logo Sign In

The Merits of the Prequel Trilogy and the "Saga" — Page 14

Author
Time
Post link
I refuse to allow others to tell me what the best movies are.

To me that's personal, and not dependant on what film snobs have to say about it.

Take Citizen Kane. Great movie, but no longer the best movie ever.

If those movies I haven't seen are so much better than Star Wars, then why aren't they shown very often on TV or otherwise?

You tell me which movies I haven't seen above are better than Star Wars, and I will make a point of seeing them.
Your focus determines your reality.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: garethxxgod
call me a slob if you will, but I'm with Peter Griffin.....I just did not care much for the Godfather films.

I haven't seen Dr. Strangelove but my brother says it's highly overrated. Kubrick has been hit and miss with me, I like Clockwork Orange and The Shining but I hate 2001: A Space Oddessy well....since those are the only movies of his I've seen I guess I shouldn't really comment.

I know I'm really late for this discussion also, but correct me if this has already been stated. Wasn't the use of Midiclorians a way of determining how well a Jedi could use the force? I have to ask, how would they have determined how one was powerful in the force without an example? Would they have just "known"? Would it have been an instinctual thing? Midiclorians was one of those things I never really bothered about and never knew it was such a problem till I heard people complaining about it on the net, however even if not completely accurate wouldn't that be a better way to get an approximation of ones abilities with the Force? I mean "feeling" one is powerful is one thing, but it still doesn't let you KNOW how powerful they are. That to me doesn't really take away from the mystism of the Jedi Knights.


It makes jedi potential quantifiable. It's basically going against everything yoda said in ESB "size matter not"

why can't people fuoking see this?

Typical Gomer PT-gush response in 3... 2... 1...
He big in nothing important in good elephant.

"Miss you, I will, Original Trilogy..."

"Your midichlorians are weak, Old man." -Darth Vader 2007 super deluxe extra special dipped in chocolate sauce edition.

http://prequelsstink.ytmnd.com/
Author
Time
Post link
Because size still matters not?
Your focus determines your reality.
Author
Time
Post link
Judge me by my midichlorians, do you?
He big in nothing important in good elephant.

"Miss you, I will, Original Trilogy..."

"Your midichlorians are weak, Old man." -Darth Vader 2007 super deluxe extra special dipped in chocolate sauce edition.

http://prequelsstink.ytmnd.com/
Author
Time
Post link
I still don't see the problem with them.
Your focus determines your reality.
Author
Time
Post link
I had shit for a snack since my focus determined it was chocolate.
He big in nothing important in good elephant.

"Miss you, I will, Original Trilogy..."

"Your midichlorians are weak, Old man." -Darth Vader 2007 super deluxe extra special dipped in chocolate sauce edition.

http://prequelsstink.ytmnd.com/
Author
Time
Post link
So, um, Go-Mer? What was the deal with mentioning that most of those movies were probably in black and white? What does that have to do with anything?

There is no lingerie in space…

C3PX said: Gaffer is like that hot girl in high school that you think you have a chance with even though she is way out of your league because she is sweet and not a stuck up bitch who pretends you don’t exist… then one day you spot her making out with some skinny twerp, only on second glance you realize it is the goth girl who always sits in the back of class; at that moment it dawns on you why she is never seen hanging off the arm of any of the jocks… and you realize, damn, she really is unobtainable after all. Not that that is going to stop you from dreaming… Only in this case, Gaffer is actually a guy.

Author
Time
Post link
I was hoping someone would chastise me for disregarding classics on the basis of their lack of color.

Seriously there is nothing inherently wrong with black and white. For example that Bettie Page movie with Gretchen Mol used it to great effect, and films from the past pretty much had no choice but to use B&W.

I just think that while it's interesting to see what the "experts" think are the great films, I often disagree.
Your focus determines your reality.
Author
Time
Post link
You still kinda danced around it, though, in your last post. Are you disregarding classics solely on their lack of color?

