Ranking the Star Wars films — Page 51

Lord Haseo said:

imperialscum said:

Lord Haseo said:

You believe all of the OT films are of the same quality?

First, quality is non-existent property when it comes to art (i.e. completely subjective things).

It’s nonexistent in the fact that it’s not something physically tangible but it exists in the mind and that is all that is pertinent for this conversation.

Quality of a product (and its properties) must be measurable, otherwise it is not quality. If it is measurable, it has to have an objective measure. Completely subjective things (like film) do not have an objective measure. There is no objective measure for properties such as story, acting, dialogue, music, sound, etc.

Second, I like them all equally.

SW and ESB I can understand because the have advantages over the other. SW is funnier, more visually interesting, has a catchier soundtrack and has the aura about it. It’s the epitome of classic Star Wars. ESB has a better written script, is better paced, has way better acting and dialogue.

On contrary, EBS is visually more interesting, while ANH has overall superior acting (there is just nothing in ESB remotely comparable to Cushing and Guinness). As for pacing, it is just a different approach. ESB is jumping slow-fast-slow-fast, while ANH is gradually progressing from very slow to very fast.

I don’t really consider ROTJ as being in the same league. At it’s best it exceeds a lot of moments that came before it but other aspects of the film leave a sour taste in my mouth.

Well you may not consider it, but it is.

imperialscum said:

Lord Haseo said:

imperialscum said:

Lord Haseo said:

You believe all of the OT films are of the same quality?

First, quality is non-existent property when it comes to art (i.e. completely subjective things).

It’s nonexistent in the fact that it’s not something physically tangible but it exists in the mind and that is all that is pertinent for this conversation.

Quality of a product (and its properties) must be measurable, otherwise it is not quality. If it is measurable, it has to have an objective measure. Completely subjective things (like film) do not have an objective measure. There is no objective measure for properties such as story, acting, dialogue, music, sound, etc.

I’m going to have to disagree with you saying that film is completely subjective. Whether you like something is totally different from if it is a good thing. You can like an objectively bad film. I can say that the dialog in the prequels is objectively bad: It’s stale, it doesn’t make sense, etc. Just like with other fields, film has objective qualities that can be measured.

yhwx said:

imperialscum said:

Lord Haseo said:

imperialscum said:

Lord Haseo said:

You believe all of the OT films are of the same quality?

First, quality is non-existent property when it comes to art (i.e. completely subjective things).

It’s nonexistent in the fact that it’s not something physically tangible but it exists in the mind and that is all that is pertinent for this conversation.

Quality of a product (and its properties) must be measurable, otherwise it is not quality. If it is measurable, it has to have an objective measure. Completely subjective things (like film) do not have an objective measure. There is no objective measure for properties such as story, acting, dialogue, music, sound, etc.

I’m going to have to disagree with you saying that film is completely subjective.

I don’t mind you disagreeing with the truth. It is just not good for one’s mental health.

Whether you like something is totally different from if it is a good thing. You can like an objectively bad film. I can say that the dialog in the prequels is objectively bad: It’s stale, it doesn’t make sense, etc. Just like with other fields, film has objective qualities that can be measured.

So then, provide me the objective measure for dialogue and acting.

(A friendly hint: there isn’t one and I would highly recommend you don’t further embarrass yourself)

imperialscum said:

yhwx said:

imperialscum said:

Lord Haseo said:

imperialscum said:

Lord Haseo said:

You believe all of the OT films are of the same quality?

First, quality is non-existent property when it comes to art (i.e. completely subjective things).

It’s nonexistent in the fact that it’s not something physically tangible but it exists in the mind and that is all that is pertinent for this conversation.

Quality of a product (and its properties) must be measurable, otherwise it is not quality. If it is measurable, it has to have an objective measure. Completely subjective things (like film) do not have an objective measure. There is no objective measure for properties such as story, acting, dialogue, music, sound, etc.

I’m going to have to disagree with you saying that film is completely subjective.

I don’t mind you disagreeing with the truth. It is just not good for one’s mental health.

Don’t embarrass yourself.

Whether you like something is totally different from if it is a good thing. You can like an objectively bad film. I can say that the dialog in the prequels is objectively bad: It’s stale, it doesn’t make sense, etc. Just like with other fields, film has objective qualities that can be measured.

