|
My problem is obviously not with ESB, but with the direction the prequels took in expanding on what the jedi order entailed. The fact Yoda couldn't be a respected jedi master just for his wisdom, but needed to also be a physical warrior restricted jedi down to earthly thugs. It was disappointing to me. I'm not sure how old you are, but I saw ESB before the prequels. The idea that Yoda had to be a laser sword fighter because the prequels said so isn't a given. And after that reveal yoda feels pretty meh. Really a wet towel on what was a wise oracle DARPA fucked around with this message at 17:22 on Jan 27, 2016 |
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 17:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 05:42 |
|
|
DARPA posted:My problem is obviously not with ESB, but with the direction the prequels took in expanding on what the jedi order entailed. The fact Yoda couldn't be a respected jedi master just for his wisdom, but needed to also be a physical warrior restricted jedi down to earthly thugs. It was disappointing to me. So close!
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 17:27
|
|
|
There is also that village of force worshippers in the beginning of Tfa.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 17:31
|
|
|
It ends up being a good arc for the character, though- he starts as a warrior-sage, but comes to realize the "warrior" bit doesn't help. Now when he says "Wars not make one great", he's speaking from experience.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 17:32
|
|
|
DARPA posted:My problem is obviously not with ESB, but with the direction the prequels took in expanding on what the jedi order entailed. The fact Yoda couldn't be a respected jedi master just for his wisdom, but needed to also be a physical warrior restricted jedi down to earthly thugs. It was disappointing to me. The prequels didn't expand what the Jedi Order entailed by showing Yoda fighting with a lightsaber. The Jedi, from the very beginning, were conceived as an order of mystical warrior-monks modeled after samurai. The intention was always for Yoda to have once been a wandering warrior-monk, just like every other follower of the Jedi way. You simply misunderstood what the Jedi, and Yoda, were supposed to be. It's perfectly legitimate for you to have only enjoyed the originals based on your own misunderstanding of the premise, but that doesn't mean you didn't misunderstand it. quote:I'm not sure how old you are, but I saw ESB before the prequels so the idea that Yoda had to be a laser sword fighter because the prequels said so isn't a given. And after that reveal yoda feels pretty meh. Really a wet towel on what was a wise oracle I also saw ESB before the prequels, when I was a young child. I used to have this weird idea that Yoda was just a really old human, and that's why he looked the way he did. Anyway, I was still never under the mistaken impression that Yoda had never been a laser sword fighter. Even being less than seven years old at the time, I managed to grasp the twin concepts communicated by the films, which were that 1) Yoda was a Jedi Master who used to be a great warrior, and 2) the lightsaber is the weapon of a Jedi Knight.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 17:34
|
|
|
Cnut the Great posted:Exactly. Unless I'm mistaken, I'm pretty sure we're saying the same thing. Yep we're in agreement on it haha.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 17:39
|
|
|
Yorkshire Tea posted:I've never seen Darth Sidious and Obi-Wan in the same room. Actually as a kid (like 4-ish) I combined the scenes in ESB of Obi-Wan as a Force Ghost and Palpatine as a Hologram so I got really confused.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 17:54
|
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:It ends up being a good arc for the character, though- he starts as a warrior-sage, but comes to realize the "warrior" bit doesn't help. Now when he says "Wars not make one great", he's speaking from experience. I feel like this is obvious but you guys are going on and on about it. Maxwell Lord has stated it exactly how it is. If it bothers you that the Jedi in the PT do a lot of fighting, good! Because that's part of the reason they failed. E: the palpatine/sidious thing is fun but I don't see the point of it. What is it telling me?