There is no lingerie in space…

C3PX said: Gaffer is like that hot girl in high school that you think you have a chance with even though she is way out of your league because she is sweet and not a stuck up bitch who pretends you don’t exist… then one day you spot her making out with some skinny twerp, only on second glance you realize it is the goth girl who always sits in the back of class; at that moment it dawns on you why she is never seen hanging off the arm of any of the jocks… and you realize, damn, she really is unobtainable after all. Not that that is going to stop you from dreaming… Only in this case, Gaffer is actually a guy.

Author
Time
Post link
No, I was just being facetious in that post. Color is not the end all of film.

I would say that color does improve a film's chances of being more visually dynamic, but to me the most important element of any given film is the story. If it's a great story, then a B&W film can be just as gripping and captivating as a color picture I think.
Your focus determines your reality.
Author
Time
Post link
My issue is that I think that you may be confusing your favourite films with what are the best films. They are often two different things. My top ten favourites (at the moment) are:

It's A Wonderful Life (1946)
Star Wars (Original Theatrical Cut, 1977)
Planes, Trains And Automobiles (1987)
The Princess Bride (1987)
Shadowlands (1993)
Dead Man (1995)
Heat (1995)
The Big Lebowski (1998)
Fight Club (1999)
Bubba Ho-Tep (2002)

These are ten films I could sit down and watch any time, no matter what mood I was in. Most of what I would call the best films I've ever seen do not qualify, as they are not so easy to watch.
Don't you call me a mindless philosopher...!
Author
Time
Post link
I love all those films too.

I guess to me there isn't much difference between what I would say are my favorite movies, and what I would consider to be the best movies.

If a movie is well crafted, yet bores me to tears, then it doesn't really matter how well crafted it is to me.

Likewise, if a movie has technical issues, but I can watch them repeatedly over and over again, then it's a better film to me.
Your focus determines your reality.
Author
Time
Post link
Here's the AFI's top 20:

1. CITIZEN KANE (1941)

2. CASABLANCA (1942)

3. THE GODFATHER (1972)

4. GONE WITH THE WIND (1939)

5. LAWRENCE OF ARABIA (1962)

6. THE WIZARD OF OZ (1939)

7. THE GRADUATE (1967)

8. ON THE WATERFRONT (1954)

9. SCHINDLER'S LIST (1993)

10. SINGIN' IN THE RAIN (1952)

11. IT'S A WONDERFUL LIFE (1946)

12. SUNSET BOULEVARD (1950)

13. THE BRIDGE ON THE RIVER KWAI (1957)

14. SOME LIKE IT HOT (1959)

15. STAR WARS (1977)

16. ALL ABOUT EVE (1950)

17. THE AFRICAN QUEEN (1951)

18. PSYCHO (1960)

19. CHINATOWN (1974)

20. ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO'S NEST (1975)

Author
Time
Post link
See I don't see how Citizen Kane can still claim the top spot.

It almost seems like they are just repeating what others before them decided or something.

I mean it's good, but is it really the best movie ever made?

And the Graduate is better than Shindler's list?

How do they determine this list anyway?

Your focus determines your reality.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
See I don't see how Citizen Kane can still claim the top spot.

It almost seems like they are just repeating what others before them decided or something.

I mean it's good, but is it really the best movie ever made?

And the Graduate is better than Shindler's list?

How do they determine this list anyway?


Its not that Citizen Kane by todays standards is the greatest film of all time. Thats impossible, because even a film by "todays standards" will be "outdated" in a few years. Citizen Kane is heralted as a great film because it laid all of the basic groundwork for modern cinematic technique. I'm not sure if i would rank it as number one, but its definitly in the top three or four. Historically speaking, its as important as a film can be. Like Picasso--"so cliched, whats the big deal?" well, not much nowadays, but in terms of importance Picasso is a monumental figure.

