TML said:

TV's Frink said:

twooffour said:

PS:

Thora Birch in Dungeons & Dragons is 10 times more wooden than Padmé, and her lines are 10 times more cliché.

What does this have to do with anything?  Are we on originalD&D.com?  Do people care about the D&D movie (I assume this is a movie) like they do about Star Wars?

I'm pretty sure he just watched a new "Nostalgia Critic" video where he reviews that movie...

Oh gee... get a sense. This movie has been made fun of so often by so many already, and Critic wasn't even the only one to review it on tgwtg. Seriously.

Haven't seen it completely, but I've seen me some parts and scenes, and I'd say I'm content with that for now. It was just one example out of many - of movies that are at least as laughable as, say, TPM, but actually probably even more so.

And yes, the fact that this isn't a DD nerd forum is the whole point - people are getting too attached and obsessed with their favorite franchise (I mean specifically those who have serious thoughts about withholding the prequels from their kids, whoever they may be), and instead of shielding their offsprings from "bad movies", for whatever reason having to do with the "art of filmmaking" or "attitudes towards and perceptions of life influences" ruined by those films, you get "shielding them from the bad Star Wars movies so their Star Wars experience isn't ruined", and "they don't acknowledge the new films as true, because they're so bad they CAN'T be real SW movies".

Suddenly, a totally legitimate, even though still highly debatable motivation, becomes laughable nerdrage that makes the supposedly adult parents saying these things look like they're 12 or something.

Yes, they "care", that's the whole point... they care far too damn much.

TheBoost said:

twooffour said:

 

That's not even the right picture, you smart alec.

If any, THAT is the approach to go with that includes "not showing the star wars prequels", NOT the "I want him to love the OT and never have heard the prequels existed, as it would've been in an ideal world". I mean, you know, good luck with that - your son has great chances of growing up to be a religious nutcase seducing millions of people all over the globe to severe their attachment to films, in promise of a final state of being where no movies exist and no movies are shown.

 Responding to that with a lame still completely detached from its caption, after having decided to respond at all (and it's your own thread, for all it matters) doesn't do anything to support your position, all it does is... making you look like a carebear!

 You're a thoroughly unlikable person, do you know that?

Yea come on now, you just didn't like how I destroyed you on that debate about the Trade Federation, is that right? Hey, no worries - you aren't SUPPOSED to like me :D

xhonzi said:

 

2. They're young kids.  There's time for the PT later, if they want.  (Your father Uncle George wanted you to have this, but your uncle father wouldn't allow it until you were old enough.)  It is my personal opinion that the awesomeness that is Star Wars is diluted through association with the PT.  Some of you younger kids that liked the PT once, and either still do or grew out of it, have no frame of reference for what I'm talking about since you don't know a Star Wars without that taint.  As Boost said over in the "missing out" thread, the biggest changes to Star Wars (and I'm paraphrasing here) aren't the changes to the individual frames and audio waves, but to the context of them.  Sure, it's not 1977 anymore, and that's part of it.  But I think the inmovie context of the Prequels is far more damaging to the experience than the extramovie context of 30+ years.

 

5. Did twooffour call me a nerd and zombie call me obsessive?  Ouch!  That really hurts when other obsessive nerds call you that!

There's a whole lot of a difference between spending some considerable free time on debating unimportant niché stuff, and actually caring so much about a bunch of movies that it starts becoming important to you what your kid thinks of them, to the point that you start worrying about the (not given at all) possibility that their perception of the "timeless classics" could be "tainted".

To me, Star Wars and the likes are just that, very good films / entertainment, among many others (or, of varying quality), and while I certainly can get involved into lighthearted nerd debates in real life, or have fun at a film evening of whatever, it plays virtually no role in my real life. I've got a 12 year old brother, and while he knows about Star Wars, and even watches CW on occasion, I couldn't care less.

