|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2016 02:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 23:38 |
|
|
People are going to think it's something to do with Vogue.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2016 02:28
|
|
|
The idea of corporate established canon is dumb and regressive because it dismisses the true canon which included Apocalypse Now, American Graffiti, and Indiana Jones and the Raiders of the Lost Ark.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2016 03:07
|
|
|
Uncle Wemus posted:What are the tenets of nerdism Immersion into (what are perceived as) teleologically-constructed franchise universes that disclose themselves through cycles of hype and the temporary satisfaction thereof. Maintenance of a perpetual state of frustrated desire, sustained by fantasies of enjoyment's theft by shadowy entities. Effective worship of corporations as living gods, via social media as prayer. Elimination of aversive experience from simulations.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2016 05:20
|
|
|
Danger posted:The idea of corporate established canon is dumb and regressive because it dismisses the true canon which included Apocalypse Now, American Graffiti, and Indiana Jones and the Raiders of the Lost Ark. Even Lucas himself said Yoda's parents are Kermit the Frog and Miss Piggy. Muppets and Star Wars: CANON.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2016 06:32
|
|
|
I am amused that the people who are being most dismissive of the inclusion of a character from The Clone Wars as useless and unnecessary 'canon wankery' that adds nothing to the story, are the same people who vehemently defend the prequels, which prominently and unnecessarily included such incredibly vital and plot-required characters as C-3PO, Boba Fett, and Chewbacca.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2016 06:52
|
|
|
HotCanadianChick posted:I am amused that the people who are being most dismissive of the inclusion of a character from The Clone Wars as useless and unnecessary 'canon wankery' that adds nothing to the story, are the same people who vehemently defend the prequels, which prominently and unnecessarily included such incredibly vital and plot-required characters as C-3PO, Boba Fett, and Chewbacca. I"m not being dismissive of it. Also, C-3PO at least is absolutely a required character in a mainline Star Wars movie. The idea that the droids should be in every episode and are the glue which holds the series together was something that was established long, long before the prequels were a twinkle in George Lucas's eye.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2016 07:21
|
|
|
HotCanadianChick posted:I am amused that the people who are being most dismissive of the inclusion of a character from The Clone Wars as useless and unnecessary 'canon wankery' that adds nothing to the story, are the same people who vehemently defend the prequels, which prominently and unnecessarily included such incredibly vital and plot-required characters as C-3PO, Boba Fett, and Chewbacca. Including a minor character from a cartoon is fanservice for nerds who want to be validated by a corporation. You won't need to watch the cartoon, which shows how pointless the bit of continuity is. You need to watch the six Star Wars movies to fully understand the whole story (minua TFA). Thus the continuity is meaningful. BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 07:38 on Jun 23, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2016 07:35
|
|
|
I've seen every Star Wars movie, including the Clone Wars movie, and have seen every episode of the Clone Wars TV show and Rebels TV show. My body is ready for Rogue One. Hooray Star Wars.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2016 07:41
|
|
|
Greatness comes before cannon. It doesn't matter if something is cannon it matters if something is great. If it's cannon it's just a bonus. Vader Down is dope as gently caress and the fact that it's "real" is pretty cool. But that's it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2016 08:02
|
|
|
rear end Catchcum posted:Greatness comes before cannon. It doesn't matter if something is cannon it matters if something is great. If it's cannon it's just a bonus. Vader Down is dope as gently caress and the fact that it's "real" is pretty cool. But that's it. I don't think any of the films are large projectile weapons.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2016 10:25
|
|
|
Star Wars cannon:
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2016 10:34
|
|
|
Neo Rasa posted:Even Lucas himself said Yoda's parents are Kermit the Frog and Miss Piggy. Muppets and Star Wars: CANON. B-but it takes place a long time ago! quote:You need to watch the six Star Wars movies to fully understand the whole story (minua TFA). Thus the continuity is meaningful. You didn't need to watch the prequels to understand 4, 5 or 6. They work on their own. Similarly you don't need to watch 4, 5, and 6 for 1, 2, and 3.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2016 13:20
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:Including a minor character from a cartoon is fanservice for nerds who want to be validated by a corporation. You won't need to watch the cartoon, which shows how pointless the bit of continuity is. So what, exactly, did Chewbacca add to the story of ep III? How did it make the film more meaningful or improve the story, other than being fanservice?
