Sign In

The Last Jedi: Official Review and Opinions Thread ** SPOILERS ** — Page 155

Author
Time

ray_afraid said:

TV’s Frink said:

ray_afraid said:

Collipso said:

Yeah, I’d argue that the people who started this 150+ page discussion were those who loved the movie. Or at least they were louder during the first 3-5 days of the movie’s release, making those who didn’t like want to “fight back” and explain their dislikes and be vocal too. It could’ve been the opposite though, I don’t really remember.

It’s not that. It’s that when someone says “I hated that movie.” and someone else responds with “I guess you’re stupid then.” there’s gonna be push back.

Who’s done that?

My example is simplified, but I’ve seen it all over the place. I don’t care enough to go looking for examples.
it goes both ways.

I guess you’re stupid then.

Episode I: The Ridiculous Menace / Episode II: Attack Of The Ridiculousness / Episode III: Revenge of the Ridiculousness

Author
Time

Every single post after Anchorheads (Exlcuding mine and oojasons) is what we could use less of.

Hell, i have been trying to dicuss things i liked in this thread, but stopped, as there are pages and pages of negativity. I am sure others have stopped posting as well, and i am sure not all of them stopped because of the negativity, some probably stopped because of the positivity.

This thread is the worst. feel free to tell me why I am wrong now.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

TV’s Frink said:

The only reason I would tell you that you are wrong is because if I’m not telling you that you are wrong then what am I doing in this thread?

i figured you would be mad i didn’t include you in the exclusion of posts we could use less of. In fact the only reason i didn’t include you is because i sorta hopped it would irk you 😃

Author
Time
 (Edited)

DrDre said:

oojason said:

Well said, mate.

Not well said. As long as debates are civil, any subject should be open for discussion. I don’t tell anyone else what they should or should not write about, and I expect the same courtesy.

Anchorhead suggested ‘However, maybe give some serious thought to focusing on what you like’ - there’s nowt wrong with that - if you have a problem with that - that’s your problem.

He also said ‘By all means feel free to vent, deconstruct, debate, rage, etc.’ - so what is your problem here?
 

Personally, if I think something is well said then, for me, that is well said.

I don’t need you pulling me up on it.

Wind your neck in.


Why don’t you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don’t you dig how beautiful it is out here? And say something righteous and hopeful for a change?

Author
Time
 (Edited)

oojason said:

DrDre said:

oojason said:

Well said, mate.

Not well said. As long as debates are civil, any subject should be open for discussion. I don’t tell anyone else what they should or should not write about, and I expect the same courtesy.

Anchorhead suggested ‘However, maybe give some serious thought to focusing on what you like’ - there’s nowt wrong with that - if you have a problem with that - that’s your problem.

He also said ‘By all means feel free to vent, deconstruct, debate, rage, etc.’ - so what is your problem here?
 

My problem is with the concept of a moderator giving advice on what people should focus on in their debates. In my opinion the focus should always be on debating the content, not on the people who write the content, and their motives, unless their behaviour is in some way inappropriate.

I’m personally very much in favour of the general rule strictly maintained at boards.theforce.net, namely “Discuss the films, not the fans”.

Author
Time

TV’s Frink said:

oojason said:

Wind your neck in.

I have no idea what this means (I mean I get it via context but no idea what it means from a “how it became a saying” standpoint) but I love it and I will be using it at every opportunity from now on.

I think it as an alternative (or derived) from ‘keep your nose out of other people’s business’ - though if so it has a different meaning now.

Also could be something derived from conflicts - ‘put your head down’ or ‘keep your head down’ etc - again a different meaning now though.


Why don’t you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don’t you dig how beautiful it is out here? And say something righteous and hopeful for a change?

Author
Time

DominicCobb said:

Star Wars movie is like other Star Wars movie in superficial ways… tricky RJ thought he could get away with it, but he was sorely mistaken! True Fans know that the only way to judge a movie is on a scale of perceived originality.

TV’s Frink said:

chyron just put a big Ric pic in your sig and be done with it.

Author
Time

Ok so apparently I was considerably toxic in my last 2 or so posts, accusing other people of something that I’m also guilty. I’m sorry.