So then, provide me the objective measure for dialogue and acting.

(A friendly hint: there isn’t one and I would highly recommend you don’t further embarrass yourself)

I think there’s certain things, such as pace, how much subtext vs text there is, etc… that can tell if dialog and acting is good or not.

yhwx said:

imperialscum said:

yhwx said:

imperialscum said:

Lord Haseo said:

imperialscum said:

Lord Haseo said:

You believe all of the OT films are of the same quality?

First, quality is non-existent property when it comes to art (i.e. completely subjective things).

It’s nonexistent in the fact that it’s not something physically tangible but it exists in the mind and that is all that is pertinent for this conversation.

Quality of a product (and its properties) must be measurable, otherwise it is not quality. If it is measurable, it has to have an objective measure. Completely subjective things (like film) do not have an objective measure. There is no objective measure for properties such as story, acting, dialogue, music, sound, etc.

I’m going to have to disagree with you saying that film is completely subjective.

I don’t mind you disagreeing with the truth. It is just not good for one’s mental health.

Don’t embarrass yourself.

Whether you like something is totally different from if it is a good thing. You can like an objectively bad film. I can say that the dialog in the prequels is objectively bad: It’s stale, it doesn’t make sense, etc. Just like with other fields, film has objective qualities that can be measured.

So then, provide me the objective measure for dialogue and acting.

(A friendly hint: there isn’t one and I would highly recommend you don’t further embarrass yourself)

I think there’s certain things, such as pace, how much subtext vs text there is, etc… that can tell if dialog and acting is good or not.

That is all subjective crap. I am sorry you chose to further embarrass yourself. One person likes this kind of pace, the other person like that kind of pace. One person prefers minimalistic text, while other prefers lots of text. One person likes some subtext, while other dislikes it. One person sees certain subtext, while other sees some different subtext. Etc. Etc.

You don’t understand the very basic concept of “objective measure”. I will give you an example. Object has properties, such as length and mass. There are objective measures for those two properties (completely independent of personal opinion), such as meters and kilograms. You use meters to measure two objects and you can compare which one is larger in meters. Same for kilograms.

imperialscum said:

yhwx said:

imperialscum said:

yhwx said:

imperialscum said:

Lord Haseo said:

imperialscum said:

Lord Haseo said:

You believe all of the OT films are of the same quality?

First, quality is non-existent property when it comes to art (i.e. completely subjective things).

It’s nonexistent in the fact that it’s not something physically tangible but it exists in the mind and that is all that is pertinent for this conversation.

Quality of a product (and its properties) must be measurable, otherwise it is not quality. If it is measurable, it has to have an objective measure. Completely subjective things (like film) do not have an objective measure. There is no objective measure for properties such as story, acting, dialogue, music, sound, etc.

I’m going to have to disagree with you saying that film is completely subjective.

I don’t mind you disagreeing with the truth. It is just not good for one’s mental health.

Don’t embarrass yourself.

Whether you like something is totally different from if it is a good thing. You can like an objectively bad film. I can say that the dialog in the prequels is objectively bad: It’s stale, it doesn’t make sense, etc. Just like with other fields, film has objective qualities that can be measured.

So then, provide me the objective measure for dialogue and acting.

(A friendly hint: there isn’t one and I would highly recommend you don’t further embarrass yourself)

I think there’s certain things, such as pace, how much subtext vs text there is, etc… that can tell if dialog and acting is good or not.

That is all subjective crap. I am sorry you chose to further embarrass yourself. One person likes this kind of pace, the other person like that kind of pace. One person prefers minimalistic text, while other prefers lots of text. One person likes some subtext, while other dislikes it. One person sees certain subtext, while other sees some different subtext. Etc. Etc.

You don’t understand the very basic concept of “objective measure”. I will give you an example. Object has properties, such as length and mass. There are objective measures for those two properties (completely independent of personal opinion), such as meters and kilograms. You use meters to measure two objects and you can compare which one is larger in meters. Same for kilograms.

Don’t embarrass yourself.

