|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 02:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 23:25 |
|
|
Watching the trilogies OT: Quoting the lines & playing a long PT: Riffing at the screen NT: Cheering incoherently at Bae
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 02:10
|
|
|
Schwarzwald posted:Believing Jesus did miracles is christian literalism. It's, like, pretty baseline stuff. I guess you don't absolutely have to think he did miracles to be a Christian, but you have to think he was literally God, so you must at least believe he totally could have if he wanted to.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 02:15
|
|
|
Let's have a metadiscussion about whether it's possible to discuss something.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 02:17
|
|
|
My least favorite thing from the prequels is the tacked on and needless deification of Anakin Skywalker. The OT was more about Lukes journey. We saw him learn and grow. He was the protagonist. The most important thing Anakin did was save Luke. I never got the impression he was anything more than Palpatines crony. But I guess Vader is Jesus now. He's the center of the Star Wars universe. We're still paying the price of the PT missteps with TFA. Now Kylo Ren is worshiping him. It stinks!
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 02:26
|
|
|
Yaws posted:Now Kylo Ren is worshiping him. Kylo Ren is wrong.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 02:31
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:Remember that the original argument was less "the old trilogy has amazing camerawork" and more "the old trilogy has less boring uninteractive scenes than the PT". The PT example shot has some interesting technical work. It is also dull as balls otherwise.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 02:39
|
|
|
Comparing between the OT and PT also falls flat a lot of the time since they have such different scopes and tones. The OT is a relatively simple and small story about good vs evil, centered around 3 characters who are working together. The PT is a much more complicated story involving lots of politics and secret plots, it even has a full blown visible war with thousands of soldiers on screen fighting. Just because the OT did it a certain way does not mean it was a good choice if it was done in the PT. The title crawls are the thing that bugs me about this the most. In the OT they were simply and boiled down to "bad guy did this, good guy did this, movie begins", in the PT they're trying to give the backstory to these complex situations (a trade dispute leading to a war with some kind of weird political play) and it just doesn't work as well, but you gotta have them since it's Star Wars!
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 02:44
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:Let's have a metadiscussion about whether it's possible to discuss something. That metadiscussion would be impossible to have though
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 02:45
|
|
|
Zeris posted:That metadiscussion would be impossible to have though Please. That's a metadiscussion for another time.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 02:49
|
|
|
Yaws posted:My least favorite thing from the prequels is the tacked on and needless deification of Anakin Skywalker. The OT was more about Lukes journey. We saw him learn and grow. He was the protagonist. The most important thing Anakin did was save Luke. I never got the impression he was anything more than Palpatines crony. Vader is the central character because he is you and me. He's the person in the OT and PT that's most like us - the real us. Luke et al are the make-believe do-gooders we wish we could be, and that's why they're more fun to watch on an escapist level. The ST is completely right to bridge the thematic gap between OT and PT by way of starting a character off where Anakin is at the end of III and showing a full redemptive arc over the following films. We'll go from whiny, self hating Anakin to confident and moral Luke by way of Kylo Ren.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 02:50
|
|
|
Zeris posted:That metadiscussion would be impossible to have though https://youtu.be/hnTmBjk-M0c
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 02:53
|
|
|
Vintersorg posted:Just think how many books of text were written about the Prequels on these forums. Then look in the mirror. And look down. Then go to the medicine cabinet and take out those blades.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 02:58
|
|
|
I can confirm the Clone Wars 3d cartoon is a lot better at being the pt than the pt is. It's also on Netflix so it's
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 03:01
|
|
|
turtlecrunch posted:I can confirm the Clone Wars 3d cartoon is a lot better at being the pt than the pt is. It's also on Netflix so it's All true.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 03:30
|
|
|
I've held off on it for a long time because I don't really watch cartoons that I didn't already watch when I was a kid, but it seems like nearly everyone likes the Clone Wars TV show so I guess I'mma have to watch it soon.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 03:37
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:That's what 'justification' means. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTiBU-1Ji_8
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 03:41
|
|
|
Phylodox posted:If something isn't a flaw if it can be justified, then the very concept of a flaw ceases to have any meaning. Nothing is ever wrong if you're just willing to throw enough words at it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 03:47
|
|
|
Terrorist Fistbump posted:"Justify" doesn't mean to try to show something is reasonable or good, it means to succeed at it. Don't worry, the concept of a flaw is still alive and well. Okay.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 04:12
|
|
|
Very straightforward camera work is not in and of itself a problem- that's all choice of technique, when the overall goal is to create images that look good and tell the story (or set the mood or convey themes etc. etc.) So even if Lucas does mostly stick to medium shots and 1-2 conversations and reactions and doesn't move the camera a lot, the composition of elements within those shots is usually pretty good. The films are all visually attractive and that's not just the neat special effects, it's a strong design sense, use of color to convey tone, etc. AotC does have a few off scenes, which I partially put down to the digital transition, but even then it's got some beautiful shots.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 04:13
|
|
|
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). They were not universally panned at the time, but that can largely be attributed to nostalgia and fanboyism, even amongst established professional critics. With the benefit of time and analysis they are now indeed near-universally panned by critics and audiences. It didn't even take that long for people to agree that the prequel films were bad. Get a bit of distance from the film's' initial release and what happened? Even by Revenge of the Sith there was the undercurrent of just grudgingly watching and saying at least this one would be darker and wouldn't have all that terrible poo poo from the first two. Hell, even by the release of Attack of the Clones there was the argument that it was better because the terrible kid was gone and there was nearly no Jar-Jar. Look how many current professional reviews of The Force Awakens explicitly make reference to how awful the prequels were in comparison. Look at how during the film itself, aside from a one-off line about clone stormtroopers, there is absolutely nothing whatsoever from the prequels mentioned at all, even stuff that people have generally accepted now like the word "padawan." Look at how all the new projects announced pretend that the prequels don't exist. If not for the idea that the prequels were bad and it took some time to look at them objectively and process just how bad, how else do we explain this? Did everybody just lose slowly their minds?
