logo Sign In

Pirates of the Caribbean and the Political Correctness Craze — Page 12

Author
Time

moviefreakedmind said:

Possessed said:

Why do you find specifically Disney’s treatment of star wars so bad compared to before? We didn’t have the oot then either, so yes that’s bad but it’s not something Disney put in place. And I understand you don’t like the sequel trilogy and while I do I understand people not liking it but I don’t see how anybody could rationally say they aren’t better than the prequels. Even if they are less original than the prequels, they are way more competently made.

I can appreciate that the prequels at least came from somewhere that wasn’t a corporate board-room meeting. Rogue One being almost entirely reshot is an example of the soulless corporate meddling and the lack of any real vision. I get that the films are more competently made, but there’s nothing particularly interesting, memorable, or stylistic about the technical aspects so it doesn’t mean too much to me since I find the Disney movies at least as boring as the PT. I also think that the PT was slightly more creative than the new movies, and that means something to me.

Nope.

Author
Time

ray_afraid said:

Mrebo said:

chyron8472 said:

Mrebo said:

moviefreakedmind said:

I hate modern Disney.

I think Disney knows. As a child I got excited by the castle opening of their movies. Classic Disney was great. If Disney was still held in such regard, it would have been proud to start TFA and TLJ with its Disney castle in lieu of the necessarily omitted Fox fanfare.

Disney often makes movies that they don’t use the Disney logo for. They didn’t even use it for Who Framed Roger Rabbit? but used their Touchstone Pictures brand instead.

But if there were warm fuzzy feelings about Disney, using their logo to replace the Fox fanfare would have been perfect.

I don’t think the Disney logo sets the right mood for Star Wars.
For me, the Fox logo and fanfare are a part of the films and the Disney logo and music just doesn’t have that feel. It’s great for Peter Pan and Sleeping Beauty, but wouldn’t work for Star Wars.

Agreed.

Author
Time

DominicCobb said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Possessed said:

Why do you find specifically Disney’s treatment of star wars so bad compared to before? We didn’t have the oot then either, so yes that’s bad but it’s not something Disney put in place. And I understand you don’t like the sequel trilogy and while I do I understand people not liking it but I don’t see how anybody could rationally say they aren’t better than the prequels. Even if they are less original than the prequels, they are way more competently made.

I can appreciate that the prequels at least came from somewhere that wasn’t a corporate board-room meeting. Rogue One being almost entirely reshot is an example of the soulless corporate meddling and the lack of any real vision. I get that the films are more competently made, but there’s nothing particularly interesting, memorable, or stylistic about the technical aspects so it doesn’t mean too much to me since I find the Disney movies at least as boring as the PT. I also think that the PT was slightly more creative than the new movies, and that means something to me.

Nope.

I find the Disney movies as soulless as the prequels.

The Person in Question

Author
Time

moviefreakedmind said:

Possessed said:

Why do you find specifically Disney’s treatment of star wars so bad compared to before? We didn’t have the oot then either, so yes that’s bad but it’s not something Disney put in place. And I understand you don’t like the sequel trilogy and while I do I understand people not liking it but I don’t see how anybody could rationally say they aren’t better than the prequels. Even if they are less original than the prequels, they are way more competently made.

I can appreciate that the prequels at least came from somewhere that wasn’t a corporate board-room meeting. Rogue One being almost entirely reshot is an example of the soulless corporate meddling and the lack of any real vision. I get that the films are more competently made, but there’s nothing particularly interesting, memorable, or stylistic about the technical aspects so it doesn’t mean too much to me since I find the Disney movies at least as boring as the PT. I also think that the PT was slightly more creative than the new movies, and that means something to me.

Yep.

Army of Darkness: The Medieval Deadit | The Terminator - Color Regrade | The Wrong Trousers - Audio Preservation
SONIC RACES THROUGH THE GREEN FIELDS.
THE SUN RACES THROUGH A BLUE SKY FILLED WITH WHITE CLOUDS.
THE WAYS OF HIS HEART ARE MUCH LIKE THE SUN. SONIC RUNS AND RESTS; THE SUN RISES AND SETS.
DON’T GIVE UP ON THE SUN. DON’T MAKE THE SUN LAUGH AT YOU.