Think of a bad movie. Tell me why it’s bad.

yhwx said:

imperialscum said:

yhwx said:

imperialscum said:

yhwx said:

imperialscum said:

Lord Haseo said:

imperialscum said:

Lord Haseo said:

You believe all of the OT films are of the same quality?

First, quality is non-existent property when it comes to art (i.e. completely subjective things).

It’s nonexistent in the fact that it’s not something physically tangible but it exists in the mind and that is all that is pertinent for this conversation.

Quality of a product (and its properties) must be measurable, otherwise it is not quality. If it is measurable, it has to have an objective measure. Completely subjective things (like film) do not have an objective measure. There is no objective measure for properties such as story, acting, dialogue, music, sound, etc.

I’m going to have to disagree with you saying that film is completely subjective.

I don’t mind you disagreeing with the truth. It is just not good for one’s mental health.

Don’t embarrass yourself.

Whether you like something is totally different from if it is a good thing. You can like an objectively bad film. I can say that the dialog in the prequels is objectively bad: It’s stale, it doesn’t make sense, etc. Just like with other fields, film has objective qualities that can be measured.

So then, provide me the objective measure for dialogue and acting.

(A friendly hint: there isn’t one and I would highly recommend you don’t further embarrass yourself)

I think there’s certain things, such as pace, how much subtext vs text there is, etc… that can tell if dialog and acting is good or not.

That is all subjective crap. I am sorry you chose to further embarrass yourself. One person likes this kind of pace, the other person like that kind of pace. One person prefers minimalistic text, while other prefers lots of text. One person likes some subtext, while other dislikes it. One person sees certain subtext, while other sees some different subtext. Etc. Etc.

You don’t understand the very basic concept of “objective measure”. I will give you an example. Object has properties, such as length and mass. There are objective measures for those two properties (completely independent of personal opinion), such as meters and kilograms. You use meters to measure two objects and you can compare which one is larger in meters. Same for kilograms.

Think of a bad movie. Tell me why it’s bad.

If a person thinks that a certain film is bad it is simply an opinion. There is no objective measure for “badness” or “goodness” of the film.

Don’t embarrass yourself.

Don’t worry, I never do.

imperialscum said:

yhwx said:

imperialscum said:

yhwx said:

imperialscum said:

yhwx said:

imperialscum said:

Lord Haseo said:

imperialscum said:

Lord Haseo said:

You believe all of the OT films are of the same quality?

First, quality is non-existent property when it comes to art (i.e. completely subjective things).

It’s nonexistent in the fact that it’s not something physically tangible but it exists in the mind and that is all that is pertinent for this conversation.

Quality of a product (and its properties) must be measurable, otherwise it is not quality. If it is measurable, it has to have an objective measure. Completely subjective things (like film) do not have an objective measure. There is no objective measure for properties such as story, acting, dialogue, music, sound, etc.

I’m going to have to disagree with you saying that film is completely subjective.

I don’t mind you disagreeing with the truth. It is just not good for one’s mental health.

Don’t embarrass yourself.

Whether you like something is totally different from if it is a good thing. You can like an objectively bad film. I can say that the dialog in the prequels is objectively bad: It’s stale, it doesn’t make sense, etc. Just like with other fields, film has objective qualities that can be measured.

So then, provide me the objective measure for dialogue and acting.

(A friendly hint: there isn’t one and I would highly recommend you don’t further embarrass yourself)

I think there’s certain things, such as pace, how much subtext vs text there is, etc… that can tell if dialog and acting is good or not.

That is all subjective crap. I am sorry you chose to further embarrass yourself. One person likes this kind of pace, the other person like that kind of pace. One person prefers minimalistic text, while other prefers lots of text. One person likes some subtext, while other dislikes it. One person sees certain subtext, while other sees some different subtext. Etc. Etc.

You don’t understand the very basic concept of “objective measure”. I will give you an example. Object has properties, such as length and mass. There are objective measures for those two properties (completely independent of personal opinion), such as meters and kilograms. You use meters to measure two objects and you can compare which one is larger in meters. Same for kilograms.

Think of a bad movie. Tell me why it’s bad.

If a person thinks that a certain film is bad it is simply an opinion. There is no objective measure for “badness” or “goodness” of the film.

