Originally posted by: Tiptup
Remember that when discussing artistic points of view, IMPORTANCE is the key! You need to tell us what is important to you. For instance, I would like to know what the PRIMARY focus of Revenge of the Sith actually is from your point of view. From my perspective, the film teaches hypocritical morals, its story is messy and disjointed, and way too long. I do not enjoy the film precisely because I find little coherent value in it.
To me it's important to enjoy these movies as much as possible. The focus of Revenge of the Sith to me is the manifestation of the grey area involved with good and evil. The morals of ROTS are very similar to the morals presented across the entire saga. That love is better than hate, and compassion is better than greed, but also that life doesn't always make the right choices very clear.Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
It's just that to me some things like assuming Luke would be as strong and as powerful as fully trained Jedi in their prime seems so illogical, it makes me really wonder why other things that seem fairly easy to roll along with seem to make no logical sense to you. Alright, I’ll talk about force jumps again . . . .
In my mind, I totally agree with you that Luke wouldn’t be as skilled with the force as a padawan that has trained to use the force his entire life, like Obi-Wan had. I just thought that Luke would have still been fairly skilled enough that, combined with his natural affinity with the force, his jumps would have been somewhat close. Even Darth Vader was impressed with Luke.
Yet you express that it is so illogical to believe that it is extreme to have Jedi jumping twice as high all of a sudden? You don’t see how this could be odd to me? Not even a little bit? You can’t see why I’d prefer the subtle jumps of the OT?
Even as much as I love the original trilogy, even I can admit potentially problematic elements. First of all, I think it's great that you and I in particular are able to talk so civilly from entirely different points of view. I am not insulted by the way you perceive my comments, and I really don't mean to personally insult you.
About force jumps, I still don't see the problem. It's not like Luke's jumps weren't fantastic, and to me, most of the Jedi jumps in the prequels aren't all that much higher than Luke's. I understand -that- you prefer more subtle jumps. I don't quite understand why. To me, the Jedi in their prime have always been this mysterious thing I wished I could see, and now the prequels have delivered that to me. I never even had a moment where I said: "whoah, those Jedi are too powerful". I guess that's because I personally hadn't decided on my own how they would be. I -wondered- how it would be, but I never once took any of my assumptions for "the way it really was". I took the prequels at face value and just accepted it right out of the gate as "how it really was".
Obviously to you this is a fairly large deal, and one you have a hard time rolling along with. I don't mean to suggest you are wrong. It's just your problems with this never even occurred to me until I heard you talk about it here. To me this all follows a consistent logic across the board, because Luke isn't as powerful. When Vader says "impressive" it's because Luke is more advanced than Vader would have suspected, not compared to other Jedi in their prime.
It would be best, if you actually stated why certain problems with the PT aren’t important to you from your perspective, instead of wasting the majority of your time pretending those problems don’t even exist.
Similarly to the way you pretend the logical problems with the concept of a light saber don't exist?Originally posted by: TiptupIt's just that to me some things like assuming Luke would be as strong and as powerful as fully trained Jedi in their prime seems so illogical, it makes me really wonder why other things that seem fairly easy to roll along with seem to make no logical sense to you. Alright, I’ll talk about force jumps again . . . .
In my mind, I totally agree with you that Luke wouldn’t be as skilled with the force as a padawan that has trained to use the force his entire life, like Obi-Wan had. I just thought that Luke would have still been fairly skilled enough that, combined with his natural affinity with the force, his jumps would have been somewhat close. Even Darth Vader was impressed with Luke.
Yet you express that it is so illogical to believe that it is extreme to have Jedi jumping twice as high all of a sudden? You don’t see how this could be odd to me? Not even a little bit? You can’t see why I’d prefer the subtle jumps of the OT?
Even as much as I love the original trilogy, even I can admit potentially problematic elements. First of all, I think it's great that you and I in particular are able to talk so civilly from entirely different points of view. I am not insulted by the way you perceive my comments, and I really don't mean to personally insult you.
About force jumps, I still don't see the problem. It's not like Luke's jumps weren't fantastic, and to me, most of the Jedi jumps in the prequels aren't all that much higher than Luke's. I understand -that- you prefer more subtle jumps. I don't quite understand why. To me, the Jedi in their prime have always been this mysterious thing I wished I could see, and now the prequels have delivered that to me. I never even had a moment where I said: "whoah, those Jedi are too powerful". I guess that's because I personally hadn't decided on my own how they would be. I -wondered- how it would be, but I never once took any of my assumptions for "the way it really was". I took the prequels at face value and just accepted it right out of the gate as "how it really was".
Obviously to you this is a fairly large deal, and one you have a hard time rolling along with. I don't mean to suggest you are wrong. It's just your problems with this never even occurred to me until I heard you talk about it here. To me this all follows a consistent logic across the board, because Luke isn't as powerful. When Vader says "impressive" it's because Luke is more advanced than Vader would have suspected, not compared to other Jedi in their prime.