All lists are subjective, so you find a bit of leeway in the rankings, but overall they are mostly the same, its always the same usual suspects because its simply art history. Its like if you had art critics have a top 100 works of all time for painted medium there would be some differences but generally 85% of the rankings would be similar--you'd have your davince's and michaelangelo's and Picasso's and Guagin's and Matisse's in varying rankings. For film you have your Coppola's and your Kurosawa's and your Eisenstein and your Hitchcock's and your Fellini's. Most of those film lists are American ones/ Hollywood ones, ie AFI, so you don't have "foreign" films, which would result in an incredible different listing.
Author
Time
Post link

2. CASABLANCA (1942)

3. THE GODFATHER (1972)

6. THE WIZARD OF OZ (1939)

11. IT'S A WONDERFUL LIFE (1946)

13. THE BRIDGE ON THE RIVER KWAI (1957)

14. SOME LIKE IT HOT (1959)

15. STAR WARS (1977)

18. PSYCHO (1960)

20. ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO'S NEST (1975)


These are the ones on the list that I've seen, and I love them all. Except "Cuckoo's Nest"; go ahead and hate me, but I really just didn't see what was so great about it.

And color definitely has nothing to do with a movie's quality. Just look at the Marx Brothers' movies or The Maltese Falcon for evidence of this.

http://i.imgur.com/7N84TM8.jpg

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: zombie84
Most of those film lists are American ones/ Hollywood ones, ie AFI, so you don't have "foreign" films, which would result in an incredible different listing.
Yes, the AFI's list is clearly their top twenty American films. The BFI & Sight & Sound polled critics and directors from many different countries, not just the UK or USA. What is interesting is that, as they noted in the accompanying articles, despite this approach the results are dominated by US films. It is also interesting how close Vertigo came to beating Citizen Kane among the critics.

Star Wars was picked by Scott Rosenberg (critic, USA/Thailand), Roger Corman (director, USA) and Anurag Mehta (director, India).

Milos Forman (director, USA) picked American Graffiti.

Go here for a full, searchable report of all the people polled and what they picked.

I recommend looking up George Romero's top ten and comments - brilliant!
Don't you call me a mindless philosopher...!
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Wesyeed
Originally posted by: garethxxgod
call me a slob if you will, but I'm with Peter Griffin.....I just did not care much for the Godfather films.

I haven't seen Dr. Strangelove but my brother says it's highly overrated. Kubrick has been hit and miss with me, I like Clockwork Orange and The Shining but I hate 2001: A Space Oddessy well....since those are the only movies of his I've seen I guess I shouldn't really comment.

I know I'm really late for this discussion also, but correct me if this has already been stated. Wasn't the use of Midiclorians a way of determining how well a Jedi could use the force? I have to ask, how would they have determined how one was powerful in the force without an example? Would they have just "known"? Would it have been an instinctual thing? Midiclorians was one of those things I never really bothered about and never knew it was such a problem till I heard people complaining about it on the net, however even if not completely accurate wouldn't that be a better way to get an approximation of ones abilities with the Force? I mean "feeling" one is powerful is one thing, but it still doesn't let you KNOW how powerful they are. That to me doesn't really take away from the mystism of the Jedi Knights.


It makes jedi potential quantifiable. It's basically going against everything yoda said in ESB "size matter not"

why can't people fuoking see this?

Typical Gomer PT-gush response in 3... 2... 1...



But Jedi expand their horizons all the time. Just because a Midiclorian count says a Jedi has x amount of pull with the Force doesn't mean that that will stay that way forever or they will only get to a certain point of being able to manipulate the force. I like to believe that Jedi are only limited by how much they are willing to learn. Surely the nature of learning techniques and mastery of the force is not limited to your Midiclorian count, it's just a counter to even determine if a certain person even has the ability with the Force. If the force didn't have any ties to nature and was just a mystical energy force that just happened to appear out of nowhere, woudn't it effect everything? Wouldn't everyone be Force Sensitive?

