Sign In

BmB

User Group
Members
Join date
6-Jan-2010
Last activity
7-Nov-2019
Posts
273

Post History

Post
#928059
Topic
"Normal" people trying to sound like they are SW experts
Time

Dek Rollins said:
I’ve been the “expert” several times (on here too; I’m sure you remember, Frink 😉), but in the times coming to my head now, I honestly thought I was remembering my facts correctly (or I stated my being unsure). But I do have a little story to add:
One of my older brothers told me that someone he was talking to said something to the effect of “George Lucas already has the scripts for episodes 7 8 and 9 written.” This was back in like, 2007.

While “already having the scripts” is probably a little too far it seems like he did indeed have enough story for 9 or 12 movies to begin with. But more likely as notes, ideas and outlines and such, than actual scripts.

Post
#928057
Topic
Filmmaker and New Yorker film critic Richard Brody's thoughts on the prequels.
Time

Bingowings said:
Padme’s main action was to wear makeup and clothes (she shoots a bit in two sequences in two movies and kicks a spidercat in the nuts).
Leia is arguably the only reasonably explored female character in the series (even more than the Mos Eisley pea-strainer or the little old lady that doesn’'t sell much in Mos Espa).

Have we forgotten the entire third act of TPM exists solely because of Padmé’s decision making as a leader? She’s also the one who decides to go save Obi-Wan in AOTC. It’s only really in ROTS that she sits idly by as things go south, although a few deleted scenes give her a more active role in creating the rebellion with Bail and Mothma.

I guess if all you see in that is makeup and clothes…

Post
#927282
Topic
What is wrong with... <strong>Attack of the Clones</strong>? - a general discussion thread
Time

Lord Haseo said:
The feats don’t chance but the perception of those feat do. I bet my right foot that if Rey was a male there wouldn’t be so many people bitching about it. There have been so many male characters that fit perimeters for being a Gary Stu but Rey…the first female protagonist in a Star Wars film is the one who is making the term nearly a household name/term. There’s definitely a correlation but I think most of the reason for the backlash is that she is more competent than Luke was in STAR WARS and since a lot of people’s view of the OT is so fragile it somehow diminishes the character.

If not for Rey’s annoying “I don’t need no help from a MAN” attitude Finn would be little more than a Gary Stu counterpart. His ability to fight competently with a lightsaber without any training or force sensitivity at all is insane.

There is no correlation. It is not because she’s a woman. It’s because she’s a mary sue. However, conversely it is highly likely that she was written to be a mary sue because she’s a woman. The current political climate is such that any character flaw on a female lead that is beyond superficial is likely to be seen by those who like to be outraged as a direct attack on women. And we all know hollywood does not take risks like that.

Criticism of these shallow characters is likely to be seen as an attack on women too, for some reason. In a lot of ways it’s perfect marketing ploy. You can’t criticize the film because the leads are oppressed minorities, and you especially cannot criticize those characters. If I say “Harrison Ford was sleeping through it.” you won’t bat an eyelid. If I say “Rey is a Mary Sue and Boyega can’t act” I’m a racist and misogynist. Or what?

Post
#926551
Topic
What is wrong with... <strong>Attack of the Clones</strong>? - a general discussion thread
Time

imperialscum said:
I am not speaking about the latest incident specifically, but in general Frink has been practising forum rule breaking and disrespectful behaviour as far as I can remember. If you like to call that kind of crap a “sarcastic sense of humour”, at least have the same standard for the users doing the same thing to Frink.

Frink used to be more humour and less grump.

Post
#926511
Topic
Filmmaker and New Yorker film critic Richard Brody's thoughts on the prequels.
Time

Smithers said:
Yes, and the first EU novel also had Luke and Vader both trying to find a crystal, some concepts don’t work well in the SW universe even if they’re old ideas

Nevertheless those guidelines were penned by Lucas, showing that the idea existed all the way back then, and is not some prequel era invention or retcon.

Post
#926491
Topic
Filmmaker and New Yorker film critic Richard Brody's thoughts on the prequels.
Time

TV’s Frink said:

The dialogue is a trainwreck. Everything out of Jar Jar’s and Jake’s mouth is laughable, Natalie’s queen is terrible, and let’s not forget the racist angle of Jar Jar, the Nemoidians, and Watto.

Also, midichlorians, the single worst concept in the entire PT.

Jar Jar is meant to be laughable so I don’t know why you hold that against him. Jake Lloyd does an excellent job. If you dislike kid Anakin I suspect it’s because you dislike kids in general, rather than anything about his performance or dialogue.

Ahmed Best does not himself consider Jar Jar racist so why should you? Lame, below the belt jab.

Midichlorians were introduced in 1978 as part of the guidelines for EU novel authors.

Post
#926461
Topic
What is wrong with... <strong>Attack of the Clones</strong>? - a general discussion thread
Time

Mavimao said:
The real problem with AOTC is that the idea is sound but is ruined by the execution.

There’s a great story here! But George’s weaknesses in storytelling and direction hamper the whole thing and the execution is lousy.

