Sign In

Star Wars as a cohesive universe/canon. — Page 5

Author
Time

ChainsawAsh said:

BiggsFan44 said:

ChainsawAsh said:

BiggsFan44 said:

I don’t think that’s what you’re actually getting out of the thread

I don’t think you get to tell me how I think, but…

because it isn’t what I’m saying.

…okay, fine.

The OT was first, the PT came next and was made by the same guy, who attempted to graft on an expansion of the original story by making Luke’s father’s journey an inverse of Luke’s.

I disagree in that he contradicted what came before in every subsequent film. Besides, you’re ignoring the contributions of Gary Kurtz, Lawrence Kasdan, Irvin Kershner, Howard Kazanjian, and Richard Marquand to the OT (though I’d argue that Kazanjian and Marquand had markedly less influence on ROTJ than Kurtz did on ANH and ESB or Kershner and Kasdan did on ESB), and ignoring the fact that Kasdan co-wrote ESB and ROTJ while also co-writing TFA and Solo.

The ST is being made by people who can be assumed to strongly disagree with elements of the PT, and make movies that reflect that.

I don’t understand why this is a problem, since they take place after the OT, and as such should be sequels to the OT. Besides, there’s a ton of prequel influence in TLJ and even a little in TFA, so I’d also argue you’re blatantly wrong about this and letting your feelings about the ST get in the way, since you’re stating this as objective fact when it quite clearly isn’t.

For example, Infinity War feels like a modern blockbuster- using all the tech at its disposal to craft a HUGE story.

What? Why does that matter?

Or even look at Solo and Rogue One- they’re shot with digital cameras.

So?

But everything TFA does (cloning a resource limited movie from 1977 being a big one)

Oh, you don’t like that TFA was shot on film? Really? Why does that make a difference?

is a condemnation of the last movies in the saga before it, real life-time wise.

It…what? How? You’re stating this as objective fact without citing any examples.

Now, this isn’t even about whether TFA is better or worse than the PT, really. I’m simply asking- How are we supposed to believe that Episode 7 is the continuation of a collection movies that it is telling off half of?

Because it’s set decades later with similar characters and is clearly part of the same universe?

If this isn’t just a “waaaah I don’t like the ST and I’m angry about it” thing, then I honestly don’t understand what you’re saying.

If you can’t see how TFA is “people who were burned by the PT please come back, you liked ANH right?: The Movie”, then I don’t see how we can converse.

If you can’t give examples for why you think this is the case, or if it is, how that “completely destroy[s] the illusion that ALL of these events from ALL of these movies and shows take place in the same universe” (the entire thesis from your original post, copy/pasted exactly), then I don’t see how we can converse, either.

But I did.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

BiggsFan44 said:

Empire vs Rebels 2.0 was not in Lucas’ story. Sorry.

"The important thing to know was this, throughout the entire guided imagery phase, Lucas was involved.

And what ideas were born in the guided imagery phase?

Kira (Rey/Thea) as a scavenger on a desert planet.

Skylar/Finn/Sam as Kira’s friend.

Kira finding a “map” to Luke Skywalker by the end of the film.

Luke being in hiding somewhere and dealing with some heavy emotional issues.

The nebulous concept of the Jedi Killer (Talon as Jedi Killer is just one possibility, the earliest Jedi Killer art really changes the appearance up, from non-human to human to Talon to Knight of Ren looking dude, to perhaps even Snoke himself.

Han Solo was back to his smuggling ways.

Leia was in a position of power.

The Neo-Empire was a thing (just not called First Order yet).

There was a “shadowy puppeteer” behind Talon/the Jedi Killer.

A final confrontation between Rey/Thea/Kira and the “Jedi Killer” on an snow planet.

The Neo-Empire having a superweapon.

A Yoda-like creature to move the story along (eventually Maz).

A graveyard of imperial stuff on various planets, including Jakku.

A forest planet w/ a castle (what eventually becomes Maz’s stronghold).

A green planet with a WWII style “Republic base.”

Kira/Rey/Thea living in an AT-AT.

Again, lots and lots of pictures of Kira/Rey/Thea wandering the junkyards of her world and being a gearhead/techie/scavenger.

Luke’s hiding spot was always either an island or a forest planet that was gorgeous.

This is all from the guided imagery phase! Where Lucas’ treatment was still being reworked by himself, Kennedy and Arndt! And before J.J. was a) officially announced as director, and b) even really that involved!

This phase went up until June of 2013."

Much of this information comes from the Art of the Force Awakens.

And I don’t have sources on hand, but I’ve seen convincing arguments on TFN for Luke in TLJ not really jiving with Campbell.

Then bring them when you get the chance.

The rest I just disagree with. Also Rey has less reason to fall for Kylo than Padme did Anakin, AKA basically none.

Star Wars fans in the 2000s would have laughed at you if you even thought Padme had much of a reason to fall for Anakin. Now, I think she did, but most fans didn’t. And Rey and Kylo’s mind literally became one, feeling all of their own hopes, fears and insecurities in a single moment. I think they know each other on a deeper level than anyone else knows them.

Author
Time

Alright, I’ll try to find your “examples” from throughout the thread and respond to them.

First, Yoda:

For example, I was just watching TLJ and I got to the scene with Yoda. Yoda is a puppet in TLJ when he was CG in the PT. The problem for me is that these movies are supposed to be installments in the same story, and yet that illusion is shattered into a million pieces when things like puppet Yoda

Yoda in TLJ is supposed to look as much like he did in ghost form in ROTJ as possible. He’s a puppet in the end of ROTJ when he’s a ghost. It would, in my opinion, be more immersion-breaking for him to be CGI and appear as he did 20 years before his death. It would be a different story (and an entirely different can of worms) had Lucas replaced ESB/ROTJ Yoda with a CGI model, but he never did. So, chronologically, you see (I) CGI/puppet (depending on the version of TPM you watch) > (II) CGI > (III) CGI > (V) Puppet > (VI) Puppet > (VIII) Puppet. You really think that (I) CGI/puppet > (II) CGI > (III) CGI > (V) Puppet > (VI) Puppet > (VIII) CGI would have been more cohesive when looked at as a full saga?

The Maz Kanata argument is invalid to me because she never appeared in any film prior to TFA, so there’s an infinite amount of freedom in her appearance. You’d have an argument if she appeared in TFA as CGI and was suddenly a puppet in TLJ, or something, but as it stands you’re creating a comparison where there isn’t one.

Yoda being CG might strain the link up with the OT, but the strain doesn’t come from what my thread is about, which is how we can consider this all to be one universe if creators are passing judgement on the quality of the depiction of supposedly equally canonical events.

So Lucas broke the cohesion of “one universe” by changing Yoda from a puppet to CGI first. Yet it’s the ST you’re railing against for going back to the puppet. That seems like a double standard to me - villifying ST filmmakers for changing a thing from one film to the next while excusing Lucas from doing the same because you prefer his movies.

On to other things…

or TFA being like the anti-prequel in much of its approach

How?

are pretty much rebuttals of earlier installments.

How are they rebuttals? Do they claim that the earlier movies never happened, wiping them from continuity the way every Highlander sequel has done to the film that came before it? No.

how can the fact that people can’t stop picking and choosing elements they like and don’t like from the movies (that goes for fans and creators alike) not completely destroy the illusion that ALL of these events from ALL of these movies and shows take place in the same universe?

It…doesn’t? I don’t understand how it does, and I’ve yet to see an explanation from you as to how this is the case in your mind.

the fact that TCW Anakin maybe should have been closer to Hayden, but also that they aren’t really AS different as Hayden detractors claim, and late season Lanter Anakin was as “unlikable” as Anakin ever was, especially in arcs like the second Clovis arc.