The fact that nature surrounds it, penetrates it, makes life grow should indicate that SOMETHING has to manipulate the force and connect those who can hear the will of the force with the world around him. You could almost say that in a way the Midiclorians are like a disease and will only effect those who have certain parentage but like Anakin there is always that anomoly. Like the world the way some people are just born different. I mean how do we determine where disease come from? People study it right? I mean where does disease come from in our real world? Someone had to discover this intangible nothingness down to a science or atleast something that you can see within the blood stream or life being of that person. The Midiclorian count is taking something that is attached to a mystified ancient order and understanding how "the universe binds it together". Like most mysteries we are given the how, but never the why.

Now the Midiclorian use in the first film was only to help demonstrate how powerful with the Force Anakin really could become, nothing more really. It helps determine that he IS the Chosen One. You must see it (sorry had to throw that in there). I know the Chosen One Prophecy is pretty much looked down upon by those who don't really like the Prequels or even buy that part of the story but again that's really the only reason the Midiclorian count was used in the film. Obviously we disagree which is fine, but I'd like to hear your thoughs....and please be constructive.....I'm not going to be like a "typical gusher" and say you are wrong or anything you have to say doesn't have merit. Believe me with just the one line I atleast had to think about my response and how it made sense to myself. Take it easy.
http://img416.imageshack.us/img416/7823/starwarssuppersmallerxx5.jpg
Author
Time
Post link
To me the Midichlorian concept is more inclusive than the Force was in the classic trilogy. In the classic trilogy, all we knew was that Luke was strong in the force because of his parentage. Back then, the idea that Han had a shot of being able to use the Force was all but non existant.

Now that we have the Midichlorian concept, which includes all life forms, it's not such an outlandish suggestion to think that Han would also be able to learn the ways of the Force, even if he didn't have as much natural ability as someone with a higher concentration of Midichlorians.

Hey Tiptup, did you see my response to your post from way back?
Your focus determines your reality.
Author
Time
Post link
I prefer to think of the Force as being something which one must discipline oneself to feel and learn techniques to manipulate. I think it is more interesting if Jedi are no different to anyone else except that they have committed themselves to this path. It takes determination and disciplined training to become a Jedi Knight and takes a lifetime to become a Master. I find it less impressive if a person's potential is determined at birth.

Also, from a dramatic point of view, it makes Anakin almost impossible to portray, as he would have to demonstrate such superhuman ability at some point during the saga, that he would be more powerful than any other Jedi. I don't think that this was ever satisfactorially shown in any of the six episodes.
Don't you call me a mindless philosopher...!
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic

Hey Tiptup, did you see my response to your post from way back?


Yes, but I'm bored at the moment with Star Wars. Give me a day or so.

"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself.  It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005

Author
Time
Post link
Cool, whenever you are ready is fine. I was just afraid it was getting buried already.
Your focus determines your reality.
Author
Time
Post link
Yeah, I saw it. Don't worry. I do want to give what you posted a fair response, but I can't do that if I'm in an uncaring mood.

"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself.  It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: garethxxgod
Originally posted by: Wesyeed
Originally posted by: garethxxgod
call me a slob if you will, but I'm with Peter Griffin.....I just did not care much for the Godfather films.

I haven't seen Dr. Strangelove but my brother says it's highly overrated. Kubrick has been hit and miss with me, I like Clockwork Orange and The Shining but I hate 2001: A Space Oddessy well....since those are the only movies of his I've seen I guess I shouldn't really comment.

I know I'm really late for this discussion also, but correct me if this has already been stated. Wasn't the use of Midiclorians a way of determining how well a Jedi could use the force? I have to ask, how would they have determined how one was powerful in the force without an example? Would they have just "known"? Would it have been an instinctual thing? Midiclorians was one of those things I never really bothered about and never knew it was such a problem till I heard people complaining about it on the net, however even if not completely accurate wouldn't that be a better way to get an approximation of ones abilities with the Force? I mean "feeling" one is powerful is one thing, but it still doesn't let you KNOW how powerful they are. That to me doesn't really take away from the mystism of the Jedi Knights.


It makes jedi potential quantifiable. It's basically going against everything yoda said in ESB "size matter not"

why can't people fuoking see this?