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 04:34
|
|
|
Cnut the Great posted:Describe to me exactly what makes this... There's nothing much different about the blocking and shots in those two discrete scenes. The issue is not that at some point George Lucas used shot-reverse-shot and simple blocking at some point in the prequels. The issue is that in the prequels he vastly overuses it, and uses it in situations it isn't appropriate, to the detriment of the scenes and the film generally. Yes, those scenes are composed in a very similar fashion, if we're looking at them without context. First, there are many many more of those scenes in the prequels than there are in the original trilogy, and specifically many more in Attack of the Clones than there are in A New Hope. But more to the point, looking at these particular scenes individually, we can see the difference. In the first example, Luke and his family are not in any danger. Nothing of interest has happened to them. Luke basically wants to go to the mall with his friends but grumpy uncle says he's got to do his chores. Whatever. In the second scene, they're talking about how some unknown entity is trying to kill one of the characters, at most a few hours after the last assassination attempt nearly killed her in a giant explosion. Also, criticizing the background and the set isn't a non-sequitir in this case. They're talking about how somebody is trying to kill one of them and could strike at any time. They are doing this with their backs to a giant window in broad daylight with visible flying vehicles behind them. Also, the character in image #3 previously died and we're just supposed to forget that except it's the whole point of the scene. But really, even if it was just that scene it wouldn't be all that bad. The problem is it's everywhere. It's hard to think of a single dialogue scene in Episode 2 or 3 which does not have basic blocking and does not have people sitting down or standing still looking at each other, usually filmed in shot-reverse shot. All the important plot points of these films are shot in this way. Talking about Padme's assassination. Finding out about clones. Anakin telling Padme he loves her. Finding out about Anakin's mother. Anakin talking about his frustrations. Padme telling Anakin she's pregnant. Anakin telling Mace about Palpatine. Anakin swearing loyalty to Palpatine. Obi-Wan telling Padme he's got to kill Anakin. Every scene is this way. It's lazy direction by an old fat hack who had not directed a film in 22 years. Only deliberate dishonesty could make one deny this. Tezzor fucked around with this message at 02:38 on Jan 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 04:34
|
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:Very straightforward camera work is not in and of itself a problem- that's all choice of technique, when the overall goal is to create images that look good and tell the story (or set the mood or convey themes etc. etc.) Let's look at just the images I quoted above. Strong design sense = during a scene in which everyone is talking about how one of the characters present is at threat of assassination at any moment, they're all looking away from a giant window anyone could fly up to and try to kill her through at any moment, and in fact later an attempt does take place with someone flying up to a giant window and trying to kill her, and despite this she and other characters are later standing next to giant windows, often with their backs turned. Use of color to convey tone = you know how there's a conspiracy to kill a main character and nobody knows who it is and they just killed an innocent woman and nobody knows when they could strike next? Broad daylight, cool blues, bright whites and clear skies!! Tezzor fucked around with this message at 23:21 on Jan 18, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 04:44
|
|
|
Tezzor posted:Look at how during the film itself, aside from a one-off line about clone stormtroopers, there is absolutely nothing whatsoever from the prequels mentioned at all, even stuff that people have generally accepted now like the word "padawan." How about the term and concept of the Sith? I don't think anyone here would deny that the new movie distances itself from the PT.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 04:45
|
|
|
porfiria posted:It's, like, pretty baseline stuff. I guess you don't absolutely have to think he did miracles to be a Christian, but you have to think he was literally God, so you must at least believe he totally could have if he wanted to. Gnostic Christians would like a word with you.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 04:48
|
|
|
Lord Krangdar posted:How about the term and concept of the Sith? The term "Sith" actually comes the original novelization of the first Star Wars movie (  ) and was well-established in the Expanded Universe as a term for an evil Force-User () for nearly a decade prior to the prequels. The new movie (and the direction of the new franchise as a whole) distancing itself from the prequels (ie pretending they never existed) is not a random act of nature worth mentioning only in passing. It's because they're very bad movies everyone hates and everyone except five goons and severe Star Wars fanboys who would defend George Lucas literally taking a poo poo in their mouths recognizes this
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 04:53
|
|
|
I think you'll find a lot more people like episodes I through III than you think.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 04:57
|
|
|
greatn posted:I think you'll find a lot more people like episodes I through III than you think. That's not true.. that's impossible!