Did you just refute your own argument about Anakin in the same sentence in which you brought it up? Because I think you did.

I’d argue that the ST betrays the spirit of the series more than the PT did though. And that’s a larger problem than things like why Owen didn’t recognize 3-P0.
TFA is a waste of 200 million dollars because it copies a movie but makes it worse (And the argument that the first Disney SW movie needed to feel “familiar” is moot, since TFA locks the entire trilogy into a “big bad Empire vs. scrappy rebels” redo, complete with locking in the stale aesthetic/art direction), and TLJ writes Luke so incredibly OOC that he can’t be considered the same character who said “You’ve failed, your highness. I am a Jedi, like my father before me.”

Okay, this is where I stop, because all of this is 100% “I don’t like the ST so I’m going to rail against it and find every avenue I can to attack it” and not a discussion of keeping canonical cohesion of a saga across multiple decades and filmmakers. Which is the discussion I was hoping to find when I opened this thread.

a trolling bantha

Author
Time

ChainsawAsh said:

Alright, I’ll try to find your “examples” from throughout the thread and respond to them.

First, Yoda:

For example, I was just watching TLJ and I got to the scene with Yoda. Yoda is a puppet in TLJ when he was CG in the PT. The problem for me is that these movies are supposed to be installments in the same story, and yet that illusion is shattered into a million pieces when things like puppet Yoda

Yoda in TLJ is supposed to look as much like he did in ghost form in ROTJ as possible. He’s a puppet in the end of ROTJ when he’s a ghost. It would, in my opinion, be more immersion-breaking for him to be CGI and appear as he did 20 years before his death. It would be a different story (and an entirely different can of worms) had Lucas replaced ESB/ROTJ Yoda with a CGI model, but he never did. So, chronologically, you see (I) CGI/puppet (depending on the version of TPM you watch) > (II) CGI > (III) CGI > (V) Puppet > (VI) Puppet > (VIII) Puppet. You really think that (I) CGI/puppet > (II) CGI > (III) CGI > (V) Puppet > (VI) Puppet > (VIII) CGI would have been more cohesive when looked at as a full saga?

The Maz Kanata argument is invalid to me because she never appeared in any film prior to TFA, so there’s an infinite amount of freedom in her appearance. You’d have an argument if she appeared in TFA as CGI and was suddenly a puppet in TLJ, or something, but as it stands you’re creating a comparison where there isn’t one.

Yoda being CG might strain the link up with the OT, but the strain doesn’t come from what my thread is about, which is how we can consider this all to be one universe if creators are passing judgement on the quality of the depiction of supposedly equally canonical events.

So Lucas broke the cohesion of “one universe” by changing Yoda from a puppet to CGI first. Yet it’s the ST you’re railing against for going back to the puppet. That seems like a double standard to me - villifying ST filmmakers for changing a thing from one film to the next while excusing Lucas from doing the same because you prefer his movies.

On to other things…

or TFA being like the anti-prequel in much of its approach

How?

are pretty much rebuttals of earlier installments.

How are they rebuttals? Do they claim that the earlier movies never happened, wiping them from continuity the way every Highlander sequel has done to the film that came before it? No.

how can the fact that people can’t stop picking and choosing elements they like and don’t like from the movies (that goes for fans and creators alike) not completely destroy the illusion that ALL of these events from ALL of these movies and shows take place in the same universe?

It…doesn’t? I don’t understand how it does, and I’ve yet to see an explanation from you as to how this is the case in your mind.

the fact that TCW Anakin maybe should have been closer to Hayden, but also that they aren’t really AS different as Hayden detractors claim, and late season Lanter Anakin was as “unlikable” as Anakin ever was, especially in arcs like the second Clovis arc.

Did you just refute your own argument about Anakin in the same sentence in which you brought it up? Because I think you did.

I’d argue that the ST betrays the spirit of the series more than the PT did though. And that’s a larger problem than things like why Owen didn’t recognize 3-P0.
TFA is a waste of 200 million dollars because it copies a movie but makes it worse (And the argument that the first Disney SW movie needed to feel “familiar” is moot, since TFA locks the entire trilogy into a “big bad Empire vs. scrappy rebels” redo, complete with locking in the stale aesthetic/art direction), and TLJ writes Luke so incredibly OOC that he can’t be considered the same character who said “You’ve failed, your highness. I am a Jedi, like my father before me.”

Okay, this is where I stop, because all of this is 100% “I don’t like the ST so I’m going to rail against it and find every avenue I can to attack it” and not a discussion of keeping canonical cohesion of a saga across multiple decades and filmmakers. Which is the discussion I was hoping to find when I opened this thread.

The Rosetta Stone of TFA is this- it doesn’t even have a scene that explains the political scenario to the level ANH did with the Tarkin round table scene, simply because the PT had “too much politics.”
TFA is so OBVIOUSLY reactionary, you trolling bantha.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

RogueLeader said:

BiggsFan44 said:

Empire vs Rebels 2.0 was not in Lucas’ story. Sorry.

"The important thing to know was this, throughout the entire guided imagery phase, Lucas was involved.

And what ideas were born in the guided imagery phase?

Kira (Rey/Thea) as a scavenger on a desert planet.

Skylar/Finn/Sam as Kira’s friend.

Kira finding a “map” to Luke Skywalker by the end of the film.

Luke being in hiding somewhere and dealing with some heavy emotional issues.

The nebulous concept of the Jedi Killer (Talon as Jedi Killer is just one possibility, the earliest Jedi Killer art really changes the appearance up, from non-human to human to Talon to Knight of Ren looking dude, to perhaps even Snoke himself.

Han Solo was back to his smuggling ways.

Leia was in a position of power.

The Neo-Empire was a thing (just not called First Order yet).

There was a “shadowy puppeteer” behind Talon/the Jedi Killer.

A final confrontation between Rey/Thea/Kira and the “Jedi Killer” on an snow planet.

The Neo-Empire having a superweapon.

A Yoda-like creature to move the story along (eventually Maz).

A graveyard of imperial stuff on various planets, including Jakku.

A forest planet w/ a castle (what eventually becomes Maz’s stronghold).

A green planet with a WWII style “Republic base.”

Kira/Rey/Thea living in an AT-AT.

Again, lots and lots of pictures of Kira/Rey/Thea wandering the junkyards of her world and being a gearhead/techie/scavenger.

Luke’s hiding spot was always either an island or a forest planet that was gorgeous.

This is all from the guided imagery phase! Where Lucas’ treatment was still being reworked by himself, Kennedy and Arndt! And before J.J. was a) officially announced as director, and b) even really that involved!

This phase went up until June of 2013."

Much of this information comes from the Art of the Force Awakens.

And I don’t have sources on hand, but I’ve seen convincing arguments on TFN for Luke in TLJ not really jiving with Campbell.

Then bring them when you get the chance.

The rest I just disagree with. Also Rey has less reason to fall for Kylo than Padme did Anakin, AKA basically none.

Star Wars fans in the 2000s would have laughed at you if you even thought Padme had much of a reason to fall for Anakin. Now, I think she did, but most fans didn’t. And Rey and Kylo’s mind literally became one, feeling all of their own hopes, fears and insecurities in a single moment. I think they know each other on a deeper level than anyone else knows them.

You didn’t address the first point you quoted.
Lucas didn’t hit the reset button in his version.
It wasn’t Empire vs Rebels 2.
It was Empire vs a functioning New Republic.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

BiggsFan44 said:

ChainsawAsh said:

Alright, I’ll try to find your “examples” from throughout the thread and respond to them.