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2016 13:44
|
|
|
What is fanservice.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2016 13:54
|
|
|
RBA Starblade posted:You didn't need to watch the prequels to understand 4, 5 or 6. They work on their own. Similarly you don't need to watch 4, 5, and 6 for 1, 2, and 3. All the movies work on their own. Doesn't mean you're getting the complete story. HotCanadianChick posted:So what, exactly, did Chewbacca add to the story of ep III? How did it make the film more meaningful or improve the story, other than being fanservice? Well, it actually gave Chewbacca some dimensionality to his character besides "comedy relief walking carpet who just follows Han around everywhere." He was a respected military leader among his people before the Empire rose to power, and it was his people's alignment with the Jedi that ultimately forced him into a life on the fringes as a two-bit smuggler's lieutenant. It gives some interesting context for a lot of his actions and behavior in the OT.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2016 13:56
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:Including a minor character from a cartoon is fanservice for nerds who want to be validated by a corporation. You won't need to watch the cartoon, which shows how pointless the bit of continuity is. We can consider the Falcon to be a character much like how Star Trek fans consider the Enterprise. What did its cameo add to Revenge of the Sith? Can you give me a detailed write up of how juxtaposing it against whatever was going on in that scene enhanced the story and totally wasn't fanservice?
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2016 14:01
|
|
|
euphronius posted:What is fanservice. Nothing that's yet been talked about on this page, as far as I can tell. Now, this is fan service:  *Movie grinds to a screeching halt as Finn stares intently for a few seconds at a blatant, pandering callback to A New Hope which serves no real story benefit or purpose and obviously exists only to stimulate fans' nostalgia receptors* e: korusan posted:We can consider the Falcon to be a character much like how Star Trek fans consider the Enterprise. I disagree with BravestOfTheLamps's certainty that Saw Gerrera's presence is just going to be fanservice, but uh, this was the extent of the Falcon's cameo in Episode III:  Fair enough to call it fan service, but it doesn't exactly intrude on the movie in any way. You might not even know it was there unless someone paused the movie and pointed it out to you. It really is just a fun little "easter egg", and a good example of how those sorts of things can be tastefully done--in contrast to the pointless, in-your-face fan service scenes in TFA which almost audibly beg for the audience's recognition and approval.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2016 14:15
|
|
|
Cnut the Great posted:Nothing that's yet been talked about on this page, as far as I can tell. Wasn't Han monologuing at the time? I dunno, I like the little callbacks that flesh out the falcon.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2016 15:19
|
|
|
Cnut the Great posted:Star Wars cannon: What's the point of having 2 to 3 cannons mounted on a single pivot
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2016 15:21
|
|
|
Neo Rasa posted:Even Lucas himself said Yoda's parents are Kermit the Frog and Miss Piggy. Muppets and Star Wars: CANON. Luke Skywalker: Pardon me, sir, can you help me? I'm lost. Yoda: Have you tried Hare Krisna?
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2016 15:23
|
|
|
Are we going to define fanservice or just us it as a slur for something we don't like.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2016 15:29
|
|
|
euphronius posted:Are we going to define fanservice or just us it as a slur for something we don't like. Fan service is something that's included only because it gives fans a feeling of familiarity, which they like. I don't think fanservice is always bad, but by definition it is always unnecessary.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2016 15:49
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:Including a minor character from a cartoon is fanservice for nerds who want to be validated by a corporation. You won't need to watch the cartoon, which shows how pointless the bit of continuity is. I can't believe a Star Wars character is going to appear in Star Wars
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2016 16:52
|
|
|
turtlecrunch posted:What's the point of having 2 to 3 cannons mounted on a single pivot You do two to three times as much damage to something you're shooting at?
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2016 18:07
|
|
|
If you really wanted to distinguish between "fanservice" and whatever you'd call the good use of returning elements, you would probably want to look at Osamu Tezuka's "star system" and Leiji Matsumoto's related approach of using identical character designs in different stories. Tezuka primarily used this as a shorthand for character personalities- a Hamegg face or an Ochanomizu face tells you something about the character. Contrastingly, Matsumoto more often uses the same character with the design- it actually is Captain Harlock or Queen Emeraldas popping up in Galaxy Express 999. So does the dividing line run directly between these two instrumental uses of the same phenomenon?