I do think one shouldn’t nitpick too much with this movie, but unlike other films with glaring plothole issues that you can forgive, AOTC is so boring and badly acted that these plotholes just stare at you like a thousand deer in headlights.

The real problem is that the script was written in like 2 months. It seems George was more occupied with developing the digital cinema thing. (Maybe it’s because his eyesight is getting worse with age but sub-1080p resolution is fit for cinema now?) And not occupied enough with making a good movie.

There were some discussions either on here or on TFN I don’t remember where, about how the plot might have had developed through the early drafts. And there’s some really good ideas in there that coupled with better direction might have made it a good film. But it seems like there just wasn’t time to develop those ideas due to the very short pre-production period. So we got a very simplified and sieve-like version instead.

Post
#926455
Topic
Filmmaker and New Yorker film critic Richard Brody's thoughts on the prequels.
Time

TV’s Frink said:
It’s a better film than the other two, but it’s not even close to being good or well made. Parts are good or well made but the overall result is still poor.

It’s enjoyable to watch from beginning to end. Is well structured, reasonably well plotted. The dialogue isn’t completely out there most of the time, and all the action sequences are exciting and move the story forward. The effects are also the best out of any of them, real care was put into both the practical and digital effects with only the gungans really standing out as bad, that owing mostly to McCallum insisting that they ditch Ahmed’s costume to bait the FX oscar.

The major “crimes” it commits is that it contradicts OT canon and doesn’t really have major relevance to the overarching story. But as a standalone film those don’t matter.

Post
#925383
Topic
Star Wars: Rogue One - * Non Spoiler Discussion Thread *
Time

Dek Rollins said:
You could wait until you’ve seen the film to start calling a character you know nothing about a Mary Sue. I mean, she could very well be, but it’s pretty hard to tell from that trailer.

Oh come on, tell me you can’t spot the “girl with attitude is put down by the establishment but actually her attitude lets her save the day all by herself” trope from 50 lightyears away here.

Post
#924555
Topic
&quot;Practical Prequels&quot; video. PT practical effects Discussion
Time

People get too hung up on CGI vs practical. Practical does not guarantee a good effect just as CGI is not necessarily bad. Some of the best effects I’ve seen have been CGI and some of those are in TPM itself. But each approach you might take to an effect has different limitations and not respecting those limitations is what causes an effect to look bad.

One thing to recognize is that interaction between CGI and the real world is very difficult. Another is that surfaces and lighting good enough to fool the eye is also incredibly difficult. Especially organics are hard no matter if you try and fake it with silicon, rubber and wax or with computers. Max Rebo and CG Yoda are equally bad in my view because neither of them convinces you that there is a real character on the screen. And filling the screen with so many full CG characters like Jar Jar draws a lot of attention to the fact that a big part of what you’re seeing is fake. They do not and for the most part cannot integrate with the shot in a convincing way. A movie like Jurassic Park overcame this limitation by also having animatronics to fill the gaps left by the CGI.

The other thing is that integration of foreground and background is difficult even if those elements are a set and a miniature. Poor compositing plagues optical approaches just as much as it does digital. Matte paintings can look fake just as well as CG backgrounds can. Think of OUT cloud city. The overuse of blue screen backgrounds is the real culprit. When nearly every single shot breaks down because of a combination of poorly integrated backgrounds and poorly integrated characters the illusion is quickly broken. Even if the set is itself not bad.

A slip up here and there in the OT is more innocuous because the elements that are front and center to your attention works much better. Yoda convinces, and so does the Dagobah set and mattes. The reality of the Falcon set and the hallways of cloud city diverts you from the fakery of the backgrounds. The illusion is completed because key characters like Chewie and C-3p0 work, where characters like CG Yoda and CG Jar Jar do not.

And at the end of the day while CGI has the potential to look like it does in JP, Zilla 98, TPM etc. It doesn’t for the most part. And especially not in II and III, where the low effort put into the CG elements stands out like a sore thumb and taints the entire image even if there are decent practical effects in it.

Post
#924551
Topic
(Spoilers)How could The Force Awakens have been more original?
Time

Lord Haseo said:
What about the other solution though? Why couldn’t Vader just pick him up with The Force, hold him down in the Carbonite chamber and turn the thing on?

The first time we see the force being used to telekinetically manipulate living beings is Maul’s force push at the end of TPM. In traditional eastern chi theory it is very difficult to overcome to chi of another being to use chi on them as such. Since the force is based on these teachings I don’t think it’s unreasonable to extend the same principle. Lifting other people and throwing them about is an EU-only phenomena. Even Maul was only able to throw Obi-Wan off-balance. Force choke is fairly low level of invasion, only manipulating the throat.

Lord Haseo said:
Seeing as how he was able to fight while throwing stuff at Luke…yeah I think he would be able to do that.

He wasn’t fighting. He even lowered his lightsabre to focus on throwing things at Luke. They weren’t even within striking distance. The first throw was during a clash where he only had to focus on keep Luke’s sabre down. It’s clearly something he had to divert his attention to.