First, Yoda:

For example, I was just watching TLJ and I got to the scene with Yoda. Yoda is a puppet in TLJ when he was CG in the PT. The problem for me is that these movies are supposed to be installments in the same story, and yet that illusion is shattered into a million pieces when things like puppet Yoda

Yoda in TLJ is supposed to look as much like he did in ghost form in ROTJ as possible. He’s a puppet in the end of ROTJ when he’s a ghost. It would, in my opinion, be more immersion-breaking for him to be CGI and appear as he did 20 years before his death. It would be a different story (and an entirely different can of worms) had Lucas replaced ESB/ROTJ Yoda with a CGI model, but he never did. So, chronologically, you see (I) CGI/puppet (depending on the version of TPM you watch) > (II) CGI > (III) CGI > (V) Puppet > (VI) Puppet > (VIII) Puppet. You really think that (I) CGI/puppet > (II) CGI > (III) CGI > (V) Puppet > (VI) Puppet > (VIII) CGI would have been more cohesive when looked at as a full saga?

The Maz Kanata argument is invalid to me because she never appeared in any film prior to TFA, so there’s an infinite amount of freedom in her appearance. You’d have an argument if she appeared in TFA as CGI and was suddenly a puppet in TLJ, or something, but as it stands you’re creating a comparison where there isn’t one.

Yoda being CG might strain the link up with the OT, but the strain doesn’t come from what my thread is about, which is how we can consider this all to be one universe if creators are passing judgement on the quality of the depiction of supposedly equally canonical events.

So Lucas broke the cohesion of “one universe” by changing Yoda from a puppet to CGI first. Yet it’s the ST you’re railing against for going back to the puppet. That seems like a double standard to me - villifying ST filmmakers for changing a thing from one film to the next while excusing Lucas from doing the same because you prefer his movies.

On to other things…

or TFA being like the anti-prequel in much of its approach

How?

are pretty much rebuttals of earlier installments.

How are they rebuttals? Do they claim that the earlier movies never happened, wiping them from continuity the way every Highlander sequel has done to the film that came before it? No.

how can the fact that people can’t stop picking and choosing elements they like and don’t like from the movies (that goes for fans and creators alike) not completely destroy the illusion that ALL of these events from ALL of these movies and shows take place in the same universe?

It…doesn’t? I don’t understand how it does, and I’ve yet to see an explanation from you as to how this is the case in your mind.

the fact that TCW Anakin maybe should have been closer to Hayden, but also that they aren’t really AS different as Hayden detractors claim, and late season Lanter Anakin was as “unlikable” as Anakin ever was, especially in arcs like the second Clovis arc.

Did you just refute your own argument about Anakin in the same sentence in which you brought it up? Because I think you did.

I’d argue that the ST betrays the spirit of the series more than the PT did though. And that’s a larger problem than things like why Owen didn’t recognize 3-P0.
TFA is a waste of 200 million dollars because it copies a movie but makes it worse (And the argument that the first Disney SW movie needed to feel “familiar” is moot, since TFA locks the entire trilogy into a “big bad Empire vs. scrappy rebels” redo, complete with locking in the stale aesthetic/art direction), and TLJ writes Luke so incredibly OOC that he can’t be considered the same character who said “You’ve failed, your highness. I am a Jedi, like my father before me.”

Okay, this is where I stop, because all of this is 100% “I don’t like the ST so I’m going to rail against it and find every avenue I can to attack it” and not a discussion of keeping canonical cohesion of a saga across multiple decades and filmmakers. Which is the discussion I was hoping to find when I opened this thread.

The Rosetta Stone of TFA is this- it doesn’t even have a scene that explains the political scenario to the level ANH did with the Tarkin round table scene, simply because the PT had “too much politics.”
TFA is so OBVIOUSLY reactionary, you trolling bantha.

Love it when members with one-day-old accounts call 14-year veterans of the site trolls.

Clearly you’re not interested in having an actual conversation. Thanks for the new signature quote, though. Bye.

a trolling bantha

Author
Time
 (Edited)

ChainsawAsh said:

BiggsFan44 said:

ChainsawAsh said:

Alright, I’ll try to find your “examples” from throughout the thread and respond to them.

First, Yoda:

For example, I was just watching TLJ and I got to the scene with Yoda. Yoda is a puppet in TLJ when he was CG in the PT. The problem for me is that these movies are supposed to be installments in the same story, and yet that illusion is shattered into a million pieces when things like puppet Yoda

Yoda in TLJ is supposed to look as much like he did in ghost form in ROTJ as possible. He’s a puppet in the end of ROTJ when he’s a ghost. It would, in my opinion, be more immersion-breaking for him to be CGI and appear as he did 20 years before his death. It would be a different story (and an entirely different can of worms) had Lucas replaced ESB/ROTJ Yoda with a CGI model, but he never did. So, chronologically, you see (I) CGI/puppet (depending on the version of TPM you watch) > (II) CGI > (III) CGI > (V) Puppet > (VI) Puppet > (VIII) Puppet. You really think that (I) CGI/puppet > (II) CGI > (III) CGI > (V) Puppet > (VI) Puppet > (VIII) CGI would have been more cohesive when looked at as a full saga?

The Maz Kanata argument is invalid to me because she never appeared in any film prior to TFA, so there’s an infinite amount of freedom in her appearance. You’d have an argument if she appeared in TFA as CGI and was suddenly a puppet in TLJ, or something, but as it stands you’re creating a comparison where there isn’t one.

Yoda being CG might strain the link up with the OT, but the strain doesn’t come from what my thread is about, which is how we can consider this all to be one universe if creators are passing judgement on the quality of the depiction of supposedly equally canonical events.

So Lucas broke the cohesion of “one universe” by changing Yoda from a puppet to CGI first. Yet it’s the ST you’re railing against for going back to the puppet. That seems like a double standard to me - villifying ST filmmakers for changing a thing from one film to the next while excusing Lucas from doing the same because you prefer his movies.

On to other things…

or TFA being like the anti-prequel in much of its approach

How?

are pretty much rebuttals of earlier installments.

How are they rebuttals? Do they claim that the earlier movies never happened, wiping them from continuity the way every Highlander sequel has done to the film that came before it? No.

how can the fact that people can’t stop picking and choosing elements they like and don’t like from the movies (that goes for fans and creators alike) not completely destroy the illusion that ALL of these events from ALL of these movies and shows take place in the same universe?

It…doesn’t? I don’t understand how it does, and I’ve yet to see an explanation from you as to how this is the case in your mind.

the fact that TCW Anakin maybe should have been closer to Hayden, but also that they aren’t really AS different as Hayden detractors claim, and late season Lanter Anakin was as “unlikable” as Anakin ever was, especially in arcs like the second Clovis arc.

Did you just refute your own argument about Anakin in the same sentence in which you brought it up? Because I think you did.

I’d argue that the ST betrays the spirit of the series more than the PT did though. And that’s a larger problem than things like why Owen didn’t recognize 3-P0.
TFA is a waste of 200 million dollars because it copies a movie but makes it worse (And the argument that the first Disney SW movie needed to feel “familiar” is moot, since TFA locks the entire trilogy into a “big bad Empire vs. scrappy rebels” redo, complete with locking in the stale aesthetic/art direction), and TLJ writes Luke so incredibly OOC that he can’t be considered the same character who said “You’ve failed, your highness. I am a Jedi, like my father before me.”