Author
Time

Frank your Majesty said:

chyron8472 said:

dahmage said:

chyron8472 said:

moviefreakedmind said:

I’m going to go on the Pirates of the Caribbean ride and scream at the animatronics like I have schizophrenia. It’s my form of protest.

Don’t forget to make a video of it. And also to film vertically.

Actually you shouldn’t film vertically. it might seem easier to hold your phone that way, but it is actually quite annoying to watch things that were filmed that way. There is a thing referred to as Vertical Video Syndrome and i fear you have it.

=p

I think you knew I was being non-serious, but answered as though I was.

I’m happy he did, because that video is great.

Oh, I see how it is! When I post the video in response to something, nobody bats an eye, but when “That’s a lotta” Dahmage posts it, it’s the best thing since Bread was a good time for me! 😉

Army of Darkness: The Medieval Deadit | The Terminator - Color Regrade | The Wrong Trousers - Audio Preservation
SONIC RACES THROUGH THE GREEN FIELDS.
THE SUN RACES THROUGH A BLUE SKY FILLED WITH WHITE CLOUDS.
THE WAYS OF HIS HEART ARE MUCH LIKE THE SUN. SONIC RUNS AND RESTS; THE SUN RISES AND SETS.
DON’T GIVE UP ON THE SUN. DON’T MAKE THE SUN LAUGH AT YOU.

Author
Time

Dek Rollins said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Possessed said:

Why do you find specifically Disney’s treatment of star wars so bad compared to before? We didn’t have the oot then either, so yes that’s bad but it’s not something Disney put in place. And I understand you don’t like the sequel trilogy and while I do I understand people not liking it but I don’t see how anybody could rationally say they aren’t better than the prequels. Even if they are less original than the prequels, they are way more competently made.

I can appreciate that the prequels at least came from somewhere that wasn’t a corporate board-room meeting. Rogue One being almost entirely reshot is an example of the soulless corporate meddling and the lack of any real vision. I get that the films are more competently made, but there’s nothing particularly interesting, memorable, or stylistic about the technical aspects so it doesn’t mean too much to me since I find the Disney movies at least as boring as the PT. I also think that the PT was slightly more creative than the new movies, and that means something to me.

Yep.

Really?

The Person in Question

Author
Time

I think he’s agreeing with you.

Author
Time

Warbler said:

Possessed said:

Why do you find specifically Disney’s treatment of star wars so bad compared to before? We didn’t have the oot then either, so yes that’s bad but it’s not something Disney put in place.

But it is something Disney has continued. They have had the rights to Star Wars for multiple years and we still don’t have a release of the oot.

I’d also like to add that at least George Lucas had psychotic creative reasons for withholding the OOT. Disney and LFL today are just being corporate assholes.

The Person in Question

Author
Time

moviefreakedmind said:

Dek Rollins said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Possessed said:

Why do you find specifically Disney’s treatment of star wars so bad compared to before? We didn’t have the oot then either, so yes that’s bad but it’s not something Disney put in place. And I understand you don’t like the sequel trilogy and while I do I understand people not liking it but I don’t see how anybody could rationally say they aren’t better than the prequels. Even if they are less original than the prequels, they are way more competently made.

I can appreciate that the prequels at least came from somewhere that wasn’t a corporate board-room meeting. Rogue One being almost entirely reshot is an example of the soulless corporate meddling and the lack of any real vision. I get that the films are more competently made, but there’s nothing particularly interesting, memorable, or stylistic about the technical aspects so it doesn’t mean too much to me since I find the Disney movies at least as boring as the PT. I also think that the PT was slightly more creative than the new movies, and that means something to me.

Yep.

Really?

Yep.

moviefreakedmind said:

Warbler said:

Possessed said:

Why do you find specifically Disney’s treatment of star wars so bad compared to before? We didn’t have the oot then either, so yes that’s bad but it’s not something Disney put in place.

