT enhances the sense that Luke and Leia are a new breed, ushering in a new era, by showing us the mistakes the Jedi and Republic of old made, but TFA makes it seem like it's just an endless cycle of being replaced by newer, younger heroes where no one really learns anything or corrects the mistakes of their forebears. It's just more pining for "a more civilized age", i.e., a status quo to rebel against. As the state-supported paramilitary, it sure as hell can't be The Resistance. Kylo Ren is supposed to be conflicted because the "light side" is seducing him, so what does that make The First Order? The "dark side" of the rebels?
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 19:59
|
|
|
"team negative1" released a 1080p scan of some 35mm '77 Star Wars prints, complete with all the dust, red fading, and reel change marks if anyone is into that. They worked on it for 4+ years. The Despecialized guy, if he does another version, will probably use it to improve the consistency of his restoration.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 19:59
|
|
|
Beeez posted:In what way does making Leia and Luke total failures who couldn't bring back a good Republic or Jedi Order start with the notion that they were right? I don't agree with SMG and co. that the Jedi or the Rebels are bad as a whole, I just think the PT Jedi had lost their way a bit, but TFA is the most cynical of all the movies. The PT enhances the sense that Luke and Leia are a new breed, ushering in a new era, by showing us the mistakes the Jedi and Republic of old made, but TFA makes it seem like it's just an endless cycle of being replaced by newer, younger heroes where no one really learns anything or corrects the mistakes of their forebears. They weren't failures? It's more of a false start, in my opinion. It just shows that their task is more difficult than they thought. It also doesn't help when you have Snoke trying to ruin everything. And I hate to be this cheesy, but you really only fail if you give up. Which is why Luke sought out the First Jedi Temple and the Resistance is still a thing. The film still expresses, through Leia in the opening crawl, the old guy at the beginning, Maz, and Han Solo, that the Jedi were right and are necessary to maintain peace and justice in the galaxy. If/when Episodes X, XI, and XII come out, then I'll definitely agree with you. At that point it's no better than the old post-ROTJ Expanded Universe, which is the most depressing thing in the world.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 20:01
|
|
|
Soggy Cereal posted:The film still expresses, through Leia in the opening crawl, the old guy at the beginning, Maz, and Han Solo, that the Jedi were right and are necessary to maintain peace and justice in the galaxy. "Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword." Maz is a charlatan.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 20:10
|
|
|
I do feel like the major flaw of The Force Awakens is that it does leave a lot undefined that maybe could have used more definition. A New Hope is pretty minimalist too, but it doesn't take much to explain "Evil Empire! Brave rebels!" and maybe take a scene or two to establish the Force and the Jedi and you got it. The First Order is a little less obvious- you basically have to glean from context and maybe EU stuff that they've taken over this part of the galaxy and that's why there's a local Resistance. The crawl defines them entirely in terms of them hunting for Luke Skywalker, which is a good motivation for Kylo Ren but not so much the entire thing- if they found Skywalker, would they leave everyone else alone and stop blowing up planets? It's a complicated enough set up that it needs a little more explication, but of course they got cold feet about being compared to the prequels and deleted the scene that would get all that out of the way. (As usual, when following up something that got a mixed reception, the filmmakers go too far in the opposite direction.) While I wouldn't go so far as to call Maz "the worst" character, she definitely suffers from a lack of definition, and again I feel some overzealous editing may have been at fault. She's definitely a sage of some sorts but it's not clear what she represents. Yoda in ESB is the little wizened old man who turns out to be very powerful, and his entire lesson is that things are not what they seem. Maz's lesson is...