Typical Gomer PT-gush response in 3... 2... 1...



But Jedi expand their horizons all the time. Just because a Midiclorian count says a Jedi has x amount of pull with the Force doesn't mean that that will stay that way forever or they will only get to a certain point of being able to manipulate the force. I like to believe that Jedi are only limited by how much they are willing to learn. Surely the nature of learning techniques and mastery of the force is not limited to your Midiclorian count, it's just a counter to even determine if a certain person even has the ability with the Force. If the force didn't have any ties to nature and was just a mystical energy force that just happened to appear out of nowhere, woudn't it effect everything? Wouldn't everyone be Force Sensitive?

The fact that nature surrounds it, penetrates it, makes life grow should indicate that SOMETHING has to manipulate the force and connect those who can hear the will of the force with the world around him. You could almost say that in a way the Midiclorians are like a disease and will only effect those who have certain parentage but like Anakin there is always that anomoly. Like the world the way some people are just born different. I mean how do we determine where disease come from? People study it right? I mean where does disease come from in our real world? Someone had to discover this intangible nothingness down to a science or atleast something that you can see within the blood stream or life being of that person. The Midiclorian count is taking something that is attached to a mystified ancient order and understanding how "the universe binds it together". Like most mysteries we are given the how, but never the why.

Now the Midiclorian use in the first film was only to help demonstrate how powerful with the Force Anakin really could become, nothing more really. It helps determine that he IS the Chosen One. You must see it (sorry had to throw that in there). I know the Chosen One Prophecy is pretty much looked down upon by those who don't really like the Prequels or even buy that part of the story but again that's really the only reason the Midiclorian count was used in the film. Obviously we disagree which is fine, but I'd like to hear your thoughs....and please be constructive.....I'm not going to be like a "typical gusher" and say you are wrong or anything you have to say doesn't have merit. Believe me with just the one line I atleast had to think about my response and how it made sense to myself. Take it easy.


It's the internet, we're all assholes who want to tear each other's digital heads off, so you can keep your take it easy to yourself. Yeah yeah, I know what a mcguffin is. I know why it was put in there and took up valuable screen time to spoonfeed what they were and I know exactly why tiptup's bored with this....because the question really is why were Midichlorians necessary? They had no later impact on the rest of the movies besides a brief mention. They easily could have and should have been left out. The original intention was to have palpatine reveal that he created Anakin through the force, but it was kind of glossed over.

Ok, I understand you still think any jedi can work extra hard and become super powerful, but when you watch the TPM movie, that's not what it's telling you. It's telling you that you are only as good as what that number says on the midi-meter. And that whole idea behind them contradicts what Yoda believes in ESB about one's power with the force being un-hindered by 'crude matter' if they truly believe in it. The force is strong with him, would have sufficed once again. We don't want to confuse the audience with a lot of babbling about microscopic beings that can talk to you, and just make them wonder why the rebells haven't found a few jedi babies with a midi-meter and taught them to use the force etc.

I'm trying to make sense out of the paragraph about making nature grow and mysteries and intangible nothingness being scientifically explained, but it just is a difficult one to understand. You could run around in circles all day with that whole idea, i suppose. I would ask why did this need to be explained? What was really gained besides new questions? Are dark side midichlorians more powerful than light side midichlorians? Why are they symbionts with all lifeforms? what do they take from their host? Why do midis allow the force to be used for evil purposes? What creates high midi counts in certain people? Why do they exist? How do midis control the force? Why can't the force talk to people directly? Is Obi-wan talking to Luke's midichlorians in ANH before Luke hears it? Can a midi level 400 beat a midi level 600? Where do midi-babies come from if jedi aren't allowed to have children? Just fall out of the sky I guess. If you got a blood transfusion from a jedi... etc. the list goes on and on...

