|
Chickenfrogman posted:I really don't like everything about G-Reco. I hate the characters, I don't like the weird as gently caress pacing, I don't like the scattered and fragmented and narrative, I just don't like anything about it besides some of the soundtrack. I get why people like it and it's fine if people do, but I utterly can't stand it at all and I almost dislike it more then I dislike SEED Destiny. Oh, sorry. After this thread, it's hard to differentiate between "I hate this" and "This is terrible!". Well then carry on. 
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2016 20:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 22:59 |
|
|
Tezzor posted:Uhhh, didn't you just say the blockade was legal? Now you are arguing that it was illegal but the Republic is still bad because if the person you committed the crime against indemnifies you in writing they won't do anything about it? I mean I guess that is bad, for some values of bad. If Exxon demolishes my house and I write a thing that says "I wanted Exxon demolish my house so it's fine" (and never contradict this which is a big flaw in the stupid plot George thought up) the government is probably not going to punish Exxon anyway. Have you answered yet the question of, if the movies were totally identical but George Lucas said he intended everything to be morally complex with the Republic and Jedi tragically corrupt and inept, would you then think they are good movies?
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2016 20:21
|
|
|
porfiria posted:I always thought the more accurate line would have been, "there are no heroes on any side." Like, who's heroic here? Conehead guy? People are getting badly confused by the concept of different points of view. Grievous is a hero to the Seperatists, while the Republic considers him the ultimate villain. The Jedi consider him a minor nuisance (because he's not a sith), and his droid subordinates just think he's an rear end in a top hat.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2016 20:28
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:People are getting badly confused by the concept of different points of view. Different points of view is Obi Wan level BS.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2016 20:34
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:The sad thing is that Tezzor sometimes comes very close to being right and then veers sharply into the nearest wall. It is insane to read.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2016 20:36
|
|
|
I think a lot of confusion come from differing definitions of "good guys" and "bad guys". Good guys are generally just the people that audience sympathy lies with, and the bad guys are the people who oppose those good guys. The "good guys" aren't inherently good in an objective, moral sense, nor are the "bad guys" inherently bad. It all depends on the audience's point of view. In Star Wars, audience sympathy is always presumed to be with the Jedi, thus they're always good guys, even when they're not good.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2016 21:07
|
|
|
"Heroes on both sides" isn't about elevating the Separatists, it's about bringing the Jedi down to their level. It's about casting doubt on the idea of heroism in general.
General Dog fucked around with this message at 21:13 on Apr 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2016 21:10
|
|
|
George Lucas himself does a pretty good job of explaining it all in a prologue he wrote for a Clone Wars-era EU novel back in 2003:quote:Prologue Cnut the Great fucked around with this message at 22:35 on Apr 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2016 21:44
|
|
|
porfiria posted:Different points of view is Obi Wan level BS. You don't believe people have different points of view?
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2016 21:48
|
|
|
Cnut the Great posted:George Lucas himself does a pretty good job of explaining it all in a prologue he wrote for a Clone Wars-era EU novel back in 2003: That's awesome. George Lucas is a good man, with a creative mind.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2016 22:21
|
|
|
Cnut the Great posted:You don't believe people have different points of view? I don't think what Lott Dod thinks of General Grevious is very significant to the story, which is what makes the quote weird.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2016 22:25
|
|
|
Can someone fill me in on the central mystery of AOTC- who commissioned the creation of the clone army? Was it intended to be more fully fleshed out and was left on the editing room floor, or was it always intended to be a little bit opaque? Was Syfo Dies (sp?) supposedly in league with Dooku but still an active member of the Jedi when he went to Kamino? edit: Wish the last line of AOTC was "forget about it Ben, it's Kamino". Jewmanji fucked around with this message at 22:30 on Apr 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2016 22:27
|
|
|