Huh, dodged the question. So I repeat:

Think of a bad movie. Tell me why it’s bad.

Don’t embarrass yourself.

Don’t worry, I never do.

The fact is by saying that you’re embarrassing yourself.

So please, don’t embarrass yourself.

yhwx said:

imperialscum said:

yhwx said:

imperialscum said:

yhwx said:

imperialscum said:

yhwx said:

imperialscum said:

Lord Haseo said:

imperialscum said:

Lord Haseo said:

You believe all of the OT films are of the same quality?

First, quality is non-existent property when it comes to art (i.e. completely subjective things).

It’s nonexistent in the fact that it’s not something physically tangible but it exists in the mind and that is all that is pertinent for this conversation.

Quality of a product (and its properties) must be measurable, otherwise it is not quality. If it is measurable, it has to have an objective measure. Completely subjective things (like film) do not have an objective measure. There is no objective measure for properties such as story, acting, dialogue, music, sound, etc.

I’m going to have to disagree with you saying that film is completely subjective.

I don’t mind you disagreeing with the truth. It is just not good for one’s mental health.

Don’t embarrass yourself.

Whether you like something is totally different from if it is a good thing. You can like an objectively bad film. I can say that the dialog in the prequels is objectively bad: It’s stale, it doesn’t make sense, etc. Just like with other fields, film has objective qualities that can be measured.

So then, provide me the objective measure for dialogue and acting.

(A friendly hint: there isn’t one and I would highly recommend you don’t further embarrass yourself)

I think there’s certain things, such as pace, how much subtext vs text there is, etc… that can tell if dialog and acting is good or not.

That is all subjective crap. I am sorry you chose to further embarrass yourself. One person likes this kind of pace, the other person like that kind of pace. One person prefers minimalistic text, while other prefers lots of text. One person likes some subtext, while other dislikes it. One person sees certain subtext, while other sees some different subtext. Etc. Etc.

You don’t understand the very basic concept of “objective measure”. I will give you an example. Object has properties, such as length and mass. There are objective measures for those two properties (completely independent of personal opinion), such as meters and kilograms. You use meters to measure two objects and you can compare which one is larger in meters. Same for kilograms.

Think of a bad movie. Tell me why it’s bad.

If a person thinks that a certain film is bad it is simply an opinion. There is no objective measure for “badness” or “goodness” of the film.

Huh, dodged the question. So I repeat:

Think of a bad movie. Tell me why it’s bad.

This question is completely off-topic and I answered it indirectly within the topic. But I will now grant you a direct answer.

AOTC is a bad film. It is bad because I think it is bad. I think it bad because I didn’t like it. I didn’t like it because of <various subjective reasons>.

imperialscum said:

yhwx said:

imperialscum said:

yhwx said:

imperialscum said:

yhwx said:

imperialscum said:

yhwx said:

imperialscum said:

Lord Haseo said:

imperialscum said:

Lord Haseo said:

You believe all of the OT films are of the same quality?

First, quality is non-existent property when it comes to art (i.e. completely subjective things).

It’s nonexistent in the fact that it’s not something physically tangible but it exists in the mind and that is all that is pertinent for this conversation.

Quality of a product (and its properties) must be measurable, otherwise it is not quality. If it is measurable, it has to have an objective measure. Completely subjective things (like film) do not have an objective measure. There is no objective measure for properties such as story, acting, dialogue, music, sound, etc.

I’m going to have to disagree with you saying that film is completely subjective.

I don’t mind you disagreeing with the truth. It is just not good for one’s mental health.

Don’t embarrass yourself.

Whether you like something is totally different from if it is a good thing. You can like an objectively bad film. I can say that the dialog in the prequels is objectively bad: It’s stale, it doesn’t make sense, etc. Just like with other fields, film has objective qualities that can be measured.

So then, provide me the objective measure for dialogue and acting.

(A friendly hint: there isn’t one and I would highly recommend you don’t further embarrass yourself)

I think there’s certain things, such as pace, how much subtext vs text there is, etc… that can tell if dialog and acting is good or not.