Okay, this is where I stop, because all of this is 100% “I don’t like the ST so I’m going to rail against it and find every avenue I can to attack it” and not a discussion of keeping canonical cohesion of a saga across multiple decades and filmmakers. Which is the discussion I was hoping to find when I opened this thread.

The Rosetta Stone of TFA is this- it doesn’t even have a scene that explains the political scenario to the level ANH did with the Tarkin round table scene, simply because the PT had “too much politics.”
TFA is so OBVIOUSLY reactionary, you trolling bantha.

Love it when members with one-day-old accounts call 14-year veterans of the site trolls.

Clearly you’re not interested in having an actual conversation. Thanks for the new signature quote, though. Bye.

What does time on this forum have to do with it? You’re not going to troll people who share your opinions.
Also, you know I’m right about TFA.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

BiggsFan44 said:

You didn’t address the first point you quoted.
Lucas didn’t hit the reset button in his version.
It wasn’t Empire vs Rebels 2.
It was Empire vs a functioning New Republic.

I agree with you that TFA played it safe and used OT imagery and story beats because they wanted something to ease fans back into Star Wars. I wish they had a little more creative imagery, and over on the fan edit thread we’re finding ways to add more political context to the film that we wish it had. But we still like The Force Awakens, though. I think the political situation makes sense in these new films, but I wish it had been made a little clearer in them. And I think in the long run, Resistance/Republic would have served the same function with differences mostly in name. Since a superweapon existed in George’s version I imagine the Republic would have had a similar fate to what actually happened in TFA. And I don’t think people would have had as much issues with the situation if they wouldn’t have been afraid to explain it more.

I just think you are at the point of thought that this a terrible movie even though there is still a lot to love about this film. Like others have said, I feel like you made this thread to find people to agree with your opinions rather than be open-minded about anything else.

EDIT: Especially when you say stuff like, “You know I’m right about TFA.” You have already made your mind up.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

RogueLeader said:
I just think you are at the point of thought that this a terrible movie even though there is still a lot to love about this film. Like others have said, I feel like you made this thread to find people to agree with your opinions rather than be open-minded about anything else.

Again, it’s not even about quality.
Let’s use Anakin instead of TFA since you people get hung up on defending JJ- how can early TCW Anakin, who is basically

  1. A different character than movie Anakin
  2. Clearly Filoni’s response to failings he perceived with movie Anakin

be said to exist in the same story as an alternate version of that character?
How can different be the same?

EDIT: The “ease back into SW” party line is moot since TFA locked all three movies into a visual and narrative rehash, not just itself. At the VERY least, it did that more than George was going to.

Author
Time

BiggsFan44 said:

RogueLeader said:
I just think you are at the point of thought that this a terrible movie even though there is still a lot to love about this film. Like others have said, I feel like you made this thread to find people to agree with your opinions rather than be open-minded about anything else.

Again, it’s not even about quality.
Let’s use Anakin instead of TFA since you people get hung up on defending JJ- how can early TCW Anakin, who is basically

  1. A different character than movie Anakin
  2. Clearly Filoni’s response to failings he perceived with movie Anakin

be said to exist in the same story as an alternate version of that character?
How can different be the same?

You know Lucas was heavily involved in TCW, especially in the early years right?

Author
Time
 (Edited)

DominicCobb said:

BiggsFan44 said:

RogueLeader said:
I just think you are at the point of thought that this a terrible movie even though there is still a lot to love about this film. Like others have said, I feel like you made this thread to find people to agree with your opinions rather than be open-minded about anything else.

Again, it’s not even about quality.
Let’s use Anakin instead of TFA since you people get hung up on defending JJ- how can early TCW Anakin, who is basically

  1. A different character than movie Anakin
  2. Clearly Filoni’s response to failings he perceived with movie Anakin

be said to exist in the same story as an alternate version of that character?
How can different be the same?

You know Lucas was heavily involved in TCW, especially in the early years right?

I do, although I was under the impression that he become more involved as it went along, since Gilroy and co say season one was a little more “just them”, and Filoni talks about how GL started to become excited about the potential around season 3.
That also explains why TCW Anakin became more and more like Hayden’s portrayal as the show continued, in both character and appearance (visually, they shaved down his chiseled-by-god-himself jaw and gave him Hayden’s slighty forward shoulders).
I also know that GL often gave in to Filoni, like with the Order 66 chip.

Author
Time

BiggsFan44 said:

This was kind of a ramble, but it’s something i’ve been wanting to get off my chest for a while. Any thoughts?

Do you feel better now that you aired your ST hate?

Author
Time

dahmage said:

BiggsFan44 said:

This was kind of a ramble, but it’s something i’ve been wanting to get off my chest for a while. Any thoughts?

Do you feel better now that you aired your ST hate?

See my previous replies to this question, please.
Perhaps the one where I talk about Anakin.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

BiggsFan44 said:

dahmage said:

BiggsFan44 said:

This was kind of a ramble, but it’s something i’ve been wanting to get off my chest for a while. Any thoughts?

Do you feel better now that you aired your ST hate?

See my previous replies to this question, please.
Perhaps the one where I talk about Anakin.

.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

BiggsFan44 said:

ChainsawAsh said:

Alright, I’ll try to find your “examples” from throughout the thread and respond to them.

First, Yoda:

For example, I was just watching TLJ and I got to the scene with Yoda. Yoda is a puppet in TLJ when he was CG in the PT. The problem for me is that these movies are supposed to be installments in the same story, and yet that illusion is shattered into a million pieces when things like puppet Yoda

Yoda in TLJ is supposed to look as much like he did in ghost form in ROTJ as possible. He’s a puppet in the end of ROTJ when he’s a ghost. It would, in my opinion, be more immersion-breaking for him to be CGI and appear as he did 20 years before his death. It would be a different story (and an entirely different can of worms) had Lucas replaced ESB/ROTJ Yoda with a CGI model, but he never did. So, chronologically, you see (I) CGI/puppet (depending on the version of TPM you watch) > (II) CGI > (III) CGI > (V) Puppet > (VI) Puppet > (VIII) Puppet. You really think that (I) CGI/puppet > (II) CGI > (III) CGI > (V) Puppet > (VI) Puppet > (VIII) CGI would have been more cohesive when looked at as a full saga?

The Maz Kanata argument is invalid to me because she never appeared in any film prior to TFA, so there’s an infinite amount of freedom in her appearance. You’d have an argument if she appeared in TFA as CGI and was suddenly a puppet in TLJ, or something, but as it stands you’re creating a comparison where there isn’t one.

Yoda being CG might strain the link up with the OT, but the strain doesn’t come from what my thread is about, which is how we can consider this all to be one universe if creators are passing judgement on the quality of the depiction of supposedly equally canonical events.

So Lucas broke the cohesion of “one universe” by changing Yoda from a puppet to CGI first. Yet it’s the ST you’re railing against for going back to the puppet. That seems like a double standard to me - villifying ST filmmakers for changing a thing from one film to the next while excusing Lucas from doing the same because you prefer his movies.

On to other things…

or TFA being like the anti-prequel in much of its approach

How?

are pretty much rebuttals of earlier installments.

How are they rebuttals? Do they claim that the earlier movies never happened, wiping them from continuity the way every Highlander sequel has done to the film that came before it? No.

how can the fact that people can’t stop picking and choosing elements they like and don’t like from the movies (that goes for fans and creators alike) not completely destroy the illusion that ALL of these events from ALL of these movies and shows take place in the same universe?