Jewmanji posted:Can someone fill me in on the central mystery of AOTC- who commissioned the creation of the clone army? Was it intended to be more fully fleshed out and was left on the editing room floor, or was it always intended to be a little bit opaque? Was Syfo Dies (sp?) supposedly in league with Dooku but still an active member of the Jedi when he went to Kamino? Originally it was Palpatine, using the name "Sido Dyas" (as in, Sideous). Then Lucas made a typo and spelled it "Sifo Dyas". Then he thought the original name was a little too on the nose, and made Sifo Dyas a real Jedi. The story in AOTC is that Sifo Dyas either was manipulated into ordering the army or had his identity stolen by Dooku/Palpatine and they ordered the army. Either way, he then died not too long after.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2016 22:35
|
|
|
whole lotta yellow peril bigotry itt towards the federation imo
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2016 22:44
|
|
|
Jewmanji posted:Can someone fill me in on the central mystery of AOTC- who commissioned the creation of the clone army? Was it intended to be more fully fleshed out and was left on the editing room floor, or was it always intended to be a little bit opaque? Was Syfo Dies (sp?) supposedly in league with Dooku but still an active member of the Jedi when he went to Kamino? Syfo Dias was almost certainly dead during the time he supposedly commissioned the clone army, so it likely wasn't him. The two biggest hints are that the clone army is conveniently "discovered" both as the Republic is considering creating an army and as the Separatists are mobilizing, and that Count Dooku and his master are both pleased that war has started between them. While that might be enough to guess that Sideous commissioned the army, Palpatine's awareness and use of Order 66 in the following movie all but confirms it was him. Schwarzwald fucked around with this message at 22:55 on Apr 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2016 22:53
|
|
|
Cnut, your point is made but by dipping into the EU, I fear you have now escalated the conflict to unimaginable levels. It is going to get ugly now. A Pyrrhic victory like Geonosis. God help us all, now.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2016 23:27
|
|
|
i don't know how the written word of lucas is any more eu than commentary tracks
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2016 23:49
|
|
|
Tezzor posted:We must believe that Lucas lied about how he wanted to make a film with clear delineations of Good Guys and Bad Guys, a film that paid literally zero attention to any of the grim undertones of Slave War, and that he not only lied but lied without fail, in dozens of statements, consistently over hours and hours, as did everyone else without exception, as a way to trick us into believing he was incompetent and didn't know what he was doing. Or he is an overrated hack who put stuff like clone soldiers and robot enemies and child Jedi and into the films because they were PG friendly business decisions and he thought it would be neat to be able to put his kids and his friends' kids into his films without any consideration of the Deep Ethical Quandaries of these things. Your belief that the former is more likely is a result of your bafflingly cultish fanboyism and not any evidence or logic we can infer. So one time someone tried to convince me that because of a bunch of reports of unidentified objects by government pilots in the 40s and 50s, it stood to reason that alien spacecraft have been buzzing US airspace for decades. My rejoinder was that even if all those airmen really did see flying saucers rather than random atmospheric phenomena, it was still more parsimonious to assume that what those guys saw was the personal flying machine of some reclusive mad scientist, not an actual alien ship, because as bizarre the Red Skull existing irl is it still requires us to contort ourselves less and make fewer wild assumptions than alien visitors do. Obviously, the actual answer is that there were no UFOs, alien or otherwise. Similarly, just as it's more likely that George Lucas has machinated you than that he made 900 separate mistakes all of which were thematically consistent with each other, it's even more likely that all the quotes you've dug up don't actually contradict this thread's central thesis in the first place. Like, okay, he wanted to make a film with clear delineations of good guys and bad guys. Watching the prequels, are you at any point confused who the good guys are? I'm not - it's obviously the Jedi. The good guys are some combination of complacent and corrupt, and their downfall proceeds from those flaws they have, but it's not actually the case that there's any confusion as to who the protagonists are or whether it'd be preferable for Yoda rather than Palpatine to win. I notice you let the other thread of our conversation slip away. What about my thought experiment? If you looked up all the commentary and found Lucas saying the exact opposite of what he does in Earth-1, but the movies don't change at all, does that change the content of the movies?