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2016 18:10
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:Fan service is something that's included only because it gives fans a feeling of familiarity, which they like. I don't think fanservice is always bad, but by definition it is always unnecessary. How is this different from the genre rules that Star Wars has always existed in and predate internet memes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2016 18:27
|
|
|
euphronius posted:How is this different from the genre rules that Star Wars has always existed in and predate internet memes. Fanservice is pornography. It's fine, even exciting if it's your thing but it's not interesting. Star Wars is good because it uses memes to achieve bigger things.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2016 18:38
|
|
|
It's an attempt to attach a "bad" word to Things I Dont Like, to make ones disdain seem more legitimate. Similar to how interest-catching headlines are now "clickbait" (which itself is a reduction from Sensationalist Journalism) Star Wars is full of fanservice and pointless cameos. They are generally fun if you like that character. There is nothing wrong with liking a particular character. It's weird to use Artist and Corporate in an interchangeable fashion depending on whether you like the aspect or not.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2016 18:41
|
|
|
porfiria posted:Fanservice is pornography. But if Star Wars is for babies then that means oh no
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2016 18:43
|
|
|
euphronius posted:How is this different from the genre rules that Star Wars has always existed in and predate internet memes. Its not different really, and the idea of fanservice certainly predates internet memes. Star Wars has always had lots of fanservice in it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2016 18:53
|
|
|
homullus posted:You do two to three times as much damage to something you're shooting at? Why not just make one bigger cannon
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2016 19:19
|
|
|
turtlecrunch posted:Why not just make one bigger cannon Maybe it's more expensive, or generates more heat or waste, to have one bigger one? Maybe having three tracking the same object makes it more likely you'd hit a smaller target you're tracking with at least one blaster? Why are you worried about the logic of the cannons in a space movie where there's sound and apparently air in space?
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2016 19:23
|
|
|
It's to establish a visual language relating these spaceships to naval warships and military aircraft, just like how the gunships in AOTC have door gunners and ball turrets, or space explosives are called "torpedoes".
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2016 19:26
|
|
|
You need multiple canons for redundancy, you don't want someone to be able to end the fight right away just by targeting one canon.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2016 19:27
|
|
|
Fan service is a silly term like Mary Sue to avoid actual criticism. It's a dressed up way to say something is bad and dismiss things without much thought. Yes, the chess board is meant to create familiarity, but that doesn't mean the familiarity doesn't have purpose. It adds a level of lived in character to the set. It makes the Millennium Falcon feel like an attic of old toys and Christmas decorations. The Force Awakens is hyper aware of four decades of little kids pretending they have lightsabers, but that in itself is not bad. We can talk about what its success or its failures are. But looking for cardinal sins of film making and storytelling is bizarre. Timeless Appeal fucked around with this message at 22:17 on Jun 23, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2016 20:12
|
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:Fan service is a silly term like Mary Sue to avoid actual criticism. It's a dressed up way to say something is bad and dismiss things without much thought. Fanservice is the validation of fans. Rather tellingly, they're not including an important original character, so the cartoon is still separate. Also, treating Star Wars as a set of toys lol
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2016 20:20
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:Fanservice is the validation of fans. quote:Also, treating Star Wars as a set of toys lol
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2016 20:27
|
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:It's like a huge motif in Force Awakens, I don't know what you're laughing at? The main character literally has Star Wars toys in the last movie. For whatever reason she's very, very adverse to the idea of TFA not being about feudalism, World War 2, or samurai helmets.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2016 20:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 23:38 |
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:Fanservice is the validation of fans. Lucas made sure to include fan favourite one-line-of-dialogue, v.important-to-plot character Boba Fett in the prequels. Because having him be the clone son of the guy they used as the template for the clone army definitely added tons of meaning to his adult appearances in empire and jedi. Oh no, wait, it didn't add anything and he could have totally been named something else in the prequels and the story wouldn't have changed one iota. And I don't know if you'd ever been in a toy store before the sale to Disney, but Lucas definitely had no problem treating Star Wars as a set of toys and raking in the dollars from it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2016 20:38
|
|