I'm also a classical music fan, yet I don't care whether he listens to it, as well, or not - certainly doesn't prevent me from making fun of some cheesy pop stuff he listens to, though, but that's a whole other thing :D And mostly, I just storm out of the room. :P

Now, do those films get "tainted" by the franchise's new installation? Well, how about I say ROTJ tainted ESB? Yet somehow, that second one remains a classic, right? How about I say ESB sort of tainted SW as that "space adventure film for all ages", and now SW is forever associated with tragedy and torture?

Or how about the whole pop-culture thing, the vast amount of ridicule, parody and plot hole bashing, don't you think that someone who might've watched ANH kinda seriously and let the Stormtroopers slip past their suspension of disbelief, or narm sensors, certainly won't do so after seeing a youtube poop video of that stormtrooper making funny gestures after his bro falls down the pit?

So you're gonna shield him from parodies and jokes, as well, because then they won't experience that chilling shiver you experienced when Vader said he was Luke's father, after having seen like 5 parodies of that scenes in various other scenes? Make sure they never search for "Vader" on Youtube, because they might just bump into his pal "Chad".

But hey, Star Trek considerable "growed a beard" in its later two series - and while it could get silly at times, not even "Voyager" managed to reach the levels of ridiculous camp that the original series had, or look anywhere as dated and cheesy.

So, has the "modernization", or the added level of seriousness and space politics, "tainted" that original space adventure series with Ham Shatner, Spock and gogo-bootsies? Not as far as I know, people do take "Star Trek" in general more seriously than they would without TNG and Ds9, but the original series with all its fun stuff remains as present in the popculture machine as it gets.

So, you know, maybe your concerns are a little unjustified? So your kid won't like Star Wars because of Clone Wars? Oh JESUS NO! Maybe they'll like Blade Runner, then.

corellian77 said:

I'm curious, do you exercise this level of vigilance for all films and television shows that your son watches, or just when it comes to Star Wars?

This :D

Akwat Kbrana said:

Well Xhonzi, since everyone else is getting on your case about what an obsessive person you are and how your efforts are doomed to futility, let me just say that I for one completely agree with your approach, and that this is how I plan on raising my children as well. My son is only fourteen months old at present, but you can bet your bottom dollar that he will be raised in a PT-free environment. I suppose if he's bound and determined to watch them he could always see them at a friend's house and there's not much I could do about that, but I'm hoping that this can be preempted by educating him about the situation and persuading him that the PT is pretty stupid and not worth watching.

My rationale is probably the same as yours. It's not a matter of censoring the movies he watches (beyond what a responsible parent should do anyway) or trying to force my views down his throat; it's more a matter of wanting him to be able to appreciate the magic of Star Wars exactly how it was before the PT came along and ruined it. Personally, I wish to high heaven someone had prevented me from ever seeing the prequels, since it irreversibly alters the context within which the OT occurs. I know you can always say "Well just ignore the PT; problem solved!" but that's really easier said than done. Whereas pre-1999 there was a lot of mystery and intrigue involved whenever I watched Star Wars ("I wonder what the clone wars were like," etc.), I now have to make a conscious decision not to think about the official crappy backstory. So while it is possible to enjoy the OT while ignoring the PT, it's still not as interesting/exciting/magical as it was in the days of pre-1999 blissful ignorance. And that's the untainted Star Wars universe that I want my kids to experience.

 

Well, there's always a solution to that "watching them at a friend's house" problem, isn't there? just be like "don't go there, kid; they all say it's just party - but the things they do there... we need to talk, son".

Anyways, "ruined"? Really? I don't think so. Did Phantom Menace really ruin Empire? Did the "noooo" really ruin "your SISter"?

How about I say Star Wars ruined Empire? Because, you know, the living, breathing, relatable person in this movie that contributes so much to the fun and charm of the "bickering willtheyorwontthey" romance and goes through angst and tragedy, was basically a space princess action girl in that previous one, with a completely ludicrous hairdo at that. Do I even need to mention ROTJ? 