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 05:07
|
|
|
greatn posted:I think you'll find a lot more people like episodes I through III than you think. The most successful and enormous entertainment conglomerate in the history of mankind seems to think otherwise and to this point are wholly borne out on that opinion, an opinion they probably gained via extensive market research and supported in practice by critical and audience response and an average of 60 million dollars per day sliding into their coffers
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 05:08
|
|
|
porfiria posted:It's, like, pretty baseline stuff. I guess you don't absolutely have to think he did miracles to be a Christian, but you have to think he was literally God, so you must at least believe he totally could have if he wanted to. Firstly, if Christ didn't even exist, would that affect the validity of the ideas they describe in the Bible? No. So you can think Jesus never even existed and still believe in ideas ascribed to Christ, just like with Socrates, who may (may) have only ever existed in the form of Plato's teachings. SMG appears to be a Christian for whom the material existence of Christ is an unimportant question compared to the ideas that emerged with him. Secondly, the divinity of christ (or the validity of the trinity) has been hotly discussed even among those who literally think he existed, for thousands of years. Or are people who disagree with your version of christianity not christians?
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 05:17
|
|
|
greatn posted:I think you'll find a lot more people like episodes I through III than you think. "A lot more than zero" can still be a great many fairly small numbers.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 05:18
|
|
|
Hbomberguy posted:You actually don't. I have completely lost track of how this relates to Star Wars. Is the discussion over whether or not the Force exists? Because the movies don't give us any reason to doubt that it does.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 05:26
|
|
|
Phylodox posted:I have completely lost track of how this relates to Star Wars The PT is very Old Testament, the OT is rather agnostic, and TFA has a lot of New Testament-ness to it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 05:28
|
|
|
Beeez posted:I've held off on it for a long time because I don't really watch cartoons that I didn't already watch when I was a kid, but it seems like nearly everyone likes the Clone Wars TV show so I guess I'mma have to watch it soon. It also kills a lot more Jangos and Jango look-alikes than the movies. (seeing if this new webm posting feature works) https://zippy.gfycat.com/DifferentNeglectedGannet.webm e: it dooo
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 05:33
|
|
|
turtlecrunch posted:It also kills a lot more Jangos and Jango look-alikes than the movies. (seeing if this new webm posting feature works) They really ought to guard their necks.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 05:35
|
|
|
turtlecrunch posted:It also kills a lot more Jangos and Jango look-alikes than the movies. (seeing if this new webm posting feature works) Beeez posted:They really ought to guard their necks.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 05:35
|
|
|
Cardboard Box A posted:They sure trained those child soldiers to be efficient murder machines didn't they "MasTER, becuz someone ewased it from tha archive memory"
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 05:37
|
|
|
Cardboard Box A posted:They sure trained those child soldiers to be efficient murder machines didn't they It's really their fault for standing around in a perfect circle against a member of an order known for basically jumping and spinning. You could have thrown a blender in the air (not even a lightblender) and they would have found a formation that got them all killed.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 05:38
|
|
|
Cardboard Box A posted:They sure trained those child soldiers to be efficient murder machines didn't they A gorget that does what those Magnaguard staffs and Stormtrooper riot batons do to deflect lightsabers, I guess.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 05:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 23:25 |
|
|
Phylodox posted:I have completely lost track of how this relates to Star Wars. Is the discussion over whether or not the Force exists? Because the movies don't give us any reason to doubt that it does. Star Wars is science fiction that takes place in our universe, a long time ago. So: why can't you move things with your thoughts?   The planet grievous hides out in is a gigantic sarlacc pit. Inside, there are massive skeletons.  And a gigantic skull.  This is good design work that puts a twist on the sarlacc imagery. It's not like doing a Tatooine 2, Coruscant 2, Yoda 2, and Death Star 3.... People have made their homes in this place, whereas Luke saw the sarlacc as merely a hole where he could dispose of his enemies. The skeletons are presented quite matter-of-factly, as just a part of life.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 05:40
|
|