That is all subjective crap. I am sorry you chose to further embarrass yourself. One person likes this kind of pace, the other person like that kind of pace. One person prefers minimalistic text, while other prefers lots of text. One person likes some subtext, while other dislikes it. One person sees certain subtext, while other sees some different subtext. Etc. Etc.

You don’t understand the very basic concept of “objective measure”. I will give you an example. Object has properties, such as length and mass. There are objective measures for those two properties (completely independent of personal opinion), such as meters and kilograms. You use meters to measure two objects and you can compare which one is larger in meters. Same for kilograms.

Think of a bad movie. Tell me why it’s bad.

If a person thinks that a certain film is bad it is simply an opinion. There is no objective measure for “badness” or “goodness” of the film.

Huh, dodged the question. So I repeat:

Think of a bad movie. Tell me why it’s bad.

This question is completely off-topic and I answered it indirectly within the topic. But I will now grant you a direct answer.

AOTC is a bad film. It is bad because I think it is bad. I think it bad because I didn’t like it. I didn’t like it because of <various subjective reasons>.

Give me the reasons.

yhwx said:

imperialscum said:

yhwx said:

imperialscum said:

yhwx said:

imperialscum said:

yhwx said:

imperialscum said:

yhwx said:

imperialscum said:

Lord Haseo said:

imperialscum said:

Lord Haseo said:

You believe all of the OT films are of the same quality?

First, quality is non-existent property when it comes to art (i.e. completely subjective things).

It’s nonexistent in the fact that it’s not something physically tangible but it exists in the mind and that is all that is pertinent for this conversation.

Quality of a product (and its properties) must be measurable, otherwise it is not quality. If it is measurable, it has to have an objective measure. Completely subjective things (like film) do not have an objective measure. There is no objective measure for properties such as story, acting, dialogue, music, sound, etc.

I’m going to have to disagree with you saying that film is completely subjective.

I don’t mind you disagreeing with the truth. It is just not good for one’s mental health.

Don’t embarrass yourself.

Whether you like something is totally different from if it is a good thing. You can like an objectively bad film. I can say that the dialog in the prequels is objectively bad: It’s stale, it doesn’t make sense, etc. Just like with other fields, film has objective qualities that can be measured.

So then, provide me the objective measure for dialogue and acting.

(A friendly hint: there isn’t one and I would highly recommend you don’t further embarrass yourself)

I think there’s certain things, such as pace, how much subtext vs text there is, etc… that can tell if dialog and acting is good or not.

That is all subjective crap. I am sorry you chose to further embarrass yourself. One person likes this kind of pace, the other person like that kind of pace. One person prefers minimalistic text, while other prefers lots of text. One person likes some subtext, while other dislikes it. One person sees certain subtext, while other sees some different subtext. Etc. Etc.

You don’t understand the very basic concept of “objective measure”. I will give you an example. Object has properties, such as length and mass. There are objective measures for those two properties (completely independent of personal opinion), such as meters and kilograms. You use meters to measure two objects and you can compare which one is larger in meters. Same for kilograms.

Think of a bad movie. Tell me why it’s bad.

If a person thinks that a certain film is bad it is simply an opinion. There is no objective measure for “badness” or “goodness” of the film.

Huh, dodged the question. So I repeat:

Think of a bad movie. Tell me why it’s bad.

This question is completely off-topic and I answered it indirectly within the topic. But I will now grant you a direct answer.

AOTC is a bad film. It is bad because I think it is bad. I think it bad because I didn’t like it. I didn’t like it because of <various subjective reasons>.

Give me the reasons.

I won’t.

Lord Haseo said:

imperialscum said:

Quality of a product (and its properties) must be measurable, otherwise it is not quality. If it is measurable, it has to have an objective measure. Completely subjective things (like film) do not have an objective measure. There is no objective measure for properties such as story, acting, dialogue, music, sound, etc.

Then what term other than “quality” would you use for measuring how good you think something is?

The term “opinion”. And you don’t measure anything. You simply think how good something is.

Lord Haseo said:

imperialscum said:

Lord Haseo said:

You believe all of the OT films are of the same quality?

First, quality is non-existent property when it comes to art (i.e. completely subjective things).

It’s nonexistent in the fact that it’s not something physically tangible but it exists in the mind and that is all that is pertinent for this conversation.