So yea, how about we cut away the rest of the OT and just show him Em- oh wait, that's too dark for a kid, I guess. Hey, WHY SHOW YOUR KID A MOVIE WHERE A MAIN CHARACTER GETS ELECTROCUTED AND SCREAMS THROUGH THE FUCKING DOOR???!!

I mean, dunno, maybe it's just me, but I can always throw in my Matrix DVD inside my player, and enjoy the sense of "mystery" so deliciously pervading the first 40 minutes of that film - without having it "ruined" by the somewhat more humorous, campy and mundane / video game elements of the rest of the film, or the cringe-inducing ending - and certainly not the sequels with their boring soap opera shit in Zion.

Lambert Wilson is just such a joy to watch, do I care there's some horrendously acted angry commander type on the other side of the planet, at that very moment? Even Smith was somewhat over-the-top and eyeroll-inducing in this movies, yet his appearence in the first film isn't "ruined" for me, as well.

The opening scene of Star Trek 09 is just so incredibly awesome (at least until they get to Kirk's mum) and epic, and contains such a capturing sense of threat, shock and havoc, I certainly couldn't care less for the sillier elements of the rest of the movie (heck, even that inane carjack scene right after) "ruining" it somehow.

Heck, the Starfleet segment was really fun and entertaining until it got cut off by that distress signal - certainly not getting the bedroom scene with the green chick "ruined" for me by Spock in the Ice Planet.

I really love the opening shot of Star Wars, and the droid chapter on Tattoine, and the Death Star was really fun - I'm not getting that "ruined" for me by "we did it", or the horribly boring dogfight at the end.

Get what I'm saying? None of that really matters that much. Who's to say your kid will have just as much difficulty to severe their attachment to shittier movies when watching the OT, as you do? Who's to say your kids aren't a savvy bunch who'll reject cheesy, silly stuff right away and might even laugh at how retartedly the stormtroopers move about in that first movie (I certainly remember my own childhood and how I hated anything that's "childish" and "dumb", to the point I couldn't stand anything that's drawn or animated for a while - an over-the-top reaction as I've long realized, but still.)

So what if they won't like the OT from the scratch (or wouldn't have), would you have grabbed your head in despair, then? Why?

I'm hoping that this can be preempted by educating him about the situation and persuading him that the PT is pretty stupid and not worth watching.

That just made me LOL. PERSUADING him??

What, really? Are you going to start lecturing your little kids on the vast plot holes, lacking characterization and insufficient exposition coupled with lazy story structure? Or will it be more like "hey, look at Anakin there... you're a kid, too, and you shouldn't be talking with that voice, because it's really ANNOYING! and look at that double-headed guy making stupid jokes during the podrace... he's STUPID, don't you see? wait, you find him funny? well, he's STUPID!!"

Or is it gonna be more like "you see, we're supposed to root for a protagonist in a movie, and it's impossible to do so if the main character goes through a battle with an attitude identical to playing a videogame, and accomplishes everything by a series of completely random accidents - where's the drama? in the first original film, Luke's kinda introduced as a good, learning amateur planet, but never really as a trained tactical genius, and so his victory and sole survival at the end of the film, despite being the least experienced of the group, comes off as unrealistic; but that's the whole point, because Star Wars is meant to be an "escapist adventure", in space, where we live out our dreams of escaping from our bleak everyday reality and going on epic adventures, and performing amazing feets, making everyone else around draw their jaws, without also imagining the hard work and experience that go into such accomplishments - so it's good; and it's not the same as in EpI, because we never dream about stumbling through life like retards and accidentally accomplishing great things - our success in life depends on luck more than we'd like to admit, and that's the whole point, we don't DREAM about being lucky, we dream about being AWESOME and just like to think away all the major difficulties that real life might and will offer; so Anakin blowing up the donut ship isn't good, it's just STUPID"?

Hey, isn't acting out a video game kinda kid's dream, too? You're sitting there in the cockpit, hit random buttons, and then you blow up the evil ship and everyone cheers at you? Except it happens in a real environment, but any feel of genuine threat would ruin it?