Anyway bottom line for me is in better hands than Lucas' midichlorians might have worked fine. It's not a terrible concept. Ever see Naruto? It scientifically explains the control of mystical energies much better than this. Basically it extends the idea of how we can biological use energy in our bodies, no microscopic alien mutant shit involved, just certain people have the ability to control chakra energy fields (like ki which is like the force) and special family bloodlines have unique bioligical traits that can do some unique things with chakra energy. No heavy handed blatant christ parallel either, just good drama. I never bought into the idea of ripping off the bible giving something more meaning. The show's focus is very interesting in how it focuses not on a character being granted his great powers from birth putting him ahead of the rest but on self determination being a significant factor in how powerful you can become with your abilities. It is basically everything the PT should have been, showing us the downfal of a good character who's lust for power and revenge destroys him... good stuff.

The way the midi thing is just thrown in there quickly in tpm like a throw away explanation that has no serious affect on the story doesn't work for me personally. Like sifo dyas. What the hell was that all about? Just use a fake name or whatever. The kaminoans won't care. It seems like an unnecessary convolution that could easily be avoided. You tell me jedi can expand their horizon and i say, "I wish they still could." The midis don't really add anything but that idea of quantifying force potential as you claim. "Now the Midiclorian use in the first film was only to help demonstrate how powerful with the Force Anakin really could become, nothing more really" My point simiply is that measuring potential is antithetic to Yoda's teachings to luke as well just being unnecessary to the story overall anyway. Strength in the force or force sensitivity is fine with me... the midi idea just seems like a brain fart that needed to be questioned before production began on tpm.

If you read GL's original ideas for star wars he compares the force power Luke, obiwan and vader have to Ki energy from stories in Japan I believe. If their powers were meant to be explained with science then I'm sure they would have been long ago but for three whole movies, they weren't. It's pretty much exactly like Ki power, just a mystical energy force explained through action more than words or a microscope. It was even called an ancient religion in the first film to show how unconventional and rare belief in such a thing as mystical energy fields was at the time... further indicated by han solo of course with his disbelief in it. Surely that guy who was choked knows if you have enough midis you can do some neat tricks doesn't he... but instead he consider's vader just a weird magician of some kind who's power is inferior next to the power of technology. Vader disagrees and chokes him of course. Anyway comparitively, Ki powas is what the force is like and anybody and everybody has the ability to use ki, no matter your ki-dichlorian count. It's more relatable that way than to say only certain people can use ki, though like in real life, some people are just naturally gifted with certain talents. I'm not exactly fully knowledgable about the details but I know for a fact that that was what the force was based on, and other similar religious beliefs.

So now you're basically telling me that Jedi are mutants. Like x-men. hmmmm... next step in evolution? Well that's fine for you, I don't really care, I'm not one to pester someone with my point of view unprovoked. You're actually more civil than those I'm used to dealing with in online discussion... well, The force power to me is as enigmatic as the spirit we all claim to possess. You can't open yourself up and see the spirit or even soul, right? But why do some believe that humans have a spirt or soul if we can't pull out a microscope and find it? Like many mysteries in life, it all comes down to faith in the end. That's what I believe anwyay... the force inherently was more based on belief than quantifiable data. It was a refreshing concept to me in that most sci fi I was familiar with tried to explain every little thing. Star wars re-enforced the idea of having faith in your abilities, letting go of relying on techno doo hickies, and achieviing something just because you believe you can... Star wars was a very different galaxy far far away until 1999... Mutant jedi huh... heh sure, magneto and xavier and wolverine are jedi. Yoda didn't have enough midichlorians to defeat the emperor. Size Matters. Obi-wan had more midis, that's why he beat darth maul. "Master Yoda, you can't die." "Many midichlorians do I have, but not that many..." And my favorite, "Use the midichlorians, Luke."



wow that came out longer than I expected, sorry.

Another gomer gush in 3... 2... 1...

He big in nothing important in good elephant.

"Miss you, I will, Original Trilogy..."

"Your midichlorians are weak, Old man." -Darth Vader 2007 super deluxe extra special dipped in chocolate sauce edition.

http://prequelsstink.ytmnd.com/