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 18:11
|
|
|
I think the reason SMG likes the prequels so much is because, in his head, they are completely different movies.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 18:20
|
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:It ends up being a good arc for the character, though- he starts as a warrior-sage, but comes to realize the "warrior" bit doesn't help. Now when he says "Wars not make one great", he's speaking from experience. What people (amazingly) still don't seem to understand is that this was the case all along. This wasn't an invention of the prequels. Yoda was explicitly based on Takashi Shimura's character in Seven Samurai, where he played an aged ronin named Kambei Shimada. From The Making of Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back: Lawrence Kasdan posted:“Yoda is the lead samurai from Seven Samurai,” says Kasdan of Akira Kurosawa’s 1954 film. “Seven Samurai is for me the greatest film ever made and enormously influential for George. If you see Seven Samurai, you see Yoda is Shimada, the lead samurai. He’s the mentor figure who gets the whole picture.” Shimada, like Yoda, is a wise teacher who has no illusions about the dreadful realities of war. Like Yoda, he knows this because he's been through it himself.  Pictured: The inspiration for Yoda. Note the sword in his hand. Lucas further acknowledged the influence of the character on Yoda by including this subtle little homage in Revenge of the Sith:  Just as you'd expect given the character's origins, and (shockingly!) just as Lucas has maintained all along, the original plan was indeed for TESB to feature scenes demonstrating Yoda's proficiency with a lightsaber. From George Lucas's original story treatment for The Empire Strikes Back, dated November 28, 1977: quote:On a mysterious planet, Luke meets “Minch Yoda” and gives him food. The creature eventually claims to be a Jedi Master, the teacher of Ben Kenobi. Meanwhile, when Han and the Falcon come out of hyperspace, the Empire is waiting for them—somehow the Imperials have managed to locate the Rebel rendezvous point. Han takes them into an asteroid field and hides the Falcon in an asteroid cave. Back on the bog planet, Yoda lifts the X-wing out of the swamp to prove his powers. Not long afterward, “Minch uses Luke’s laser sword to kill a monster that attacks them.” Luke “practices with the sword and seeker balls, defending himself against a dozen laser beams …” (Notice that this excerpt also features Minch (Yoda) making use of floating seeker balls to train a Padawan with a lightsaber, just as we see in Attack of the Clones. Imagine that!) Unfortunately, Lucas had to abandon his plans for scenes featuring Yoda wielding a lightsaber, because of obvious practical considerations. However, there's a deleted scene where Yoda verbally instructs Luke in the principles of lightsaber combat, demonstrating that (of course) Yoda knows how to fight with one.  This scene was meant to explain Luke's sudden combat proficiency during his duel with Vader on Bespin. Unfortunately, this and several other training scenes went uncompleted because production problems caused Kershner to literally run out of time to finish filming them. edit: Oh yeah, and these production problems were mainly a result of the fact that it sometimes took hours and hours of filming on the Dagobah set just to get a scant few minutes of usable footage of Yoda where he didn't look blatantly like a lifeless rubber puppet. Gee, I wonder why Lucas opted to go CGI for the prequels. Cnut the Great fucked around with this message at 18:44 on Jan 27, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 18:25
|
|
|
Cnut the Great posted:What people (amazingly) still don't seem to understand is that this was the case all along. This wasn't an invention of the prequels. Yoda was explicitly based on Takashi Shimura's character in Seven Samurai, where he played an aged ronin named Kambei Shimada. From The Making of Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back: I find it fascinating that the movie that most people consider to be the best Star Wars had such troubled production that scenes went unfinished, the producer got fired for going so overbudget, and Harrison Ford hated the experience so much he didn't want to play Han Solo anymore.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 18:31
|
|
|
Cnut the Great posted:The prequels didn't expand what the Jedi Order entailed by showing Yoda fighting with a lightsaber. The Jedi, from the very beginning, were conceived as an order of mystical warrior-monks modeled after samurai. The intention was always for Yoda to have once been a wandering warrior-monk, just like every other follower of the Jedi way. You simply misunderstood what the Jedi, and Yoda, were supposed to be. It's perfectly legitimate for you to have only enjoyed the originals based on your own misunderstanding of the premise, but that doesn't mean you didn't misunderstand it. Yoda is referred to as a great warrior only because Luke assumes it. Yoda is never referred to as a Jedi Knight.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 18:33
|
|
|
DARPA posted:Yoda is referred to as a great warrior only because Luke assumes it. Yoda is never referred to as a Jedi Knight. No, he's referred to as a Jedi Master by Kenobi.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 18:45
|
|
|
DARPA posted:Yoda is referred to as a great warrior only because Luke assumes it. Yoda is never referred to as a Jedi Knight. well "There you will learn from Yoda, the Jedi Master who instructed me" whether you consider "jedi master" and "jedi knight" different things dietetically is your call i suppose Lt. Danger posted:He was talking about how it was revealed to the audience only subtextually. He was wrong, but not by much. Also I love how you made the absolutely perfect point and everyone who poo poo on SMG just kinda shut up instead of having the dignity to be like, "oh ok good point, interesting read"
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 18:45
|
|
|
If Vader is gonna be in Rogue One, I hope they give Ashoka (possibly last known Jedi with Obi/Yoda in hiding?) a central role in the movie. It would be awesome to hear JEJ saying "...Snips?"