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 20:11
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:"Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword." "Blessed are the peacemakers"
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 20:11
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:"Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword." Which is why justice is also included, and Jedi use literal swords. Maz is an old woman; do you want her to wield a sword personally? I'm not sure why her intent is lacking.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 20:13
|
|
|
To be honest I am downright shocked at how much people are talking about Maz. She held as much impact on the film for me as Iexter Dettster did.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 20:20
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:There are no "happily ever after"'s in the real world. If you are to read into films in such a way that requires comparing them to historical moments, real people, and real countries, then you must accept this. Reality is a constant struggle to push towards "better", not "good". When have I compared them to real historical moments? Star Wars is a fairy tale. I understand that they have to introduce new characters who have new journeys, but there are right ways and wrong ways to do that. I'm not saying they've definitely gone about it the wrong way, there are two more movies on the way in this trilogy, after all, but every choice they make with regards to how they continue on is not, necessarily, the right one. When you make sequels to movies that didn't need sequels, and you specifically tout the fact this is continuation of the characters and stories from those movies, the way you go about it is not unassailable. You criticize endlessly the "pitiable statements" and hypocrisies of everyone else, yet somehow you're exempt despite spending so much of your time complaining that people criticize something you like and show appreciation for something you don't. You're evidently happy that The Force Awakens is "making it right" by vaguely being more what "Star Wars" is supposed to be than the prequels were, but I'm supposed to be apologetic for wariness about how the original characters and concepts are being utilized? I liked The Force Awakens a lot, and I haven't watched the prequels in years but I'm inclined to say I find the new one more entertaining, but that doesn't mean everything Disney does with the franchise is great. Soggy Cereal posted:They weren't failures? Yeah, I guess I was saying it in a more inflammatory way than necessary, if this is just intended as a false start that is corrected in the next two movies then it's not as cynical as I suggested. If it's all simply a device to clear all the old beloved characters from the board to make way for the new ones, then I stand by my initial interpretation. Unfortunately, Episodes X, XI, and XII are almost a given, though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 20:21
|
|
|
Beeez posted:If it's all simply a device to clear all the old beloved characters from the board to make way for the new ones, then I stand by my initial interpretation. Unfortunately, Episodes X, XI, and XII are almost a given, though. Yeah, definitely. "That's what I'm afraid of." - Owen Lars, upon being told something that he is afraid of
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 20:25
|
|
|
The original trilogy and the prequel trilogy have similar strengths and weaknesses. Pointing out that something that you dislike in a prequel was also present in an original is not a potshot; it means "It didn't bother you then; so why does it bother you now?"
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 20:37
|
|
|
Here's some awesome footage from the 35MM clean up. http://thestarwarstrilogy.com/starwars/post/2016/01/15/Team-Negative-One-completes-35mm-Restoration-of-Star-Wars https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_OsKrhVKSEk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dxitcuq2J_g https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mo24gFFk7WM
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 20:43
|
|
|
Soggy Cereal posted:Which is why justice is also included, and Jedi use literal swords. That's a misinterpretation of the quote. When Christ says that he does not bring peace but a sword, this means that (as Paul puts it), "all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus." Those concepts are what Christ attacks. In Star Wars terms, the true lesson of Vader is that 'there is neither Jedi nor Sith, there is neither Empire nor Republic, there is nether Resistance nor New Order....' These false conflicts distract from the truly universal struggle of the droids and other 'meek' against their mutual oppressors: "In short, political conflict designates the tension between the structured social body in which each part has its place, and 'the part of no part' which unsettles this order on account of the empty principle of universality - of what Balibar calls égaliberté, the principled equality of all men qua speaking beings. Politics proper thus always involves a kind of short circuit between the Universal and the Particular: the paradox of a singulier universel, a singular which appears as the stand in for the Universal, destabilizing the 'natural' functional order of relations in the social body. This identification of the non-part with the Whole, of the part of society with no properly defined place within it (or resisting the allocated subordinated place within it) with the Universal, is the elementary gesture of politicization, discernible in all great democratic events ..." -Zizek Quigon Jinn: Are you brainless? Jar Jar Binks: I speak. Quigon Jinn: The ability to speak does not make you intelligent. Now get out of here. Force Awakens, on the other hand, plays a real trick by having Rey dress poor, and then having her seek belonging in feudal system, beneath a king. What Leia's pushing for is not justice in the sense of égaliberté, but the elimination of the illuminati/New World Order 'corruption' of the Republic, caused by Disney-Marvel's HYDRA. It's a trap. SuperMechagodzilla fucked around with this message at 20:59 on Jan 16, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 20:53
|
|
|
Yaws posted:A cool thing is all these PT defenders constantly taking these lame potshots at the OT I"m not. I actually like the OT. Do you?