The thing is I’m not sure if defending your opinion on the movie passionately is something to be considered wrong. I thought that was the whole purpose of the thread. Oh well.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

TV’s Frink said:

^Unclear gif is unclear.

I think I catch your meaning based on your enjoyment of TLJ…just saying though.

Dom was being sarcastic. His post made me smirk because I agree (with his underlying meaning) and thought it was clever.

TV’s Frink said:

chyron just put a big Ric pic in your sig and be done with it.

Author
Time

Collipso said:

Ok so apparently I was considerably toxic in my last 2 or so posts, accusing other people of something that I’m also guilty. I’m sorry.

The thing is I’m not sure if defending your opinion on the movie passionately is something to be considered wrong. I thought that was the whole purpose of the thread. Oh well.

We said “don’t do that” at some point?

Episode I: The Ridiculous Menace / Episode II: Attack Of The Ridiculousness / Episode III: Revenge of the Ridiculousness

Author
Time
 (Edited)

chyron8472 said:

TV’s Frink said:

^Unclear gif is unclear.

I think I catch your meaning based on your enjoyment of TLJ…just saying though.

Dom was being sarcastic. His post made me smirk because I agree (with his underlying meaning) and thought it was clever.

What I thought. I don’t think your gif captures that clearly though.

Anyway…

Episode I: The Ridiculous Menace / Episode II: Attack Of The Ridiculousness / Episode III: Revenge of the Ridiculousness

Author
Time
 (Edited)

DrDre said:

oojason said:

DrDre said:

oojason said:

Well said, mate.

Not well said. As long as debates are civil, any subject should be open for discussion. I don’t tell anyone else what they should or should not write about, and I expect the same courtesy.

Anchorhead suggested ‘However, maybe give some serious thought to focusing on what you like’ - there’s nowt wrong with that - if you have a problem with that - that’s your problem.

He also said ‘By all means feel free to vent, deconstruct, debate, rage, etc.’ - so what is your problem here?
 

My problem is with the concept of a moderator giving advice on what people should focus on in their debates. In my opinion the focus should always be on the content, not on the people who write the content, and their motives.

That the seemingly endless repeated and circular negative content in here has become an issue where a moderator has asked members to maybe also give some thought to the things they like about the film - in amongst the ‘free to vent, deconstruct, debate, rage’ - and you give him or me shit for it… says a lot - about you.

Give your head a wobble Have a good re-think about it, soft lad.


Why don’t you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don’t you dig how beautiful it is out here? And say something righteous and hopeful for a change?

Author
Time
 (Edited)

TV’s Frink said:

Collipso said:

Ok so apparently I was considerably toxic in my last 2 or so posts, accusing other people of something that I’m also guilty. I’m sorry.

The thing is I’m not sure if defending your opinion on the movie passionately is something to be considered wrong. I thought that was the whole purpose of the thread. Oh well.

We said “don’t do that” at some point?

I guess not. I overreacted with fear of censorship. Sorry.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

oojason said:

DrDre said:

oojason said:

DrDre said:

oojason said:

Well said, mate.

Not well said. As long as debates are civil, any subject should be open for discussion. I don’t tell anyone else what they should or should not write about, and I expect the same courtesy.

Anchorhead suggested ‘However, maybe give some serious thought to focusing on what you like’ - there’s nowt wrong with that - if you have a problem with that - that’s your problem.

He also said ‘By all means feel free to vent, deconstruct, debate, rage, etc.’ - so what is your problem here?
 

My problem is with the concept of a moderator giving advice on what people should focus on in their debates. In my opinion the focus should always be on the content, not on the people who write the content, and their motives.

That the seemingly endless repeated and circular negative content in here has become an issue

An issue for whom? For those that don’t agree with that content?

where a moderator has asked members to maybe also give some thought to the things they like about the film - in amongst the ‘free to vent, deconstruct, debate, rage’ - and you give him or me shit for it… says a lot - about you.

What’s that supposed to mean? Moderators can do personal attacks now? I’m advocating for a “discuss the films, and not the fans” policy. I don’t see why that would warrent such a response.

I will stop discussing the subject, since I don’t want to keep going off subject, but this is a serious issue for me.