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 18:49
|
|
|
"Star Wars fans don't like Star Wars" is by far the dumbest and most obnoxious thing in this thread including Tezzor's posts.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 18:52
|
|
|
SHISHKABOB posted:E: the palpatine/sidious thing is fun but I don't see the point of it. What is it telling me? Going back to the original point, people were saying that Palpatine was an illegitimate ruler because he was obviously none other than Darth Sidious, the man responsible for invading Naboo and the starting the Separatist movement. Therefore, there's no moral ambiguity, the Jedi were right to try assassinating him, kill all Siths, etc. So it's important to note that Darth Sidious - from the point of view of nearly all the characters, and in the presentation of the film itself - effectively doesn't exist. In this fairy-tale story, it's like they're saying the President is secretly the Devil or Illuminati or whatever. We in the audience get a few shots of the bad guys talking to the Devil, but that's not a reason to assassinate an elected leader. On top of that, the extremely important point is that Palpstine is evil regardless of whether Sidious exists. Sidious is fairly irrelevant. But accepting this fact means breaking out of the Jedis' conspiracy theorist mindset ("our liberal-democratic system has been corrupted by the Illuminati!") and moving into a more radical stance ("liberal democracy is itself corrupt. It is not true democracy.")
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 18:53
|
|
|
I think the Jedi being evil and the Sith being good is probably the most ridiculous of assertions. I think at one point somebody said they enjoyed Jedi Rocks but I don't believe that was anything but a troll.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 18:54
|
|
|
DARPA posted:Yoda is referred to as a great warrior only because Luke assumes it. Yoda is never referred to as a Jedi Knight. Read my lengthy post above. You are wrong. Luke assumes (correctly) that Yoda was once a great warrior, because that is what a Jedi is. It is contained within the definition of the word "Jedi." What you're saying would be like someone calling themselves a samurai master and then saying, "Oh no, but I'm not a warrior, never have been." That's now how it works. You can be a retired samurai, which means you are no longer a warrior. But you cannot call yourself a samurai and never at any point have been a warrior. I mean, maybe it wouldn't be the craziest thing in the world to just accept that the creator of Star Wars really does have a better understanding of his own world and characters than you do? Why is this such a hard pill for so many people to swallow?
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 18:54
|
|
|
euphronius posted:There is also that village of force worshippers in the beginning of Tfa. Where was this?
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 18:55
|
|
|
Chickenfrogman posted:"Star Wars fans don't like Star Wars" is by far the dumbest and most obnoxious thing in this thread including Tezzor's posts. on the surface level, maybe--since a lot of people read that and probably take it too personally or too seriously it's an interesting rhetorical device because it gets to the heart of the weird fact that people who claim to love star wars only like 3 (maybe 4) out of 7 total movies, which really means that when people say they like star wars, most really mean that they like their very own version of star wars, separate from what star wars actually is the best example is to look at all of the prequel fan edits; the people doing those don't like star wars, they like episodes 4, 5 and 6. it's identity politics i quite like the movie alien and I think the exorcist is pretty spooky, but that's about the extent of horror movies i like--it would be quite silly of me to say that I love horror, wouldn't it?
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 18:57
|
|
|
kiimo posted:I think the Jedi being evil and the Sith being good is probably the most ridiculous of assertions. The assertion is that the Jedi are bad while Palpatine is Evil - and that Evil is preferable to mere badness.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 18:58
|
|
|
Waffles Inc. posted:on the surface level, maybe--since a lot of people read that and probably take it too personally or too seriously I don't know if liking 66% of the movies (and only the movies, or you could go the SMG route and count every single version as a new separate movie, but let's not forget the tv shows, games, books, comics, toys, radio plays, etc.) qualifies you either, though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 19:01
|
|
|
RBA Starblade posted:I don't know if liking 66% of the movies (and only the movies, or you could go the SMG route and count every single version as a new separate movie, but let's not forget the tv shows, games, books, comics, toys, radio plays, etc.) qualifies you either, though. who only likes 66% of the movies if not for people who don't like the prequels? i would say those people don't very much star wars either? is there a significant camp of people who only like the prequels to the exclusion of the OT?