Second, I like them all equally.

SW and ESB I can understand because the have advantages over the other. SW is funnier, more visually interesting, has a catchier soundtrack and has the aura about it. It’s the epitome of classic Star Wars. ESB has a better written script, is better paced, has way better acting and dialogue.

I don’t really consider ROTJ as being in the same league. At it’s best it exceeds a lot of moments that came before it but other aspects of the film leave a sour taste in my mouth.

I have similar feelings about ROTJ not being in the league of Star Wars and ESB. I consider Star Wars and ESB to be some of the best films of all time… Whereas ROTJ is solid on its own but fueled with nostalgia (and cause it’s Star Wars) it is still one of my favorite movies.

EDIT:

ROTJ was a fitting end to the OT but as a finale to the saga it feels a bit weak. This is why I’m so damn excited for episode 9 (not as much as 8) is because it can give me the grand bombastic finale that I’m craving.

"ROTJ is on the same level as ESB and ANH"

Oh

Earl said:

"ROTJ is on the same level as ESB and ANH"

Oh

That is a force kick my friend.

Lord Haseo said:
That’s inconsequential in comparison to the story telling problems it has.

There are no story telling problems. It is all in your mind my friend.

I think that I like ROTJ more than TFA, now that TFA has passed and I’ve seen it a few more times. I still love TFA, and it’s really about equal to ROTJ, but I’m going to give ROTJ the edge for nostalgia. As for SW and ESB, I can never make up my mind. My ratings for each film:

SW: 10/10
ESB: 10/10
ROTJ: 9/10
TFA: 9/10
ROTS: 3/10
TPM: 3/10
AOTC: 2/10

TV’s Frink said:

imperialscum said:

Earl said:

"ROTJ is on the same level as ESB and ANH"

Oh

That is a force kick my friend.

Nope.

I am sorry that you can’t handle the truth.

Lord Haseo said:

imperialscum said:
There are no story telling problems. It is all in your mind my friend.

The fact that Vader did one good thing and get’s into Force Heaven

He did THE good thing. He killed Emperor, which caused Empire’s collapse.

the fact that Yoda is okay with Luke not finish his training even though he said a couple of sentences prior (and in ESB) that only a fully trained Jedi Knight will conquer Vader and his Emperor

Yoda’s and Obi-Wan’s plan was never to use Luke to defeat Vader and Emperor (because that was impossible). They simply used him as a tool to trigger Anakin’s return, who could kill Emperor (and did).

the fact Death Star 2.0 exists

That’s the most stupid complaint about ROTJ ever. The fact that Death Star 2.0 exists is a good story telling as it follows a basic logic. When IJN sunk USN aircraft carriers during the initial stages of Pacific War, did USN stop building aircraft carrier? No… they built newer and bigger ones.

the fact teddy bears somehow overcame the best legion of Storm Troopers The Empire had

There are numerous real life examples when apparently much weaker enemy defeated stronger. And if you actually paid attention to the film, you would see that teddy bears were more of a distraction. Rebels (Chewie in particular) did most of the job. As for “best legion”, Emperor would obviously say “best” to demoralise Luke even if they were “cripple battalion”. There might be a legion-sized unit on the planet guarding different sectors of the huge shield generator complex (film clearly shows it was huge), but that particular back door was obviously guarded by a company-sized unit (which we see in the battle).

the fact that somehow losing the Second Death Star

It is as unrealistic as losing the first one in ANH or as unrealistic as rebels escaping the Hoth blockade in ESB.

Vader, Palpatine in a few Star Destroyers means the war is over etc.

Juts because you came to such a dumb conclusion, it doesn’t mean it is actually the case. The death of the Emperor caused a gradual collapse of the Empire. If Emperor survived, the outcome of this battle would be insignificant. This point connects to Luke being used to trigger Anikan’s return who killed Emperor and saved the galaxy.

I can’t pick apart SW and ESB to that degree; I can only really nitpick as it pertains to story and how it’s executed.

ROTJ is a complex film, even more so than ANH and ESB. From you reply, it is obvious you simply can’t handle this kind of complexity.

It actually makes sense now why you like TFA so much and why I dislike it so much. Because TFA is an empty over-simplistic crap.