It…doesn’t? I don’t understand how it does, and I’ve yet to see an explanation from you as to how this is the case in your mind.

the fact that TCW Anakin maybe should have been closer to Hayden, but also that they aren’t really AS different as Hayden detractors claim, and late season Lanter Anakin was as “unlikable” as Anakin ever was, especially in arcs like the second Clovis arc.

Did you just refute your own argument about Anakin in the same sentence in which you brought it up? Because I think you did.

I’d argue that the ST betrays the spirit of the series more than the PT did though. And that’s a larger problem than things like why Owen didn’t recognize 3-P0.
TFA is a waste of 200 million dollars because it copies a movie but makes it worse (And the argument that the first Disney SW movie needed to feel “familiar” is moot, since TFA locks the entire trilogy into a “big bad Empire vs. scrappy rebels” redo, complete with locking in the stale aesthetic/art direction), and TLJ writes Luke so incredibly OOC that he can’t be considered the same character who said “You’ve failed, your highness. I am a Jedi, like my father before me.”

Okay, this is where I stop, because all of this is 100% “I don’t like the ST so I’m going to rail against it and find every avenue I can to attack it” and not a discussion of keeping canonical cohesion of a saga across multiple decades and filmmakers. Which is the discussion I was hoping to find when I opened this thread.

The Rosetta Stone of TFA is this- it doesn’t even have a scene that explains the political scenario to the level ANH did with the Tarkin round table scene, simply because the PT had “too much politics.”
TFA is so OBVIOUSLY reactionary, you trolling bantha.

BiggsFan44 said:

ChainsawAsh said:

BiggsFan44 said:

ChainsawAsh said:

Alright, I’ll try to find your “examples” from throughout the thread and respond to them.

First, Yoda:

For example, I was just watching TLJ and I got to the scene with Yoda. Yoda is a puppet in TLJ when he was CG in the PT. The problem for me is that these movies are supposed to be installments in the same story, and yet that illusion is shattered into a million pieces when things like puppet Yoda

Yoda in TLJ is supposed to look as much like he did in ghost form in ROTJ as possible. He’s a puppet in the end of ROTJ when he’s a ghost. It would, in my opinion, be more immersion-breaking for him to be CGI and appear as he did 20 years before his death. It would be a different story (and an entirely different can of worms) had Lucas replaced ESB/ROTJ Yoda with a CGI model, but he never did. So, chronologically, you see (I) CGI/puppet (depending on the version of TPM you watch) > (II) CGI > (III) CGI > (V) Puppet > (VI) Puppet > (VIII) Puppet. You really think that (I) CGI/puppet > (II) CGI > (III) CGI > (V) Puppet > (VI) Puppet > (VIII) CGI would have been more cohesive when looked at as a full saga?

The Maz Kanata argument is invalid to me because she never appeared in any film prior to TFA, so there’s an infinite amount of freedom in her appearance. You’d have an argument if she appeared in TFA as CGI and was suddenly a puppet in TLJ, or something, but as it stands you’re creating a comparison where there isn’t one.

Yoda being CG might strain the link up with the OT, but the strain doesn’t come from what my thread is about, which is how we can consider this all to be one universe if creators are passing judgement on the quality of the depiction of supposedly equally canonical events.

So Lucas broke the cohesion of “one universe” by changing Yoda from a puppet to CGI first. Yet it’s the ST you’re railing against for going back to the puppet. That seems like a double standard to me - villifying ST filmmakers for changing a thing from one film to the next while excusing Lucas from doing the same because you prefer his movies.

On to other things…

or TFA being like the anti-prequel in much of its approach

How?

are pretty much rebuttals of earlier installments.

How are they rebuttals? Do they claim that the earlier movies never happened, wiping them from continuity the way every Highlander sequel has done to the film that came before it? No.

how can the fact that people can’t stop picking and choosing elements they like and don’t like from the movies (that goes for fans and creators alike) not completely destroy the illusion that ALL of these events from ALL of these movies and shows take place in the same universe?

It…doesn’t? I don’t understand how it does, and I’ve yet to see an explanation from you as to how this is the case in your mind.

the fact that TCW Anakin maybe should have been closer to Hayden, but also that they aren’t really AS different as Hayden detractors claim, and late season Lanter Anakin was as “unlikable” as Anakin ever was, especially in arcs like the second Clovis arc.

Did you just refute your own argument about Anakin in the same sentence in which you brought it up? Because I think you did.

I’d argue that the ST betrays the spirit of the series more than the PT did though. And that’s a larger problem than things like why Owen didn’t recognize 3-P0.
TFA is a waste of 200 million dollars because it copies a movie but makes it worse (And the argument that the first Disney SW movie needed to feel “familiar” is moot, since TFA locks the entire trilogy into a “big bad Empire vs. scrappy rebels” redo, complete with locking in the stale aesthetic/art direction), and TLJ writes Luke so incredibly OOC that he can’t be considered the same character who said “You’ve failed, your highness. I am a Jedi, like my father before me.”

Okay, this is where I stop, because all of this is 100% “I don’t like the ST so I’m going to rail against it and find every avenue I can to attack it” and not a discussion of keeping canonical cohesion of a saga across multiple decades and filmmakers. Which is the discussion I was hoping to find when I opened this thread.

The Rosetta Stone of TFA is this- it doesn’t even have a scene that explains the political scenario to the level ANH did with the Tarkin round table scene, simply because the PT had “too much politics.”
TFA is so OBVIOUSLY reactionary, you trolling bantha.

Love it when members with one-day-old accounts call 14-year veterans of the site trolls.

Clearly you’re not interested in having an actual conversation. Thanks for the new signature quote, though. Bye.

What does time on this forum have to do with it? You’re not going to troll people who share your opinions.
Also, you know I’m right about TFA.

lawl

I suspect there’s indeed a “trolling bantha” in this thread, but it isn’t ChainsawAsh.

Divergent Universes
Dreams of a Randy Git-Fiend

Author
Time
 (Edited)

DuracellEnergizer said:

BiggsFan44 said:

ChainsawAsh said:

Alright, I’ll try to find your “examples” from throughout the thread and respond to them.

First, Yoda:

For example, I was just watching TLJ and I got to the scene with Yoda. Yoda is a puppet in TLJ when he was CG in the PT. The problem for me is that these movies are supposed to be installments in the same story, and yet that illusion is shattered into a million pieces when things like puppet Yoda

Yoda in TLJ is supposed to look as much like he did in ghost form in ROTJ as possible. He’s a puppet in the end of ROTJ when he’s a ghost. It would, in my opinion, be more immersion-breaking for him to be CGI and appear as he did 20 years before his death. It would be a different story (and an entirely different can of worms) had Lucas replaced ESB/ROTJ Yoda with a CGI model, but he never did. So, chronologically, you see (I) CGI/puppet (depending on the version of TPM you watch) > (II) CGI > (III) CGI > (V) Puppet > (VI) Puppet > (VIII) Puppet. You really think that (I) CGI/puppet > (II) CGI > (III) CGI > (V) Puppet > (VI) Puppet > (VIII) CGI would have been more cohesive when looked at as a full saga?

The Maz Kanata argument is invalid to me because she never appeared in any film prior to TFA, so there’s an infinite amount of freedom in her appearance. You’d have an argument if she appeared in TFA as CGI and was suddenly a puppet in TLJ, or something, but as it stands you’re creating a comparison where there isn’t one.

Yoda being CG might strain the link up with the OT, but the strain doesn’t come from what my thread is about, which is how we can consider this all to be one universe if creators are passing judgement on the quality of the depiction of supposedly equally canonical events.