I mean, you know, how about, if anything, you educate your kids on CRITICAL THINKING, and viewing a movie critically, with an eye for consistency and narrative techniques? Now THAT's an education. They'll learn to think and not be passive sheep accepting anything that's dumped on the screen, and they'll feel how such a thing pays off to oneself pretty quickly - yea, I remember somewhat discussing stuff, or stupid stuff, in a movie when I was 12, too.

Not in... "experiencing the magic of Star Wars". I mean, seriously?

In your case, you're an adult, and should be able to apply critical thought with ease; if you can't think away a bunch of new movies that meddled with the orginals' continuity, and thoughts of Jar Jar Binks always creep inside your head when you watch Luke getting his hand chopped off, your thought process isn't sufficiently developed and it's something you need to work on yourself.

Akwat Kbrana said:

zombie84 said:

I'm not saying either of those things. I'm just saying, if kids want to watch something that will probably give them entertainment and fun times, it seems counter-intuitive to go to such lengths to manipulate them into not having that experience just because you didn't have it.

Rather stringent language, don't you think? How is it manipulative or excessive to educate my child about the Star Wars current state-of-affairs and explain my negative opinions of the PT to him? Just because my child "wants to watch something that will probably give [him] enjoyment and fun times", that doesn't necessitate that I go out of my way to procure specific movies and let him watch them, especially movies that I happen to dislike. For example, one of the worst films I've ever had the displeasure of seeing is Beowulf (1999) starring Christopher Lambert. If my son one day expressed a desire to watch that film, I would explain that (a) it's a very stupid, uninteresting movie, and (b) we don't own it, and (c) I'm not going to spend good money to rent a crappy movie. If he decides to watch it at a friend's house then I'm not going to do anything to stop him, but he'd be doing it with the knowledge that his dad thinks it's a crummy movie, so he's only got himself to blame if he ends up hating it. Same scenario applies to the PT...how exactly is that "manipulative"?

How it's "manipulative"? How about when you said you'd like to PERSUADE your kid into how stupid the prequels were?

Next, you proceed to express the sentiment that you can't be bothered to buy a movie FOR YOU KID, if YOU happen to dislike it, or find it "uninteresting"... Really? Hey, isn't that the whole point of buying toys, nintendos or whatever else FOR YOUR KIDS, that it's something YOUR KIDS are interested in and will spend time on, whether you yourself find it interesting or not?

Are we suppose to take from that that you aren't going to buy your son toy cars unless you enjoy playing with them, too?

Aside from that, the "good money" needed to buy an older movie is like 7 bucks, and the entire SW series is on Youtube, anyway - so is it really financial considerations that bother you about this?

but he'd be doing it with the knowledge that his dad thinks it's a crummy movie, so he's only got himself to blame if he ends up hating it.

I just crapped my pants reading that... what, SERIOUSLY? Hey, what if he DOES like the movie, then he'll think "wow, my dad's kind of a dunce for not liking this awesome flick", what then? You'll probably think something like "gee, I kind of did a mistake when trying to make him put far more weight on my personal opinions about stuff than he reasonably should, didn't I? now whenever there's a difference in reaction between us two, he'll think I'm a complete dunce who shouldn't be listened to at all when it comes to movies - it's not like he should develop his own thought and not invest himself into the opinions of others, even his parents, so much, that's completely right by me as long as he just feels thankful or guilty whenever I'm proven right - but I'M NOT A DUNCE, I DON'T WANT HIM TO THINK OF ME THIS WAY!!!"

Hey, why should anyone have anyone to BLAME for seeing a bad movie, anyway? I mean, geez, now you've seen this movie (everyone else is talking about), you've learned just one bit more about film history, you have a new experience to talk about, and you can start enjoying ripping it a new one from that day on... what's so bad about that?