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 00:19
|
|
|
Jewmanji posted:Can someone fill me in on the central mystery of AOTC- who commissioned the creation of the clone army? The audience does though as Darth Sidious greets Count Dooku as his Sith name: Darth Tyrannus.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 01:02
|
|
|
porfiria posted:I don't think what Lott Dod thinks of General Grevious is very significant to the story, which is what makes the quote weird. The fact that the Separatists have semi-legitimate grievances is very important to the story. Instead of resolving the issues that led to all this, the Republic just kills everyone who opposes them. SuperMechagodzilla fucked around with this message at 02:14 on Apr 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 01:45
|
|
|
The Repiblic did nothing wrong.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 02:12
|
|
|
EX-GAIJIN AT LAST posted:Have you answered yet the question of, if the movies were totally identical but George Lucas said he intended everything to be morally complex with the Republic and Jedi tragically corrupt and inept, would you then think they are good movies? No, absolutely not. Even if it were intended as a deconstruction of heroic myth or whatever, the acting, characterization, dialogue and cinematography would remain unconscionably terrible and that's without getting into the question of whether we should really be yelling "give us hell, Quimby"
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 02:14
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:So one time someone tried to convince me that because of a bunch of reports of unidentified objects by government pilots in the 40s and 50s, it stood to reason that alien spacecraft have been buzzing US airspace for decades. I honestly can not recall the opening to a multi-paragraph post that made me immediately dismiss the remainder as valueless and not worth reading, that's a triumph
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 02:18
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:The sad thing is that Tezzor sometimes comes very close to being right and then veers sharply into the nearest wall. These Dark Undercurrents Of Naboo Society are you bringing your weird goon cynicism about everything to bear, and were not anything intended by the author. I can't imagine the kind of disregard for sanity required to take every single stupid idea that falls apart and is completely irrational and loving weird the second you look at it critically in the prequels, and then declare that Actually, this was a genius decision to critically deconstruct blah blah blah. It sounds absolutely exhausting
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 02:25
|
|
|
Tezzor posted:No, absolutely not. Even if it were intended as a deconstruction of heroic myth or whatever, the acting, characterization, dialogue and cinematography would remain unconscionably terrible and that's without getting into the question of whether we should really be yelling "give us hell, Quimby" Wait maybe the lovely filmmaking is Actually a satirical deconstruction of how people think movies should be put together with a basic degree of competence. I don't know; there is nothing to support this, but if we Read these movies really hard,
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 02:27
|
|
|
This always gets ignored: how is Windu's decision to kill palpatine the wrong way to do it, while Vader's decision the right way to do it? In both instances they are acting to save what they cherish (the Republic, Luke), they both choose to violently kill him, and they both are aware that an unarmed Palpatine is not a disarmed palpatine. Obviously I get the intent here, but both are given immensely contradictory statements by the respective trilogies.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 02:47
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:This always gets ignored: how is Windu's decision to kill palpatine the wrong way to do it, while Vader's decision the right way to do it? In both instances they are acting to save what they cherish (the Republic, Luke), they both choose to violently kill him, and they both are aware that an unarmed Palpatine is not a disarmed palpatine. Yes these are identical scenes. Everything about them is the same.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 02:49
|
|
|
SHISHKABOB posted:Yes these are identical scenes. Everything about them is the same. oh ok thanks
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 02:52
|
|
|
In ROTS Palpatine is cowering and whimpering, in ROTJ he's gleefully torturing Luke to death. Like even if you think the Zodiac killer should be put to death, isn't there a difference between a cop killing him in his home as he crawls away vs killing him as he's actively murdering someone?
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 02:53
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:This always gets ignored: how is Windu's decision to kill palpatine the wrong way to do it, while Vader's decision the right way to do it? In both instances they are acting to save what they cherish (the Republic, Luke), they both choose to violently kill him, and they both are aware that an unarmed Palpatine is not a disarmed palpatine. In both scenes, Anakin/Vader is actually in the same position - the observer, watching an enemy be defeated. Once he transitions from observer to actor, the aggressive party is banished into the abyss, and the victim seemingly regains their vitality. The difference is that in Ep 3 the Jedi is an aggressor towards the Sith, while in Ep 6 the reverse is true.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 02:54
|
|
|
Prolonged Priapism posted:In ROTS Palpatine is cowering and whimpering, in ROTJ he's gleefully torturing Luke to death? He's putting on a show for Anakin. The first 5 seconds after Windu stops he is fully capable of shotgunning Windu out the window. There is no nonviolent way to stop Palpatine here without killing him. computer parts posted:In both scenes, Anakin/Vader is actually in the same position - the observer, watching an enemy be defeated. Once he transitions from observer to actor, the aggressive party is banished into the abyss, and the victim seemingly regains their vitality. The difference is that in Ep 3 the Jedi is an aggressor towards the Sith, while in Ep 6 the reverse is true. Sure, I fully understand Vader/Anakin's mindset. I'm talking about the overall film and readings within this thread. Neither are particularly virtuous or villainous attempts to kill Palpatine, yet one is read as an example of Jedi succumbing to the dark side, and the other is read as a saviour bringing balance to the force.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 02:57
|
|
|
Tezzor posted:I honestly can not recall the opening to a multi-paragraph post that made me immediately dismiss the remainder as valueless and not worth reading, that's a triumph You loving coward. You sniveling baby. Face me!
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 02:59
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:He's putting on a show for Anakin. The first 5 seconds after Windu stops he is fully capable of shotgunning Windu out the window. There is no nonviolent way to stop Palpatine here without killing him. He's really not though, what was he going to do if anakin hadn't saved him? shoot more lightning? Anikin says that palpy deserves a fair trial this mean that there must be another way windu agrees and even suggested the same thing but he lets his fear control him and he goes for the killing blow . nothing in that scene suggests that Palpatine is too powerful to contain except Palpatine and mace's fear
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 03:03
|
|
|
Elfgames posted:He's really not though, what was he going to do if anakin hadn't saved him? shoot more lightning? Anikin says that palpy deserves a fair trial this mean that there must be another way windu agrees and even suggested the same thing but he lets his fear control him and he goes for the killing blow . nothing in that scene suggests that Palpatine is too powerful to contain except Palpatine and mace's fear It's easy to say that a better solution -has to- exist. Name a scenario where Windu could have contained Palpatine and brought him to court, starting when he beats Palpatine's lightning.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 03:08
|
|
|
I do not know but all three of the characters on screen belive it to be possible, why should i doubt them?