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 19:04
|
|
|
Waffles Inc. posted:who only likes 66% of the movies if not for people who don't like the prequels? i would say those people don't very much star wars either? Maybe you don't like TFA or the bad clone wars movie or the ewok movie. So that would be 6/9. Forgot about those two didn't you? 
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 19:07
|
|
|
RBA Starblade posted:Maybe you don't like TFA or the bad clone wars movie or the ewok movie. So that would be 6/9. Forgot about those two didn't you? i quite like clone wars and tfa and have never seen the clone war movie or ewoks?????? i also didn't come up with "star wars fans don't like star wars" i was just explaining how i find it to be an interesting device so
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 19:09
|
|
|
Beeez posted:I find it fascinating that the movie that most people consider to be the best Star Wars had such troubled production that scenes went unfinished, the producer got fired for going so overbudget, and Harrison Ford hated the experience so much he didn't want to play Han Solo anymore. A lot of quality works come from overcoming adversity, in technical limitations, difficult production, censorship, and budgetary reasons. It's more impressive that David kills Goliath, than Goliath killing a human.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 19:10
|
|
|
RBA Starblade posted:I don't know if liking 66% of the movies (and only the movies, or you could go the SMG route and count every single version as a new separate movie, but let's not forget the tv shows, games, books, comics, toys, radio plays, etc.) qualifies you either, though. You liking your Boba Fett toy doesn't mean you like Star Wars. It means you like merchandising.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 19:11
|
|
|
It's the dumbest argument. You can't tell me what I like and what I don't. You don't have any say in that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 19:15
|
|
|
Beeez posted:Harrison Ford hated the experience so much he didn't want to play Han Solo anymore.  His investment ended up paying off, though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 19:16
|
|
|
Waffles Inc. posted:i quite like clone wars and tfa and have never seen the clone war movie or ewoks?????? I was explaining why I find it meaningless. You do not need to like all aspects of something to be a fan of something. quote:You liking your Boba Fett toy doesn't mean you like Star Wars. It means you like merchandising. Star Wars is a franchise. What percentage of it must you like to be worthy of the title Fan? I couldn't tell you, as I am not one. What number did you settle on?
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 19:17
|
|
|
RBA Starblade posted:
So's Alien. Me saying "I just like Aliens and the drop ship toys" doesn't mean I like the Alien franchise.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 19:18
|
|
|
CelticPredator posted:It's the dumbest argument. You can't tell me what I like and what I don't. You don't have any say in that. Nah, it's actually an interesting discussion about the intersection of ideology and personal identity. This is extra cool because ideology and how it functions socially is one of the most important themes of Star Wars.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 19:19
|
|
|
computer parts posted:So's Alien. Me saying "I just like Aliens and the drop ship toys" doesn't mean I like the Alien franchise. If one likes the movies but nothing else are they truly a Fan Of Alien? How much are you allowed to dislike before you are deemed unworthy of the title?
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 19:20
|
|
|
CelticPredator posted:It's the dumbest argument. You can't tell me what I like and what I don't. You don't have any say in that. I can tell you whatever I want. If you claim you like pie, but actually dislike all pie that is not "apple pie made by your own mom," you could say you like pie, and I could say you don't. And we'd both be right...from a certain point of view.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 19:20
|
|
|
computer parts posted:You liking your Boba Fett toy doesn't mean you like Star Wars. It means you like merchandising. Is there no art to sculpting, painting, and designing? The merchandise of Star Wars exist as separate works from Star Wars but still considered a part of Star Wars. There is no objective percentage of material required to subjectively like Star Wars (and if there was we'd all be at 1% because nobody wants to read Traviss schlock.)
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 19:21
|
|
|
RBA Starblade posted:If one likes the movies but nothing else are they truly a Fan Of Alien? You're using fan as a synonym for "likes x", whereas everyone else is not. So to your question: no under your definition, yes under my definition.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 19:21
|
|
|
jivjov posted:Where was this? Max Von Sydows village.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 19:22
|
|
|
computer parts posted:You're using fan as a synonym for "likes x", whereas everyone else is not. By all means, define it then.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 19:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 05:42 |
|
|
euphronius posted:Max Von Sydows village. When in the movie is this established?
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 19:23
|
|