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 21:03
|
|
|
I love the OT. In fact I'll say on balance, overall, the original movies are better than the prequel movies. However this does not make the prequel movies bad, and the chasm between them is not as large as is traditionally perceived.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 21:05
|
|
|
Waffles Inc. posted:You're yet another in a long series of people who pop into the star wars thread and go through about 4 phases Hm. A ton of people come in, criticize your opinions, seem like they're smarter than you, tell you you suck, declare you're a bunch of clowns not worth engaging and then leave forever? I guess "they're lying and we're right" is certainly one way to interpret those events, especially for one so skilled in pulling poo poo out of nothing
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 21:08
|
|
|
Beeez posted:In what way does making Leia and Luke total failures who couldn't bring back a good Republic or Jedi Order start with the notion that they were right? I don't agree with SMG and co. that the Jedi or the Rebels are bad as a whole, I just think the PT Jedi had lost their way a bit, but TFA is the most cynical of all the movies. The PT enhances the sense that Luke and Leia are a new breed, ushering in a new era, by showing us the mistakes the Jedi and Republic of old made, but TFA makes it seem like it's just an endless cycle of being replaced by newer, younger heroes where no one really learns anything or corrects the mistakes of their forebears. This is a really weird criticism if one is even vaguely aware of what happens in the EU, which Star Wars fans tended to not hate as a concept. What happens to the characters and the galaxy post-Jedi in the EU is so much worse.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 21:14
|
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:I love the OT. In fact I'll say on balance, overall, the original movies are better than the prequel movies. However this does not make the prequel movies bad, and the chasm between them is not as large as is traditionally perceived. I love the OT, too. I don't have a problem with the simple way they're shot and directed. I'm just pointing out that they are shot that way. The only people who seem to have a problem with it are the ones criticizing the PT for doing the same thing. It's hilarious that Yaws thinks I'm taking "potshots" at the OT, when I'm doing nothing of the sort. The fact that he thinks I am reveals more about his real feelings than they do mine.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 21:15
|
|
|
Thread Challenge: Write some paragraphs of text about the Star Wars movies.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 21:19
|
|
|
Cnut the Great posted:I love the OT, too. I don't have a problem with the simple way they're shot and directed. I'm just pointing out that they are shot that way. The only people who seem to have a problem with it are the ones criticizing the PT for doing the same thing. The directing and shot construction in the original trilogy is vastly different, than it is in the prequel trilogy, particularly 2 and 3, not the least of the reasons for which are different directors for 5 and 6. 4 has the same director as 1, 2, and 3, and while I haven't watched A New Hope recently I would be surprised to learn that most dialogue is by people walking twenty feet and stopping or sitting on couches in front of greenscreened visual diarrhea, in shot-reverse shot. I'll check and report back Tezzor fucked around with this message at 21:25 on Jan 16, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 21:22
|
|
|
"I love the PT. I love the OT." -Palpatine, before the Senate
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 21:26
|
|
|
Tezzor posted:This is a really weird criticism if one is even vaguely aware of what happens in the EU, which Star Wars fans tended to not hate as a concept. What happens to the characters and the galaxy post-Jedi in the EU is so much worse. I hate the EU, but at least it didn't make the events of the OT seem largely pointless and it allowed Leia and Luke to accomplish something. As I said, maybe the next two movies will go more this way, but as it stands in the EU the Republic faced a lot of problems but at least it still managed to exist in some form for more than 30 years and it seemed different than the Old Republic, Luke actually managed to train some new Jedi that didn't fall to the Dark Side, and Han and Leia at least had one kid who didn't die and/or become a bad guy. In execution the EU was pretty bad and full of really stupid ideas, but that doesn't mean the only other recourse is to say "No, Luke and Leia are abject failures, it's actually Rey, Finn, and Poe who are supposed to resurrect the Jedi Order and bring about a government that doesn't totally suck and get destroyed!" Again, these sequels didn't need to happen, so going the route of "Actually the original movies didn't have much significance, here are new characters doing it right!" is a pretty lame way of justifying the existence of these sequels.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 21:26
|
|
|
Do we know anything about Rogue One? It'll be interesting to have a Star Wars film that dispenses with the Force and Jedi and all that. If that's what they intend to do.Cnut the Great posted:It's hilarious that Yaws thinks I'm taking "potshots" at the OT
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 21:33
|
|
|
Yaws posted:Do we know anything about Rogue One? It'll be interesting to have a Star Wars film that dispenses with the Force and Jedi and all that. If that's what they intend to do. Rumor has it Vader is in it, so the Force won't be completely absent.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 21:38
|
|
|
Soggy Cereal posted:I might be the only one. Luke only succeeds because he ignores Yoda and Ben, they wanted him to kill Vader and abandon his friends.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 21:38