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 03:11
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:He's putting on a show for Anakin. The first 5 seconds after Windu stops he is fully capable of shotgunning Windu out the window. There is no nonviolent way to stop Palpatine here without killing him. I see what you're saying, but reading the scene that way chucks a ton of meaning out the window (lol). First of all, even if it were true, Mace seems to believe that Palpaine actually is physically helpless and can (and should) be executed easily in that moment - he's having a conversation about how the courts are corrupt, not about how Palpatine could recharge his Force Meter at any moment and use Death Lightning. So if we turn this in to a more traditional movie, Mace has Palpatine at gunpoint. You're saying Palpatine has a gun behind his back Mace doesn't know about. It's still wrong for Mace to smoke him while he's cowering on the ground. Second, Palpatine being able to kill Mace at any time (gun behind his back) removes Anakin's agency in the scene. Mace is toast either way. It makes Anakins decision vastly less meaningful. It also makes Palpatine less compelling - in my interpretation (that he was actually helpless at that moment) he saves himself by having done just barely enough to pollute Anakin's mind - the doubts he'd been sowing save him just as his physical power fails him. The whole scene is way more interesting and tense if it really is three people squaring off at the limits of their strength, morals, and powers of persuasion. And not just an inevitable puppet show in the Create Darth Vader Plot.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 03:15
|
|
|
Elfgames posted:I do not know but all three of the characters on screen belive it to be possible, why should i doubt them? Because they are not omniscient nor omnipotent?
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 03:19
|
|
|
Prolonged Priapism posted:I see what you're saying, but reading the scene that way chucks a ton of meaning out the window (lol). I'm not saying Palpatine could kill Windu at any moment, only that Palpatine is only momentarily helpless as a result of Windu's decision to execute him. While Windu has no intention if keeping Palpatine alive, there is no situation at that point where he can even do so. If the idea is to incapacitate him, then Windu is not yet at that point seeing as he immediately kills Windu once he's disarmed (hah). If the point is to stop and demand he comply, well thats kind of silly considering what we now know, and considering that they did that in the first place; we're at the "or else" part. Since you bring up traditional films, in this scenario the hero would go "I shant kill this helpless knave!", then said Helpless Knave pulls out a concealed weapon as the hero leaves, and the hero turns around and kills him (in Virtuous Noble Self Defense). Windu is incapable of doing this as a result of the scenario in question, and the end results would have been exactly the same.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 03:25
|
|
|
At that point Palpatine has already won. Windu and the Jedi should never have let it get to that point and it's far too late for anything good to happen in that room.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 03:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 22:59 |
|
|
Tezzor posted:These Dark Undercurrents Of Naboo Society are you bringing your weird goon cynicism about everything to bear, and were not anything intended by the author. I can't imagine the kind of disregard for sanity required to take every single stupid idea that falls apart and is completely irrational and loving weird the second you look at it critically in the prequels, and then declare that Actually, this was a genius decision to critically deconstruct blah blah blah. It sounds absolutely exhausting Tezzor. Tezzor. Tezzor, you wrote the post about Naboo's 'dark undercurrents'. Don't you remember? Here it is again: Tezzor posted:It's where all the galaxy's pedos go to practice their choice of lifestyle free from criticism. We see this from its Classical Grecian/Roman aesthetic, the fact that Padme entertains 8 year old Anakin's romantic advances and later enters into a sexual relationship with him, why they elect a creepy unmarried man as their Senator, and why they have teenage girls in elaborate costumes as their leaders, because the primary voting bloc is really really into being dominated by skinny teens dressed like an anime. -You said Naboo is a decadent, hedonistic society. -You said that Naboo's elected Senator is 'creepy'. -You said Padme is taking advantage of a child. -You said the Naboo people like to be dominated. -You criticized Padme's leadership. All these ideas came from you. You watched the film, collected textual evidence, and generated an interpretation all by yourself. The only dishonest thing you did was 'lol-randomly' calling the characters pedophiles instead of just, accurately, calling them rich. SuperMechagodzilla fucked around with this message at 03:37 on Apr 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 03:35
|
|