So Lucas broke the cohesion of “one universe” by changing Yoda from a puppet to CGI first. Yet it’s the ST you’re railing against for going back to the puppet. That seems like a double standard to me - villifying ST filmmakers for changing a thing from one film to the next while excusing Lucas from doing the same because you prefer his movies.

On to other things…

or TFA being like the anti-prequel in much of its approach

How?

are pretty much rebuttals of earlier installments.

How are they rebuttals? Do they claim that the earlier movies never happened, wiping them from continuity the way every Highlander sequel has done to the film that came before it? No.

how can the fact that people can’t stop picking and choosing elements they like and don’t like from the movies (that goes for fans and creators alike) not completely destroy the illusion that ALL of these events from ALL of these movies and shows take place in the same universe?

It…doesn’t? I don’t understand how it does, and I’ve yet to see an explanation from you as to how this is the case in your mind.

the fact that TCW Anakin maybe should have been closer to Hayden, but also that they aren’t really AS different as Hayden detractors claim, and late season Lanter Anakin was as “unlikable” as Anakin ever was, especially in arcs like the second Clovis arc.

Did you just refute your own argument about Anakin in the same sentence in which you brought it up? Because I think you did.

I’d argue that the ST betrays the spirit of the series more than the PT did though. And that’s a larger problem than things like why Owen didn’t recognize 3-P0.
TFA is a waste of 200 million dollars because it copies a movie but makes it worse (And the argument that the first Disney SW movie needed to feel “familiar” is moot, since TFA locks the entire trilogy into a “big bad Empire vs. scrappy rebels” redo, complete with locking in the stale aesthetic/art direction), and TLJ writes Luke so incredibly OOC that he can’t be considered the same character who said “You’ve failed, your highness. I am a Jedi, like my father before me.”

Okay, this is where I stop, because all of this is 100% “I don’t like the ST so I’m going to rail against it and find every avenue I can to attack it” and not a discussion of keeping canonical cohesion of a saga across multiple decades and filmmakers. Which is the discussion I was hoping to find when I opened this thread.

The Rosetta Stone of TFA is this- it doesn’t even have a scene that explains the political scenario to the level ANH did with the Tarkin round table scene, simply because the PT had “too much politics.”
TFA is so OBVIOUSLY reactionary, you trolling bantha.

BiggsFan44 said:

ChainsawAsh said:

BiggsFan44 said:

ChainsawAsh said:

Alright, I’ll try to find your “examples” from throughout the thread and respond to them.

First, Yoda:

For example, I was just watching TLJ and I got to the scene with Yoda. Yoda is a puppet in TLJ when he was CG in the PT. The problem for me is that these movies are supposed to be installments in the same story, and yet that illusion is shattered into a million pieces when things like puppet Yoda

Yoda in TLJ is supposed to look as much like he did in ghost form in ROTJ as possible. He’s a puppet in the end of ROTJ when he’s a ghost. It would, in my opinion, be more immersion-breaking for him to be CGI and appear as he did 20 years before his death. It would be a different story (and an entirely different can of worms) had Lucas replaced ESB/ROTJ Yoda with a CGI model, but he never did. So, chronologically, you see (I) CGI/puppet (depending on the version of TPM you watch) > (II) CGI > (III) CGI > (V) Puppet > (VI) Puppet > (VIII) Puppet. You really think that (I) CGI/puppet > (II) CGI > (III) CGI > (V) Puppet > (VI) Puppet > (VIII) CGI would have been more cohesive when looked at as a full saga?

The Maz Kanata argument is invalid to me because she never appeared in any film prior to TFA, so there’s an infinite amount of freedom in her appearance. You’d have an argument if she appeared in TFA as CGI and was suddenly a puppet in TLJ, or something, but as it stands you’re creating a comparison where there isn’t one.

Yoda being CG might strain the link up with the OT, but the strain doesn’t come from what my thread is about, which is how we can consider this all to be one universe if creators are passing judgement on the quality of the depiction of supposedly equally canonical events.

So Lucas broke the cohesion of “one universe” by changing Yoda from a puppet to CGI first. Yet it’s the ST you’re railing against for going back to the puppet. That seems like a double standard to me - villifying ST filmmakers for changing a thing from one film to the next while excusing Lucas from doing the same because you prefer his movies.

On to other things…

or TFA being like the anti-prequel in much of its approach

How?

are pretty much rebuttals of earlier installments.

How are they rebuttals? Do they claim that the earlier movies never happened, wiping them from continuity the way every Highlander sequel has done to the film that came before it? No.

how can the fact that people can’t stop picking and choosing elements they like and don’t like from the movies (that goes for fans and creators alike) not completely destroy the illusion that ALL of these events from ALL of these movies and shows take place in the same universe?

It…doesn’t? I don’t understand how it does, and I’ve yet to see an explanation from you as to how this is the case in your mind.

the fact that TCW Anakin maybe should have been closer to Hayden, but also that they aren’t really AS different as Hayden detractors claim, and late season Lanter Anakin was as “unlikable” as Anakin ever was, especially in arcs like the second Clovis arc.

Did you just refute your own argument about Anakin in the same sentence in which you brought it up? Because I think you did.

I’d argue that the ST betrays the spirit of the series more than the PT did though. And that’s a larger problem than things like why Owen didn’t recognize 3-P0.
TFA is a waste of 200 million dollars because it copies a movie but makes it worse (And the argument that the first Disney SW movie needed to feel “familiar” is moot, since TFA locks the entire trilogy into a “big bad Empire vs. scrappy rebels” redo, complete with locking in the stale aesthetic/art direction), and TLJ writes Luke so incredibly OOC that he can’t be considered the same character who said “You’ve failed, your highness. I am a Jedi, like my father before me.”

Okay, this is where I stop, because all of this is 100% “I don’t like the ST so I’m going to rail against it and find every avenue I can to attack it” and not a discussion of keeping canonical cohesion of a saga across multiple decades and filmmakers. Which is the discussion I was hoping to find when I opened this thread.

The Rosetta Stone of TFA is this- it doesn’t even have a scene that explains the political scenario to the level ANH did with the Tarkin round table scene, simply because the PT had “too much politics.”
TFA is so OBVIOUSLY reactionary, you trolling bantha.

Love it when members with one-day-old accounts call 14-year veterans of the site trolls.

Clearly you’re not interested in having an actual conversation. Thanks for the new signature quote, though. Bye.

What does time on this forum have to do with it? You’re not going to troll people who share your opinions.
Also, you know I’m right about TFA.

lawl

I suspect there’s indeed a “trolling bantha” in this thread, but it isn’t ChainsawAsh.

Who’s the suspect?

Author
Time

ChainsawAsh said:

Okay, this is where I stop, because all of this is 100% “I don’t like the ST so I’m going to rail against it and find every avenue I can to attack it” and not a discussion of keeping canonical cohesion of a saga across multiple decades and filmmakers. Which is the discussion I was hoping to find when I opened this thread.

I’m amazed this thread is still going, but thanks for the break down of what is really going on in all of these monolithic quote trees. Not liking the ST is fine. But claiming the real reason they don’t work is because they don’t follow the prequels enough is just bonkers. Nobody was going to pay however many millions to invite comparisons to that debacle. Things that leave a bad taste need a strong pallet cleanser after all.

Yub Nub for life

Author
Time

BiggsFan44 said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

BiggsFan44 said:

ChainsawAsh said:

Alright, I’ll try to find your “examples” from throughout the thread and respond to them.