Originally posted by: Tiptup
Well, to be honest, you and other prequel trilogy defenders don’t spend a lot of time talking about the positive elements of the films in terms of the perspective that makes them positive to you. Most of the time, you simply spend your time making endless excuses as to why a certain negative element shouldn’t be a problem for another person. Or, even worse, you try to attack the Original Trilogy equally by making unfair comparisons. And, when you rarely do talk about something positive, you usually state that you enjoy something that someone else finds un-enjoyable, and that simply re-ignites the cycle.
I'm the one making "unfair" comparisons? I'm just illustrating what I find to be a huge double standard here.Originally posted by: TiptupOriginally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
I mean you went ahead and assume there must be -some- reason that a light saber stops at the end without something there to reflect or absorb it. Even going so far as to suspect it had something to do with the "Force".
No offense, but your stated assumptions about what I supposedly assume are hardly accurate at all. In fact, they are a little insulting to me. A word of advice: It’s not good to invent straw-man arguments, from whole cloth, in your head, and then attribute them to people for no reason whatsoever. That’s a good way to make enemies if anything. When you debate people, you should try to give them the benefit of the doubt.
Nowhere did I ever “assume” that light saber’s having nothing to absorb or reflect beams of energy with. And nowhere did I tie the “stops-at-the-end” factor to the Force as a logical explanation in my mind. How on earth can you accuse me of those two, rather stupid assumptions? Considering how I have said nothing of the kind, that makes me a bit angry. No offense but you aren't exactly the most difficult person to make angry. Here is what I was keying in on that you had said in response to me explaining that light sabers don't make logical sense, because lasers wouldn't just stop at one end like that without something to reflect or absorb the energy.
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
But I think it's unfortunate that so many feel as you do, and it breaks my heart to know that no matter how much I try to explain my enjoyment to many of you, it won't help at all.
I mean you went ahead and assume there must be -some- reason that a light saber stops at the end without something there to reflect or absorb it. Even going so far as to suspect it had something to do with the "Force".
No offense, but your stated assumptions about what I supposedly assume are hardly accurate at all. In fact, they are a little insulting to me. A word of advice: It’s not good to invent straw-man arguments, from whole cloth, in your head, and then attribute them to people for no reason whatsoever. That’s a good way to make enemies if anything. When you debate people, you should try to give them the benefit of the doubt.
Nowhere did I ever “assume” that light saber’s having nothing to absorb or reflect beams of energy with. And nowhere did I tie the “stops-at-the-end” factor to the Force as a logical explanation in my mind. How on earth can you accuse me of those two, rather stupid assumptions? Considering how I have said nothing of the kind, that makes me a bit angry. No offense but you aren't exactly the most difficult person to make angry. Here is what I was keying in on that you had said in response to me explaining that light sabers don't make logical sense, because lasers wouldn't just stop at one end like that without something to reflect or absorb the energy.
Originally posted by: Tiptup
Nonsense. Light sabers were always presented in a very logically beautiful way in the films. They were mysterious and magical weapons that somehow needed the force to work and, unlike what you claim, they were clearly different from the laser blasters in the film (please don’t make flippant points). All in all, light sabers are a very simple and acceptable subject from a logical standpoint, and very enjoyable from a logical standpoint as well.
Now, if we were to have logically delved deeper into how light sabers supposedly worked in the films themselves and talked about plasma and shit like that, sure that might well have been an unsuccessful addition, artistically speaking. There’s no way for us to know though, since the films never went that route. You think it's nonsense to question the logical veracity of a light saber, I think it's nonsense to question the logical veracity of Jedi that can jump twice as high as Luke.
I see how it could seem that way to you, but you’d be wrong. The logical hurdles I have with the PT and the “saga” are the internally contradicting or discordant concepts. If a concept that is expressed in a film contradicts other concepts expressed in that same film, then you’re damn right that I will consider that to be a logical hurdle and not accept it easily. If a film is internally hypocritical with emotions or motivations then I will also consider that to be a logical flaw. The original trilogy had very little of this compared to the prequels or the “PT+OTSE” perspective. The prequel trilogy is far less perfect from my point of view.
Quite honestly, it seems to me that you aren't having trouble with the way concepts are expressed, but with what you assume beyond what is expressed. Jedi jumping twice as high as Luke isn't a contradiction, because Luke is Luke, and the prequel era Jedi are prequel era Jedi. The only thing it's really "contradicting" is your personal assumptions based on what was presented that Jedi in their prime shouldn't be able to jump "that" high, which in and of itself is contradicting what has been presented in the movies (if you count the prequels).Originally posted by: TiptupNonsense. Light sabers were always presented in a very logically beautiful way in the films. They were mysterious and magical weapons that somehow needed the force to work and, unlike what you claim, they were clearly different from the laser blasters in the film (please don’t make flippant points). All in all, light sabers are a very simple and acceptable subject from a logical standpoint, and very enjoyable from a logical standpoint as well.