I've seen a fair share of bad movies myself, either because some asshat reviewer said it was cool, or because everyone was saying it was bad; I don't blame anyone for motivating me to watch any of that stuff, I can certainly go ridicule the dumbhead reviewers for being so naive or whatever, but NOW I'VE SEEN IT AND HAVE SOMETHING TO TALK ABOUT AND REFERENCE. 

Jesus H., it's just movies, not getting your teeth ripped out. Like "hey, how about I'll just ask the doctor to withhold the anesthetic during a dental procedure so I know how it feels"? "don't do son" "I will dad!" "Don't, I'm warning you." "*does* ooh.."

Leonardo said:

I know this will sound like another topic, but I feel it's related.

 

 

So, I'm no father, but if I ever become one, I want my kids to experience just one thing.

 

Something I never had.

 

 

no TV. no personal computers.

 

any thoughts on this?

Oh, sorry, I had thought you'd say "posing for pedobear pics". My bad..

So um, no, there's nothing wrong with TV or PCs as long as the time spent on them is kept at a healthy dosis. The internet is a rich education tool, as well (when you know how to use it, that is).

What kind of asinine idea is that?? You can still go out and play in the grass even when there's a computer in your room. For Christ's sake...

I see kids playing outside in the yard the whole day (in summer), do I have to conclude from this that their parents have no computer in their home, or forbid them to use it? Like, at all?

Hey, how are computers any different from board games for that matter? If a kid's just lazy and prefers sitting on his ass all day, then hey, no excuse is too bad, isn't it?

A couple of fallacies you make in your thesis:

-TV and computers only serve distraction and entertainment, and nothing useful can be gained from them.

-it's impossible to restrict their time, or, to an extent, guide their activities in those mediums, so the only solution is getting rid of them completely - along the way, sacrificing anything useful that may come out of them.

Akwat Kbrana said:

Gee, looks like twooffour wrote a couple of his trademark novel-length posts in response to something I said. I hope you weren't planning on a response; in case you didn't notice, I put you on my ignore list a long time ago due to the condescending, conceited tone of every post of yours I've ever observed. So when you address one of your posts to me, this is all I ever see of it:

Just FYI.

If anyone else (that is to say, anyone who makes a habit of sensible posting) wants to continue to discuss this issue, I stand by my earlier comments. If I have strongly negative preferences regarding a particular film, I see no reason to go out of my way to secure a copy so my child can watch it. And I certainly don't think regulating what movies I do or don't show my children constitutes manipulation.

So I take it you clicked on the "click here" button, then, because somehow you know my responses were long, right? Hey, man, I know how easy and seductive it is to click on that small button... "hey, I know this guy wrote something... and I'm one click away from finding out! is it long? or is short... ah damn, now i clicked it!"... I really know how completely useless that makes this so-called "ignore function"... don't worry, I'm not telling anybody, I've got a thin skin, too...

I mean, hey, you know, if you don't want to read something that directly relates to you and what you have to say, because it's "too long" - does everyone need to cater to your ADD syndrome? - or is in "condescending tone" - 'cause you're not reading anything that doesn't bother to show respect for you, the reader, even if it may be relevant to the issue!  - then you have no one else to blame than yourself! ;)

I mean, if you purposefully ignore what's said to you, you run the risk of ending up looking like a complete dunce when saying things like:

If I have strongly negative preferences regarding a particular film, I see no reason to go out of my way to secure a copy so my child can watch it.

Everyone else who's read the response will think "lol, what this guy said about imposing his preferences on his kids, that just got validly compared to buying toy cars LOL, and this guy just obliviously repeats the same thing again!", and you'll just be like "haha, i have no idea what this guy sed, i do not listen, lala! i didn't click the click button... i didn't, didn't click the click button..."

Whatever, man. If someone else explains to you thoroughly how what you're doing is "manipulative", remember to get all butthurt about the "condescending tone", put them on ignore, too, and then continue on saying "lol everyone's telling me it's manipulative, but i don't see how! anyone wanna tell me?"