First, Yoda:

For example, I was just watching TLJ and I got to the scene with Yoda. Yoda is a puppet in TLJ when he was CG in the PT. The problem for me is that these movies are supposed to be installments in the same story, and yet that illusion is shattered into a million pieces when things like puppet Yoda

Yoda in TLJ is supposed to look as much like he did in ghost form in ROTJ as possible. He’s a puppet in the end of ROTJ when he’s a ghost. It would, in my opinion, be more immersion-breaking for him to be CGI and appear as he did 20 years before his death. It would be a different story (and an entirely different can of worms) had Lucas replaced ESB/ROTJ Yoda with a CGI model, but he never did. So, chronologically, you see (I) CGI/puppet (depending on the version of TPM you watch) > (II) CGI > (III) CGI > (V) Puppet > (VI) Puppet > (VIII) Puppet. You really think that (I) CGI/puppet > (II) CGI > (III) CGI > (V) Puppet > (VI) Puppet > (VIII) CGI would have been more cohesive when looked at as a full saga?

The Maz Kanata argument is invalid to me because she never appeared in any film prior to TFA, so there’s an infinite amount of freedom in her appearance. You’d have an argument if she appeared in TFA as CGI and was suddenly a puppet in TLJ, or something, but as it stands you’re creating a comparison where there isn’t one.

Yoda being CG might strain the link up with the OT, but the strain doesn’t come from what my thread is about, which is how we can consider this all to be one universe if creators are passing judgement on the quality of the depiction of supposedly equally canonical events.

So Lucas broke the cohesion of “one universe” by changing Yoda from a puppet to CGI first. Yet it’s the ST you’re railing against for going back to the puppet. That seems like a double standard to me - villifying ST filmmakers for changing a thing from one film to the next while excusing Lucas from doing the same because you prefer his movies.

On to other things…

or TFA being like the anti-prequel in much of its approach

How?

are pretty much rebuttals of earlier installments.

How are they rebuttals? Do they claim that the earlier movies never happened, wiping them from continuity the way every Highlander sequel has done to the film that came before it? No.

how can the fact that people can’t stop picking and choosing elements they like and don’t like from the movies (that goes for fans and creators alike) not completely destroy the illusion that ALL of these events from ALL of these movies and shows take place in the same universe?

It…doesn’t? I don’t understand how it does, and I’ve yet to see an explanation from you as to how this is the case in your mind.

the fact that TCW Anakin maybe should have been closer to Hayden, but also that they aren’t really AS different as Hayden detractors claim, and late season Lanter Anakin was as “unlikable” as Anakin ever was, especially in arcs like the second Clovis arc.

Did you just refute your own argument about Anakin in the same sentence in which you brought it up? Because I think you did.

I’d argue that the ST betrays the spirit of the series more than the PT did though. And that’s a larger problem than things like why Owen didn’t recognize 3-P0.
TFA is a waste of 200 million dollars because it copies a movie but makes it worse (And the argument that the first Disney SW movie needed to feel “familiar” is moot, since TFA locks the entire trilogy into a “big bad Empire vs. scrappy rebels” redo, complete with locking in the stale aesthetic/art direction), and TLJ writes Luke so incredibly OOC that he can’t be considered the same character who said “You’ve failed, your highness. I am a Jedi, like my father before me.”

Okay, this is where I stop, because all of this is 100% “I don’t like the ST so I’m going to rail against it and find every avenue I can to attack it” and not a discussion of keeping canonical cohesion of a saga across multiple decades and filmmakers. Which is the discussion I was hoping to find when I opened this thread.

The Rosetta Stone of TFA is this- it doesn’t even have a scene that explains the political scenario to the level ANH did with the Tarkin round table scene, simply because the PT had “too much politics.”
TFA is so OBVIOUSLY reactionary, you trolling bantha.

BiggsFan44 said:

ChainsawAsh said:

BiggsFan44 said:

ChainsawAsh said:

Alright, I’ll try to find your “examples” from throughout the thread and respond to them.

First, Yoda:

For example, I was just watching TLJ and I got to the scene with Yoda. Yoda is a puppet in TLJ when he was CG in the PT. The problem for me is that these movies are supposed to be installments in the same story, and yet that illusion is shattered into a million pieces when things like puppet Yoda

Yoda in TLJ is supposed to look as much like he did in ghost form in ROTJ as possible. He’s a puppet in the end of ROTJ when he’s a ghost. It would, in my opinion, be more immersion-breaking for him to be CGI and appear as he did 20 years before his death. It would be a different story (and an entirely different can of worms) had Lucas replaced ESB/ROTJ Yoda with a CGI model, but he never did. So, chronologically, you see (I) CGI/puppet (depending on the version of TPM you watch) > (II) CGI > (III) CGI > (V) Puppet > (VI) Puppet > (VIII) Puppet. You really think that (I) CGI/puppet > (II) CGI > (III) CGI > (V) Puppet > (VI) Puppet > (VIII) CGI would have been more cohesive when looked at as a full saga?

The Maz Kanata argument is invalid to me because she never appeared in any film prior to TFA, so there’s an infinite amount of freedom in her appearance. You’d have an argument if she appeared in TFA as CGI and was suddenly a puppet in TLJ, or something, but as it stands you’re creating a comparison where there isn’t one.

Yoda being CG might strain the link up with the OT, but the strain doesn’t come from what my thread is about, which is how we can consider this all to be one universe if creators are passing judgement on the quality of the depiction of supposedly equally canonical events.

So Lucas broke the cohesion of “one universe” by changing Yoda from a puppet to CGI first. Yet it’s the ST you’re railing against for going back to the puppet. That seems like a double standard to me - villifying ST filmmakers for changing a thing from one film to the next while excusing Lucas from doing the same because you prefer his movies.

On to other things…

or TFA being like the anti-prequel in much of its approach

How?

are pretty much rebuttals of earlier installments.

How are they rebuttals? Do they claim that the earlier movies never happened, wiping them from continuity the way every Highlander sequel has done to the film that came before it? No.

how can the fact that people can’t stop picking and choosing elements they like and don’t like from the movies (that goes for fans and creators alike) not completely destroy the illusion that ALL of these events from ALL of these movies and shows take place in the same universe?

It…doesn’t? I don’t understand how it does, and I’ve yet to see an explanation from you as to how this is the case in your mind.

the fact that TCW Anakin maybe should have been closer to Hayden, but also that they aren’t really AS different as Hayden detractors claim, and late season Lanter Anakin was as “unlikable” as Anakin ever was, especially in arcs like the second Clovis arc.

Did you just refute your own argument about Anakin in the same sentence in which you brought it up? Because I think you did.

I’d argue that the ST betrays the spirit of the series more than the PT did though. And that’s a larger problem than things like why Owen didn’t recognize 3-P0.
TFA is a waste of 200 million dollars because it copies a movie but makes it worse (And the argument that the first Disney SW movie needed to feel “familiar” is moot, since TFA locks the entire trilogy into a “big bad Empire vs. scrappy rebels” redo, complete with locking in the stale aesthetic/art direction), and TLJ writes Luke so incredibly OOC that he can’t be considered the same character who said “You’ve failed, your highness. I am a Jedi, like my father before me.”

Okay, this is where I stop, because all of this is 100% “I don’t like the ST so I’m going to rail against it and find every avenue I can to attack it” and not a discussion of keeping canonical cohesion of a saga across multiple decades and filmmakers. Which is the discussion I was hoping to find when I opened this thread.

The Rosetta Stone of TFA is this- it doesn’t even have a scene that explains the political scenario to the level ANH did with the Tarkin round table scene, simply because the PT had “too much politics.”
TFA is so OBVIOUSLY reactionary, you trolling bantha.