Now, if we were to have logically delved deeper into how light sabers supposedly worked in the films themselves and talked about plasma and shit like that, sure that might well have been an unsuccessful addition, artistically speaking. There’s no way for us to know though, since the films never went that route. You think it's nonsense to question the logical veracity of a light saber, I think it's nonsense to question the logical veracity of Jedi that can jump twice as high as Luke.
Originally posted by: Tiptup
And if it is really so interesting for you to know what I actually assumed when watching Star Wars, then I’ll tell you: As a child, when I first saw the movies, I believed that light saber beams contained energy in some form. Like “light” or fire. I also believed that the force had something to do with how they worked, but that had nothing to do with reflection. I’m not some idiot who assumes that I “know” how a piece of technology works within a freakin’ science fiction fantasy story. What is the point to making assumptions about something that cannot, by definition, be understood in modern terms and is ultimately not even real? There -is- no point. But I don't think there's a point in making assumptions about how high Jedi can jump either. It's not like we have Jedi running around here on Earth, and it's not like Luke's jump wasn't also in defiance of how high people can jump here on Earth. So again we have what seems to me like a huge double standard.
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
Sometimes it seems as though a lot of you had no problem effortlessly suspending your disbelief for the classic trilogy, but now it seems like you guys are expecting the prequel trilogy to be more perfect than the classic trilogy had to be.
And if it is really so interesting for you to know what I actually assumed when watching Star Wars, then I’ll tell you: As a child, when I first saw the movies, I believed that light saber beams contained energy in some form. Like “light” or fire. I also believed that the force had something to do with how they worked, but that had nothing to do with reflection. I’m not some idiot who assumes that I “know” how a piece of technology works within a freakin’ science fiction fantasy story. What is the point to making assumptions about something that cannot, by definition, be understood in modern terms and is ultimately not even real? There -is- no point. But I don't think there's a point in making assumptions about how high Jedi can jump either. It's not like we have Jedi running around here on Earth, and it's not like Luke's jump wasn't also in defiance of how high people can jump here on Earth. So again we have what seems to me like a huge double standard.
Originally posted by: Tiptup
Fucking light sabers are a piece of advanced, alien technology from a fantasy world! If you’ll forgive me, I believe it’s idiotic and stupid to absolutely “assume” that something is even being absorbed or reflected in the first place. Those ideas aren’t even stated in the film! They’re fucking, sword weapons! There was nothing presented in the first movie about light sabers that we could analyze as illogical in terms of their construction or technology. Forgive me, but I believe it's stupid to absolutely "assume" that Jedi in their prime wouldn't be able to jump as high as they ended up doing in the prequels.
Well we know Jedi have powers of telekinesis, it's not that illogical to me to assume that if they were falling, and they were concentrating hard enough on their landing, they could use that kind of telekinesis to help slow their fall before impact. In other areas where I can think of Jedi being far more fragile, they were falling from a great height while they were unconscious, which would handily explain this to me.Originally posted by: TiptupFucking light sabers are a piece of advanced, alien technology from a fantasy world! If you’ll forgive me, I believe it’s idiotic and stupid to absolutely “assume” that something is even being absorbed or reflected in the first place. Those ideas aren’t even stated in the film! They’re fucking, sword weapons! There was nothing presented in the first movie about light sabers that we could analyze as illogical in terms of their construction or technology. Forgive me, but I believe it's stupid to absolutely "assume" that Jedi in their prime wouldn't be able to jump as high as they ended up doing in the prequels.
Originally posted by: Tiptup
Do you really believe that an energy-beam-looking sword is truly impossible, Go-Mer? According to your intellect, something like that could never be invented by anyone in the universe, ever? No I don't. I accept it as something that just goes beyond our society's current understanding. At the risk of making you repeat yourself, do you really believe that Jedi in their prime wouldn't be able to jump as high as they do in the prequels?
I would suggest that you could use a lesson in fantasy.
Originally posted by: Tiptup
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
Yet whenever someone starts talking about how something doesn't make sense in the prequels, and someone like myself says, "well that's the Force", people act like it's suddenly a huge cop out.
Hmm, well, I would say that providing the force as a reason why Anakin didn’t turn into a bloody pulp after crashing into that hover-car is a bit of a cop out. Are we to assume that Jedi can somehow make themselves invincible to that degree? If so, then that’s somewhat contradictory and discordantly jarring. Jedi are depicted as being far more fragile elsewhere in the movies. Do you really believe that an energy-beam-looking sword is truly impossible, Go-Mer? According to your intellect, something like that could never be invented by anyone in the universe, ever? No I don't. I accept it as something that just goes beyond our society's current understanding. At the risk of making you repeat yourself, do you really believe that Jedi in their prime wouldn't be able to jump as high as they do in the prequels?