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:That's a misinterpretation of the quote. That's one of my favorite verses in the Bible, Matthew 10:34. Here are the next verses: 35 For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. 36 And a man’s foes shall be they of his own household. 37 He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. 38 And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me. 39 He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it. The devotion is not to some underclass uprising of publicans and sinners, it is to Christ himself. The whole point of what he's saying is that he's going to cause conflict, including and especially within families. Literally what Star Wars is about. Some accept the doctrine of Christ (The Force) and some do not. Even with your own interpretation of Vader as Christ, your interpretation of this verse is wrong. Of course, he's not advocating literal violence like in Star Wars, but Star Wars is an action adventure series that doesn't claim to be derived from the Bible anyway (except by way of Campbell,) so there you go.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 21:39
|
|
|
wyoming posted:Luke only succeeds because he ignores Yoda and Ben, they wanted him to kill Vader and abandon his friends. Based on their prior experience, that's understandable. Anakin got too attached to people and look what happened.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 21:40
|
|
|
Hat Thoughts posted:Hahahaha what what part don't you get? The prequels didn't get that stellar of reviews.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 21:48
|
|
|
Soggy Cereal posted:Ad nauseam. No one can talk about the themes of the OT because they are all themes with a spiritual message that depend on the Jedi and the Rebels (or at least Luke) being right. While a huge part of the PT is that the Jedi either look like they're completely wrong or are completely wrong. The explicit point of the PT is that Luke was right to disregard Yoda and Obi-Wan because they hadn't learned anything. See also: Yaws posted:Based on their prior experience, that's understandable. Anakin got too attached to people and look what happened. What they learned from the rise of Darth Vader is not that the Jedi way of doing things was wrong, but we just have to double down on letting go of our feelings. If anything, TFA fucks it up by saying "Oh Luke did the exact same thing the Old Jedi did* and caused the downfall of the Jedi Order again". *Granted, we don't know exactly what led to Kylo Ren turning, so I'll reserve judgement for now. computer parts fucked around with this message at 21:58 on Jan 16, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 21:55
|
|
|
wyoming posted:Luke only succeeds because he ignores Yoda and Ben, they wanted him to kill Vader and abandon his friends. quote:The explicit point of the PT is that Luke was right to disregard Yoda and Obi-Wan because they hadn't learned anything. Are you talking about Empire or Return? In ESB they hold him back from going to kill Vader (his own idea, shown in the cave) and save his friends, because he is not ready. They are fully correct that this is a bad idea - the whole thing is a trap for Luke. When he goes, he does not change what happens in Cloud City, except by making himself a liability. Han Solo is still frozen in carbonite and taken to Jabba by Boba Fett. Lando still betrays his allies but then has a change of heart and helps Leia and Chewie escape. Meanwhile Luke is faced with serious temptation, has his hand cut off, and tries to commit suicide to escape his situation. He barely survives by contacting Leia, who was in the middle of escaping. He then realizes that they (Ben and Yoda) were right, though Obi Wan did kind of lie to him about Vader's identity which makes him a meanie face. In ROTJ they know that he has learned from his mistakes and is more experienced as a Jedi, having built a lightsaber and probably done some other stuff in between movies. He acts like Yoda wanted him to in ESB; he is serious about his responsibilities and thinks about more than just adventure or even military conflict. He is solemn, humble, and confident. The time is now right for him to go and confront Vader and the Emperor. At no point do they actually tell him to abandon his friends. In fact, they tell him that by putting himself in danger, he would "destroy all for which they have fought and suffered," which is true. If Luke turned to the dark side or died, the Rebellion and the Falcon crew in particular are screwed. "But Han and Leia will die if I don't!" - a rash young man who is melting down "You don't know that." - an old wise wizard ghost
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 22:01
|
|
|
Soggy Cereal posted:The devotion is not to some underclass uprising of publicans and sinners, it is to Christ himself. [...] Of course, he's not advocating literal violence That's stepping away from what Christ stands for, into the comforting idea that he represents merely an 'apolitical' belief in a personal diety who can guide your actions. "It's the will of the Force! This sword, it calls to you!" But what is Christ if not the ultimate example of someone forsaken by God? "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" The logic is so radical that even God himself is helpless, suffering. This is why the most radical interpretation of Star Wars is that the Force has died, in the basic sense that Vader's death confirms that it never existed. Christ brings freedom from God, in the sense that he brings awareness of the terrifying responsibility to your fellow man. What is left in the aftermath of Christ's death is the harsh, uncaring universe, those who turn away from the radical implications of the Christ story, and the huddled community of believers in Him (aka the Holy Spirit). The Holy Spirit, this authentic light side, is largely absent from The Force Awakens. SuperMechagodzilla fucked around with this message at 22:10 on Jan 16, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 22:07
|
|
|
korusan posted:what part don't you get? The prequels didn't get that stellar of reviews. "Not that stellar" is a weasel phrase that lets you get out of jail when somebody points out that the prequels were not anything close to universally panned. No matter how good the reviews were, well, they weren't THAT stellar, the arbitrary amount of stellar you will retroactively claim you meant. Roger Ebert knew movies, and the only one that got a "bad" review was Attack of the Clones, which was partly because he saw it on film rather than digital. He revised his opinion a little when he went back to see it again. OT got 4/4; Episodes I and III got 3.5/4 (Episode II on film got 2/4).