Love it when members with one-day-old accounts call 14-year veterans of the site trolls.

Clearly you’re not interested in having an actual conversation. Thanks for the new signature quote, though. Bye.

What does time on this forum have to do with it? You’re not going to troll people who share your opinions.
Also, you know I’m right about TFA.

lawl

I suspect there’s indeed a “trolling bantha” in this thread, but it isn’t ChainsawAsh.

Who’s the suspect?

You remind me of the babe.

Divergent Universes
Dreams of a Randy Git-Fiend

Author
Time

Mocata said:

ChainsawAsh said:

Okay, this is where I stop, because all of this is 100% “I don’t like the ST so I’m going to rail against it and find every avenue I can to attack it” and not a discussion of keeping canonical cohesion of a saga across multiple decades and filmmakers. Which is the discussion I was hoping to find when I opened this thread.

I’m amazed this thread is still going, but thanks for the break down of what is really going on in all of these monolithic quote trees. Not liking the ST is fine. But claiming the real reason they don’t work is because they don’t follow the prequels enough is just bonkers. Nobody was going to pay however many millions to invite comparisons to that debacle. Things that leave a bad taste need a strong pallet cleanser after all.

Since you brought it up, I’d say that “debacle” is a much more accurate description of the ST (so far) than the PT.
It doesn’t get more cringeworthy than than the unfortunate juxtaposition of Rose’s “saving what we love” speech with the laser blasting “what they love” in center frame as they lean in for the kiss.

And people thought “I don’t like sand” was bad. Yeesh.

Author
Time

BiggsFan44 said:

Mocata said:

ChainsawAsh said:

Okay, this is where I stop, because all of this is 100% “I don’t like the ST so I’m going to rail against it and find every avenue I can to attack it” and not a discussion of keeping canonical cohesion of a saga across multiple decades and filmmakers. Which is the discussion I was hoping to find when I opened this thread.

I’m amazed this thread is still going, but thanks for the break down of what is really going on in all of these monolithic quote trees. Not liking the ST is fine. But claiming the real reason they don’t work is because they don’t follow the prequels enough is just bonkers. Nobody was going to pay however many millions to invite comparisons to that debacle. Things that leave a bad taste need a strong pallet cleanser after all.

Since you brought it up, I’d say that “debacle” is a much more accurate description of the ST (so far) than the PT.
It doesn’t get more cringeworthy than than the unfortunate juxtaposition of Rose’s “saving what we love” speech with the laser blasting “what they love” in center frame as they lean in for the kiss.

And people thought “I don’t like sand” was bad. Yeesh.

Stop, my sides are hurting.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Mocata said:

ChainsawAsh said:

Okay, this is where I stop, because all of this is 100% “I don’t like the ST so I’m going to rail against it and find every avenue I can to attack it” and not a discussion of keeping canonical cohesion of a saga across multiple decades and filmmakers. Which is the discussion I was hoping to find when I opened this thread.

I’m amazed this thread is still going, but thanks for the break down of what is really going on in all of these monolithic quote trees. Not liking the ST is fine. But claiming the real reason they don’t work is because they don’t follow the prequels enough is just bonkers. Nobody was going to pay however many millions to invite comparisons to that debacle. Things that leave a bad taste need a strong pallet cleanser after all.

The problem of this divisive approach is that it has resulted in two trilogies that have left a bad taste in a large subsection of the fanbase. It seems with each trilogy the fanbase is shattered further rather than united under one unifying vision that is satisfying to OT, PT, and ST fans alike, whilst bringing new fans into the fold. While I’m not a fan of the ST, I’m actually more concerned with LFM’s inability to create such a vision, and not to greatly piss off some significant portion of the fanbase. The disdain expressed by the different subsections of the fanbase towards each other seen in articles, on youtube, and in this thread, whether it be OT fans, PT fans, or ST fans is a testament to that failure.

Author
Time

dahmage said:

BiggsFan44 said:

Mocata said:

ChainsawAsh said:

Okay, this is where I stop, because all of this is 100% “I don’t like the ST so I’m going to rail against it and find every avenue I can to attack it” and not a discussion of keeping canonical cohesion of a saga across multiple decades and filmmakers. Which is the discussion I was hoping to find when I opened this thread.

I’m amazed this thread is still going, but thanks for the break down of what is really going on in all of these monolithic quote trees. Not liking the ST is fine. But claiming the real reason they don’t work is because they don’t follow the prequels enough is just bonkers. Nobody was going to pay however many millions to invite comparisons to that debacle. Things that leave a bad taste need a strong pallet cleanser after all.

Since you brought it up, I’d say that “debacle” is a much more accurate description of the ST (so far) than the PT.
It doesn’t get more cringeworthy than than the unfortunate juxtaposition of Rose’s “saving what we love” speech with the laser blasting “what they love” in center frame as they lean in for the kiss.

And people thought “I don’t like sand” was bad. Yeesh.

Stop, my sides are hurting.

Do you honestly disagree?

Author
Time

BiggsFan44 said:

dahmage said:

BiggsFan44 said:

Mocata said:

ChainsawAsh said:

Okay, this is where I stop, because all of this is 100% “I don’t like the ST so I’m going to rail against it and find every avenue I can to attack it” and not a discussion of keeping canonical cohesion of a saga across multiple decades and filmmakers. Which is the discussion I was hoping to find when I opened this thread.

I’m amazed this thread is still going, but thanks for the break down of what is really going on in all of these monolithic quote trees. Not liking the ST is fine. But claiming the real reason they don’t work is because they don’t follow the prequels enough is just bonkers. Nobody was going to pay however many millions to invite comparisons to that debacle. Things that leave a bad taste need a strong pallet cleanser after all.

Since you brought it up, I’d say that “debacle” is a much more accurate description of the ST (so far) than the PT.
It doesn’t get more cringeworthy than than the unfortunate juxtaposition of Rose’s “saving what we love” speech with the laser blasting “what they love” in center frame as they lean in for the kiss.

And people thought “I don’t like sand” was bad. Yeesh.

Stop, my sides are hurting.

Do you honestly disagree?

Yes, he honestly has a different opinion from you. You might try to respect him for that fact, rather than act like a ****.

Author
Time

DrDre said:

BiggsFan44 said:

dahmage said:

BiggsFan44 said:

Mocata said:

ChainsawAsh said:

Okay, this is where I stop, because all of this is 100% “I don’t like the ST so I’m going to rail against it and find every avenue I can to attack it” and not a discussion of keeping canonical cohesion of a saga across multiple decades and filmmakers. Which is the discussion I was hoping to find when I opened this thread.

I’m amazed this thread is still going, but thanks for the break down of what is really going on in all of these monolithic quote trees. Not liking the ST is fine. But claiming the real reason they don’t work is because they don’t follow the prequels enough is just bonkers. Nobody was going to pay however many millions to invite comparisons to that debacle. Things that leave a bad taste need a strong pallet cleanser after all.

Since you brought it up, I’d say that “debacle” is a much more accurate description of the ST (so far) than the PT.
It doesn’t get more cringeworthy than than the unfortunate juxtaposition of Rose’s “saving what we love” speech with the laser blasting “what they love” in center frame as they lean in for the kiss.

And people thought “I don’t like sand” was bad. Yeesh.

Stop, my sides are hurting.

Do you honestly disagree?

Yes, he honestly has a different opinion from you. You might try to respect him for that fact, rather than act like a ****.

Uh… he believed all the response my post warranted was to let me know that it was laughable.
Don’t look to me for the start of the disrespect chain.