But it is something Disney has continued. They have had the rights to Star Wars for multiple years and we still don’t have a release of the oot.

I’d also like to add that at least George Lucas had psychotic creative reasons for withholding the OOT. Disney and LFL today are just being corporate assholes.

Army of Darkness: The Medieval Deadit | The Terminator - Color Regrade | The Wrong Trousers - Audio Preservation
SONIC RACES THROUGH THE GREEN FIELDS.
THE SUN RACES THROUGH A BLUE SKY FILLED WITH WHITE CLOUDS.
THE WAYS OF HIS HEART ARE MUCH LIKE THE SUN. SONIC RUNS AND RESTS; THE SUN RISES AND SETS.
DON’T GIVE UP ON THE SUN. DON’T MAKE THE SUN LAUGH AT YOU.

Author
Time

moviefreakedmind said:

DominicCobb said:

No.

I am right on the OOT point.

Sorta. We haven’t been given an official explanation. The closest was speculation from an LFL employee that they are adhering to George’s wishes. You’d think the corporate asshole in them would be eager to do the double dip.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

TV’s Frink said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Possessed said:

Why do you find specifically Disney’s treatment of star wars so bad compared to before? We didn’t have the oot then either, so yes that’s bad but it’s not something Disney put in place. And I understand you don’t like the sequel trilogy and while I do I understand people not liking it but I don’t see how anybody could rationally say they aren’t better than the prequels. Even if they are less original than the prequels, they are way more competently made.

I can appreciate that the prequels at least came from somewhere that wasn’t a corporate board-room meeting. Rogue One being almost entirely reshot is an example of the soulless corporate meddling and the lack of any real vision.

I swear, some people see “Disney” anywhere on the product and just automatically assume the corporate suits made the whole thing while the actual filmmakers were locked in the janitor’s closet.

This.

I think it’s unfair to blanketly label anything remotely under the umbrella of Disney as soulless. And it overlooks a lot to give the Prequels a pass simply because their particular board room meetings had George Lucas and what amounted to a collection of yes-men.

Giving George all the artistic credit for the OT vastly overlooks the many people on staff at the time who overrode ideas of his that would have ruined the films.

TV’s Frink said:

chyron just put a big Ric pic in your sig and be done with it.

Author
Time

I didn’t give the prequels a pass. I just said they are slightly less soulless.

The Person in Question

Author
Time

moviefreakedmind said:

I didn’t give the prequels a pass. I just said they are slightly less soulless.

I would argue the opposite because their writer/directors are people who actually care about making Star Wars.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

moviefreakedmind said:

I didn’t give the prequels a pass. I just said they are slightly less soulless.

I’m not sure though how working for Disney automatically leads JJ Abrams, Gareth Edwards, Rian Johnson, or Ron Howard (among the many others involved) to create soulless works. People like a movie or they don’t.

JEDIT: And sure, I can think of two movies right now for which I loved the Director’s Cut but find the theatrical cut to be comparatively “meh.” So yes, producers do meddle and often not for the better. But the company a producer works for is not automatically a source of evil in filmmaking.

TV’s Frink said:

chyron just put a big Ric pic in your sig and be done with it.

Author
Time

chyron8472 said:

Giving George all the artistic credit for the OT vastly overlooks the many people on staff at the time who overrode ideas of his that would have ruined the films.

The OT was built out of more talented people bringing a good end product from George’s ever-changing vision for the story. The PT was built out of George’s (still ever-changing and seemingly unfinished) personal vision being controlled by himself alone because nobody else wanted to take the helm from him. Both were still built around his artistic vision, the thing that brought the OT to perfection was that everyone else added their own vision into George’s.

DominicCobb said:

moviefreakedmind said:

I didn’t give the prequels a pass. I just said they are slightly less soulless.

I would argue the opposite because their writer/directors are people who actually care about making Star Wars.

chyron8472 said:

moviefreakedmind said:

I didn’t give the prequels a pass. I just said they are slightly less soulless.

