xhonzi said:
http://www2.originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/Act-Breaks/post/426492/#TopicPost426492
Found it! Some of the names have been changed, because my memory never cheats.
So 005 was posting under my account then....got it.
EDIT: I see that's where the Imagination Princess was crowned as well. What an important thread!
http://www2.originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/Act-Breaks/post/426563/#TopicPost426563
^ The reason I thought it was in the "This thread is now about" thread.
IT'S MY TRILOGY, AND I WANT IT NOW!
"[George Lucas] rebooted the franchise in 1997 without telling anyone." -skyjedi2005
"Yeah, well, George says a lot of things..." a young 1997 xhonzi on RASSM
"They're my movies." -George Lucas. 19 people won oscars for their work on Star Wars (1977) and George Lucas wasn't one of them.
Just because a character like Darth Vader is more well-known among students or the general public, it does not necessarily mean that Vader is objectively better or more interesting than other characters such as General Grievous.
The speaker seems to be arguing that the appeal to popularity is not a valid argument when it comes to art or entertainment, as the value of a work of art or a character in a story is subjective and cannot be determined solely by the number of people who know about it or like it.
They then provide an example of an actor in a movie called “Warriors of Virtue” who they believe is a more entertaining villain than Grievous, even though the movie is relatively unknown.
Overall, it seems like the point being made is that popularity or public recognition does not necessarily equate to quality or value, particularly when it comes to subjective matters such as art and entertainment.
I am at least 99% sure that all of SophieSopho’s posts are written by ChatGPT.
Actually, I’m 100% sure, because she posted “essay help website” spam in the fanedit section. Can the mods please do something about this?
My preferred Skywalker Saga experience:
I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX
So this ancient thread was apparently resurrected by some AI or whatever. (Crap, too many sci-fi elements are creeping into reality.)
But anyway, it’s interesting, from an historical perspective, to read the OP of this thread, as an example of common Internet sentiment about the Prequels all the way back in 2011. Basically, the OP argues that (based on an admittedly small and non-representative sample size), very few people care about or even recognize Prequel characters. The conclusion is that the OT will be timeless, but the Prequels will fade into oblivion. (Based on a comparison of General Grievous vs. Darth Vader, but extrapolated to the Prequels at a whole).
Yeah… I mean, that was my assumption back in the day as well.
But it’s ironic to read this now. Little did the OP know, back in 2011, that as he confidently mocked the Prequels, an entire generation of 5 to 10 year olds was slowly incubating, absorbing George Lucas’ campy schlock with their developing minds, such that in only a few years time, they would be unleashed upon the Internet, declaring that Revenge of the Sith is an absolute masterpiece that rivals The Empire Strikes Back. And General Grievous and his twirling multi-colored lightsabers (plus zero character-development) is an incredibly memorable, kick-ass villain.
George Lucas apparently knew what he was doing when he aimed these movies at a much younger audience.