Akwat Kbrana said:Vaderisnothayden said:C3PX said:
I am through with this discussion. Reading some of your hair brained bullcrap is really beginning to insult my intelligence, and I really don't care that much about the subject at hand to go around in circles about it anyway.
Oh I see, thinking differently from C3PX = "hair brained bullcrap." Nice to know that. So you see a different way of looking at things and thinking about things that doesn't give in and back down and go "Sorry, I realize I should be thinking like C3PX" and your reaction is to decide that means the thinking must be crap. Because your mind doesn't work like mine then my mind must be full of shit. I'm glad to find out you're so open to other ways of thinking.
Btw, it's "hare-brained", not "hair-brained".
The issue is not so much that you had a differing point of view than C3PX, but that you openly and intentionally abandoned reason and logic because of some vague "implication" that everyone is somehow supposed to pick up on. Allegedly, this is because ROTJ is meant to be a kid's story instead of an adult's story (which is borderline equivovation on your part, BTW, since you've said elsewhere, "Not true at all. ROTJ is mich more adult-friendly than TPM and a very different animal.") Well, I can't dispute your "viewer response" inference, but I personally never picked up an any "implication" that the entirety of the conflict was over after the battle of Endor...not even when I first watched it as a small child. The very idea is absurdly ludicrous to adults and children alike...thus, the "hair brained bullcrap" analysis isn't so far off.
(BTW, needling someone on the basis of a typo is pretty immature. You've made quite a few typos yourself, but I don't see anyone rubbing your nose in them. This is an internet message board; being anal about typographical precision is just ridiculous.)
You are still refusing to understand the principle that just because logic dictates something should happen in the story doesn't mean it happens, because logic doesn't rule in this story. Just because it's a kids' fairytale doesn't mean we should toss out every inch of reason, true. Neither I nor Kasdan nor Lucas tossed out every inch of reason. But where logic gets in the way of where the story needs to go then reason IS tossed out.
This is very silly. What it ends up meaning is "logic doesn't count when I don't like the implications of logical thought." It's particularly odd coming from someone who proposed the notion of three seperate clone templates in AOTC based on the fact that there were three seperate actors used to depict them, and that Boba isn't really Jango's clone since the two actors don't look 100% identical. Looks like you're pretty selective about when "where the story needs to go" counts, and when it doesn't.
Consistency, thou art a gem.
The issue is not so much that you had a differing point of view than C3PX, but that you openly and intentionally abandoned reason and logic because of some vague "implication" that everyone is somehow supposed to pick up on. Allegedly, this is because ROTJ is meant to be a kid's story instead of an adult's story (which is borderline equivovation on your part, BTW, since you've said elsewhere, "Not true at all. ROTJ is mich more adult-friendly than TPM and a very different animal.") Well, I can't dispute your "viewer response" inference, but I personally never picked up an any "implication" that the entirety of the conflict was over after the battle of Endor...not even when I first watched it as a small child. The very idea is absurdly ludicrous to adults and children alike...thus, the "hair brained bullcrap" analysis isn't so far off.
The "very idea" has worked perfectly well for many adults and children from 1983 down to this day. No I didn't abandon reason and logic. I recognized that ROTJ didn't always choose to follow reason and logic. There is a difference. It is reasonable and logical to recognize that ROTJ isn't always trying to be reasonable and logical. And if ROTJ isn't running by reason and logic then you can't infer that something must happen in the story just because reason and logic say it should. I am not abandoning reason and logic. ROTJ is.
Allegedly, this is because ROTJ is meant to be a kid's story instead of an adult's story (which is borderline equivovation on your part, BTW, since you've said elsewhere, "Not true at all. ROTJ is mich more adult-friendly than TPM and a very different animal.")
My statement that you quote was in response to a claim that ROTJ was EXCLUSIVELY for children and was the same as TPM. It is not those things, but it is a children's fairytale. It is a children's fairytale designed to work for adults who don't need everything to be logical.
(BTW, needling someone on the basis of a typo is pretty immature. You've made quite a few typos yourself, but I don't see anyone rubbing your nose in them. This is an internet message board; being anal about typographical precision is just ridiculous.)
I don't concern myself with what's mature or isn't. I tend to feel that only people who are insecure in their own maturity do that. I don't usually correct people's typos, but C3PX was reacting to my view with such an unfriendly sulk (being very dismissive towards me in the process) that I felt he deserved it.
Vaderisnothayden said:
You are still refusing to understand the principle that just because logic dictates something should happen in the story doesn't mean it happens, because logic doesn't rule in this story. Just because it's a kids' fairytale doesn't mean we should toss out every inch of reason, true. Neither I nor Kasdan nor Lucas tossed out every inch of reason. But where logic gets in the way of where the story needs to go then reason IS tossed out.
AkwatKbrana said:
This is very silly. What it ends up meaning is "logic doesn't count when I don't like the implications of logical thought." It's particularly odd coming from someone who proposed the notion of three seperate clone templates in AOTC based on the fact that there were three seperate actors used to depict them, and that Boba isn't really Jango's clone since the two actors don't look 100% identical. Looks like you're pretty selective about when "where the story needs to go" counts, and when it doesn't.
If people are going to sneer at my thinking I wish they'd do it based on understanding my thinking, rather than confidently sneering at me based on not understanding my thinking at all. Take a look at what I really said. I never said that logic doesn't count whenever I don't like its implications. Rather, I acknowledged that the writers had clearly decided that they'd ignore logic when it didn't suit them. THEM, not me. Some writers writing some stories choose to abandon logic when it doesn't suit them to follow logic. That's what Lucas and Kasdan did in ROTJ. I am prepared to recognize that. It seems you don't want to.
As for the Boba Fett situation, I was never very serious about my theories about how many clone templates there were. I was just playing around seeing if the film could be explained so that it could work with Boba Fett not being a clone of Jango. Because the Boba-is-clone-of-Jango thing doesn't work for me, because I find them too different-looking (note, not just not 100% similar-looking, "too different-looking", as in significantly different-looking -I would have accepted somebody who looked more like Morrison, they didn't have to look 100% like him). I don't NEED the film to work with Boba Fett not being a clone. I don't NEED an explanation of how things could be the way they were in the film with Boba not being a clone. I just played around a bit with ideas for the sake of experimentation. I don't need the logic of the film to work. Even though I think AOTC has more pretentions to logic than ROTJ (not that its logic necessarily works better, just its nature implies more claim to be logical) and thus I think it should be held to a higher standard of logic because it intends to be a more logical sort of film. But I'm not particularly bothered by AOTC's logical lapses. There are other things about AOTC that bother me far more. So, let's get this straight, I was never much concerned with the logic of AOTC. The only thing that seriously concerned me was this attempt to pass off this kid as a clone of Jango when he didn't look like Jango. The logical implications were not my concern, the lack of facial resemblence was.
C3PX said:Vaderisnohayden, my sincerest apologies for mis-spelling "hare-brained".
And I wasn't suggesting your ideas were hare-brained because they differed from my own. I suggested they were hare-brained simply because they were hare-brained.
As I already said, I am finished with this nonsense.
Not so finished with it to above one last dig, I see. This statement (below), when considered carefully, can be seen to make no sense. But you knew that. The statement in question:
And I wasn't suggesting your ideas were hare-brained because they differed from my own. I suggested they were hare-brained simply because they were hare-brained.