I’m not sure though how working for Disney automatically leads JJ Abrams, Gareth Edwards, Rian Johnson, or Ron Howard (among the many others involved) to create soulless works.

The Disney films are the director’s vision being made with massive amounts of input from Disney/LFL overlords who don’t care about Star Wars. They care about money. George Lucas cared about money and his personal vision of Star Wars. I also might argue that Rian Johnson doesn’t care about Star Wars, but I don’t know how much of TLJ was interference from the studio heads, and I actually don’t want to argue about that because it would amount to flinging basement cat poo. I also don’t like JJ Abrams (as a filmmaker).

Army of Darkness: The Medieval Deadit | The Terminator - Color Regrade | The Wrong Trousers - Audio Preservation
SONIC RACES THROUGH THE GREEN FIELDS.
THE SUN RACES THROUGH A BLUE SKY FILLED WITH WHITE CLOUDS.
THE WAYS OF HIS HEART ARE MUCH LIKE THE SUN. SONIC RUNS AND RESTS; THE SUN RISES AND SETS.
DON’T GIVE UP ON THE SUN. DON’T MAKE THE SUN LAUGH AT YOU.

Author
Time

I sorta get that about TFA and R1, but TLJ seemed to me to be a very personal work by Rian Johnson. I don’t know what Disney’s Shadow Filmmaking Cabal would have put in it.

.

Author
Time

I haven’t seen TLJ, but I don’t see how anyone could describe TFA or R1 as films with any kind of creative or artistic vision. I’m not even saying that as an insult to them. There are plenty of Bond movies or other films that I love and find entertaining as hell that have no real creative or artistic vision, but I don’t find the Disney SW films entertaining. And since they don’t entertain me or interest me and they don’t have heart, I can’t appreciate them as films.

The Person in Question

Author
Time

chyron8472 said:

moviefreakedmind said:

I didn’t give the prequels a pass. I just said they are slightly less soulless.

I’m not sure though how working for Disney automatically leads JJ Abrams, Gareth Edwards, Rian Johnson, or Ron Howard (among the many others involved) to create soulless works. People like a movie or they don’t.

It’s not just Disney. I watched the first two movies and found them soulless. There are films made under the Disney banner that have soul, but those are primarily products that aren’t poised to gross 2 billion dollars, so the corporate overlords don’t take as much interest in meddling with them.

The Person in Question

Author
Time

Dek Rollins said:

chyron8472 said:

Giving George all the artistic credit for the OT vastly overlooks the many people on staff at the time who overrode ideas of his that would have ruined the films.

The OT was built out of more talented people bringing a good end product from George’s ever-changing vision for the story. The PT was built out of George’s (still ever-changing and seemingly unfinished) personal vision being controlled by himself alone because nobody else wanted to take the helm from him. Both were still built around his artistic vision, the thing that brought the OT to perfection was that everyone else added their own vision into George’s.

DominicCobb said:

moviefreakedmind said:

I didn’t give the prequels a pass. I just said they are slightly less soulless.

I would argue the opposite because their writer/directors are people who actually care about making Star Wars.

chyron8472 said:

moviefreakedmind said:

I didn’t give the prequels a pass. I just said they are slightly less soulless.

I’m not sure though how working for Disney automatically leads JJ Abrams, Gareth Edwards, Rian Johnson, or Ron Howard (among the many others involved) to create soulless works.

The Disney films are the director’s vision being made with massive amounts of input from Disney/LFL overlords who don’t care about Star Wars. They care about money. George Lucas cared about money and his personal vision of Star Wars. I also might argue that Rian Johnson doesn’t care about Star Wars, but I don’t know how much of TLJ was interference from the studio heads, and I actually don’t want to argue about that because it would amount to flinging basement cat poo. I also don’t like JJ Abrams (as a filmmaker).

You don’t have to tell me you don’t know much, that’s plainly evident. Don’t talk about shit you know nothing about.