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 22:11
|
|
|
Beeez posted:I hate the EU, but at least it didn't make the events of the OT seem largely pointless and it allowed Leia and Luke to accomplish something. As I said, maybe the next two movies will go more this way, but as it stands in the EU the Republic faced a lot of problems but at least it still managed to exist in some form for more than 30 years and it seemed different than the Old Republic, Luke actually managed to train some new Jedi that didn't fall to the Dark Side, and Han and Leia at least had one kid who didn't die and/or become a bad guy. In execution the EU was pretty bad and full of really stupid ideas, but that doesn't mean the only other recourse is to say "No, Luke and Leia are abject failures, it's actually Rey, Finn, and Poe who are supposed to resurrect the Jedi Order and bring about a government that doesn't totally suck and get destroyed!" Again, these sequels didn't need to happen, so going the route of "Actually the original movies didn't have much significance, here are new characters doing it right!" is a pretty lame way of justifying the existence of these sequels. I checked the timeline of the EU because I lacked a lot of familiarity with it: In TFA, as far as we know, in the intervening 30 years the Empire is defeated, the Republic is in charge, and there's a small imperial remnant that has cropped up recently. Luke's student betrayed him and killed a bunch of Jedi trainees, Han and Leia's son went evil and killed a bunch of people. The bad guys are building a superweapon and there appear to be about 2-6 Sith. Ok. In the EU, in the same amount of time, the Empire keeps going as a serious threat for at least 20 years and almost won several times. The Republic is around and controls some percentage of the galaxy. Luke's student betrayed him and killed a bunch of Jedi trainees. Han and Leia's son went evil and killed a bunch of people. He also tortured their other son, who later died horribly in an unrelated incident. He killed Luke's wife and drove him to the dark side for a while. Han and Leia's daughter killed their evil son. As soon as the Empire stopped being a threat a new war started as a race of torture-worshiping S&M aliens invaded. Hundreds of billions died, including a lot of new characters and Chewbacca. As soon as the S&M aliens were defeated, a civil war broke out, and then more invading aliens. The various bad guys have built or found approximately 30 superweapons, many of which have been used, killing billions each. Yes, more Jedi have been trained in this universe, but only because Luke couldn't have fought all like 50 Sith Lords that have popped up in this time by himself
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 22:12
|
|
|
homullus posted:"Not that stellar" is a weasel phrase that lets you get out of jail when somebody points out that the prequels were not anything close to universally panned. No matter how good the reviews were, well, they weren't THAT stellar, the arbitrary amount of stellar you will retroactively claim you meant. Roger Ebert knew movies, and the only one that got a "bad" review was Attack of the Clones, which was partly because he saw it on film rather than digital. He revised his opinion a little when he went back to see it again. OT got 4/4; Episodes I and III got 3.5/4 (Episode II on film got 2/4). Duhhhhhh Ebert is a dumb hack who doesn't understand how Lucas ruined Star Wars!
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 22:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 14:41 |
|
|
Tezzor posted:The directing and shot construction in the original trilogy is vastly different, than it is in the prequel trilogy, particularly 2 and 3, not the least of the reasons for which are different directors for 5 and 6. 4 has the same director as 1, 2, and 3, and while I haven't watched A New Hope recently I would be surprised to learn that most dialogue is by people walking twenty feet and stopping or sitting on couches in front of greenscreened visual diarrhea, in shot-reverse shot. I'll check and report back Describe to me exactly what makes this...           ...so vastly different and more creative than this:              And I mean in terms of the shot constructions and editing pattern. Don't bring up any non-sequiturs like how you don't like Jar Jar or the city backgrounds. Cnut the Great fucked around with this message at 22:33 on Jan 16, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 22:17
|
|