Originally posted by: Tiptup
Here, let’s even assume that light sabers work like a beam of light and need to be reflected back toward the hilt or absorbed at the hilt. (Those two ideas are stupid assumptions to ever be sure of, since, based upon the movies, you have no idea that reflection or absorption are even necessary for light saber technology, but let’s just assume that one of them is true for the sake of argument.) Even in that case, how can you assume that there is no reflecting or absorbing mechanism in the technology that you can’t see or understand? How? By not seeing anything there to reflect it, and knowing how lasers seem to work here on Earth, that's how I can assume that. Assumptions by their very nature rest on perception and limits of imagination, and are not dependant on facts.
I think you might need a lesson in logic, Go-Mer.
Do I now? Here, let’s even assume that light sabers work like a beam of light and need to be reflected back toward the hilt or absorbed at the hilt. (Those two ideas are stupid assumptions to ever be sure of, since, based upon the movies, you have no idea that reflection or absorption are even necessary for light saber technology, but let’s just assume that one of them is true for the sake of argument.) Even in that case, how can you assume that there is no reflecting or absorbing mechanism in the technology that you can’t see or understand? How? By not seeing anything there to reflect it, and knowing how lasers seem to work here on Earth, that's how I can assume that. Assumptions by their very nature rest on perception and limits of imagination, and are not dependant on facts.
Originally posted by: Tiptup
Light sabers are so totally cool precisely because you can accept them readily without finding contradictions. You don’t need the “Force” to accept them either. Simple, sci-fi wonder will do the trick.
Exactly, same goes for Jedi Jumping. I never actually got hung up on light sabers, I was just explaining that they are no more logical than Jedi being able to jump as high as they do. Simple "sci-fi -FANTASY- wonder" will do the trick. At least for me it does.Originally posted by: TiptupLight sabers are so totally cool precisely because you can accept them readily without finding contradictions. You don’t need the “Force” to accept them either. Simple, sci-fi wonder will do the trick.
I think you might need a lesson in logic, Go-Mer.
I would suggest that you could use a lesson in fantasy.Originally posted by: Tiptup
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
Yet whenever someone starts talking about how something doesn't make sense in the prequels, and someone like myself says, "well that's the Force", people act like it's suddenly a huge cop out.
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
Sometimes it seems as though a lot of you had no problem effortlessly suspending your disbelief for the classic trilogy, but now it seems like you guys are expecting the prequel trilogy to be more perfect than the classic trilogy had to be.
I see how it could seem that way to you, but you’d be wrong. The logical hurdles I have with the PT and the “saga” are the internally contradicting or discordant concepts. If a concept that is expressed in a film contradicts other concepts expressed in that same film, then you’re damn right that I will consider that to be a logical hurdle and not accept it easily. If a film is internally hypocritical with emotions or motivations then I will also consider that to be a logical flaw. The original trilogy had very little of this compared to the prequels or the “PT+OTSE” perspective. The prequel trilogy is far less perfect from my point of view.
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
But I think it's unfortunate that so many feel as you do, and it breaks my heart to know that no matter how much I try to explain my enjoyment to many of you, it won't help at all.
Well, to be honest, you and other prequel trilogy defenders don’t spend a lot of time talking about the positive elements of the films in terms of the perspective that makes them positive to you. Most of the time, you simply spend your time making endless excuses as to why a certain negative element shouldn’t be a problem for another person. Or, even worse, you try to attack the Original Trilogy equally by making unfair comparisons. And, when you rarely do talk about something positive, you usually state that you enjoy something that someone else finds un-enjoyable, and that simply re-ignites the cycle.
It would be best, if you actually stated why certain problems with the PT aren’t important to you from your perspective, instead of wasting the majority of your time pretending those problems don’t even exist.
Remember that when discussing artistic points of view, IMPORTANCE is the key! You need to tell us what is important to you. For instance, I would like to know what the PRIMARY focus of Revenge of the Sith actually is from your point of view. From my perspective, the film teaches hypocritical morals, its story is messy and disjointed, and way too long. I do not enjoy the film precisely because I find little coherent value in it.
On the one hand, saving Padme and Shmi are noble, compassionate things. Anakin strives to obtain the power to control these things, and is then consumed by the desire to control the plight of the entire galaxy, so he "can make things the way he wants them to be", but as Padme asks, "at what cost"?
It's an examination of what's "right" for an individual and at what point that becomes less important than what's "right" for the greater good.
I really don't see why you would say it's incoherent.