Sign In

Broom Kid

User Group
Members
Join date
3-Sep-2019
Last activity
26-Feb-2020
Posts
520

Post History

Post
#1323111
Topic
What do you think was the best release of the OT at the time it came out?
Time

Tack said:
I think a prime Eastman mono print would have been the way I personally would love to see it. The mono mix is so much more sonically alive to me than the Dolby and 70mm versions, and the more washed-out look of an Eastman print might have complimented the visuals more than I think some realize.

There aren’t a lot of “holy grails” left when it comes to various preservations… A great scan/restoration of Empire on 35mm, of course. THX-1138, too. But increasingly, I’m finding that what you just described is probably the last version of Star Wars I’d need. Even if it was just a brand-new restoration/recording of that original mono track married to whatever iteration of 4k77 is the most “up-to-date” at that point.

I think a warm, full, well-recorded/restored version of that mono track is one of those last grails, for me.

To answer the question, as many others have: It’s probably either Definitive Edition Laserdisc or Executor Set. One of those two. It wasn’t just extras or picture quality for the time, it was just that those sets had real weight to them. Not just literally, as in “these are heavy” but it felt like you owned an actual piece of Star Wars, and that piece was worth a lot, and you could feel that worth when you picked it up.

Post
#1323104
Topic
<strong>The Rise Of Skywalker</strong> — Official Review and Opinions Thread — * <strong>SPOILERS</strong> *
Time

OutboundFlight said:

We need to recognize both sides have a small group of outspoken idiots and a majority of normal people who just have different tastes.

I think the majority of normal people don’t have a side at all, and aren’t really engaged in this conversation, because they honestly don’t think about it to that extent once they’re done watching it. And there’s absolutely nothing wrong with that either. They watch the thing, they like parts of it, dislike others, and either they’re happy with their experience or they’re not. The majority of normal people just move onto the next thing at that point. They never join a side.

I understand the inclination to minimize the more unsavory aspects of online film discussion but in my experience, continually characterizing the sort of fighting, bad-faith arguing, and proxy/stand-in projection that occurs as being somehow anomalous or not representative is… inaccurate.

The “outspoken idiots” aren’t really a small group. Maybe they’re not the majority, but the margin is pretty slim, and more often than not they’re steering the ship.

Post
#1322967
Topic
<strong>The Rise Of Skywalker</strong> — Official Review and Opinions Thread — * <strong>SPOILERS</strong> *
Time

Audience scores on any entertainment website are pretty sketchy in terms of reliably ascertaining what “The general public” thought of a film - not just because gaming of those scores is so easy, but because absent any ulterior motive for gaming the scores, the self-selecting sample is hardly representative of your normal movie-goer anyway. Normal movie-goers typically don’t rate movies online at imdb OR rotten tomatoes after watching a film. The kind of person who does that isn’t just a tiny percentage of the possible general audience, but they’re a skewed tiny percentage at that, because you have to be a certain type of movie-goer to care enough about your opinion being registered online to even THINK of heading there after watching the film.

It’s part of why the scores are so easy to game - people don’t think of the scores at all, so when presented with the score, they just accept the number out of hand. People who game those scores know this. They can fake the number, and then fake the authority that number holds. Audience scores have basically become not much more than a stat to be used to win online arguments. They were pretty much always that, because more often than not the only people contributing were people inclined to get in those arguments in the first place.

Post
#1322622
Topic
<em>The Mandalorian</em> Discussion Thread - * <em><strong>SPOILERS</strong></em> *
Time

I get what you’re saying, but this applies to pretty much all directors, showrunners, writers, etc.

i don’t think that’s necessarily true, But even if I agreed with that - why would the fact it applies to all directors/showrunners/writers (those three things are three very different things, btw) be any sort of rebuttal to the points I’m making? If it applies to them, it applies to him. So what’s wrong with the criticisms I’m making - which are aimed more at people who are willing to carry his water for the sake of minimizing his shortcomings than they are at him and his actual shortcomings as a storyteller?

A big part of what I’m criticizing here is the inclination for people to essentially transform collaborative art into singular authorship for the sake of championing a “visionary” for negligible reasons. It was wrong when they did it for Lucas’ benefit, and it’s still wrong now. I’m not so much trying to downplay his contributions as I am fighting against the idea his contributions are as essential to Star Wars’ continued success as they are often claimed to be.

I also think, while I’m at it, that he benefits not JUST from the proximity to Lucas (pay attention to how often his praise is essentially backhanded, as if he’s a vessel for Lucas’ genius instead of a creative in his own right - even Freddie Prinze essentially framed him as such when he went viral on twitter sticking up for him) but also from the fact he’s got a bit of a handicap because he works in children’s animation. Because so many people honestly believe that’s a “lesser” medium, and that stories “don’t count” as much in that medium as they do in live action, his successes end up being appreciated to a somewhat unfair extent - they read it as his being so good he transcends the medium, when what’s happened is they’ve opened themselves up to what that medium can do in a way they don’t normally do for other practitioners of that medium. If they did, they’d likely discover there are a lot of people who are just as good, if not better in many ways, at what Filoni does as a showrunner.

Favreau is the showrunner on Mandalorian, anyway. Filoni is a supporting player to that end. I don’t think he’s an equal there. He’s a key element, but it’s Favreau’s show.

Post
#1322608
Topic
<em>The Mandalorian</em> Discussion Thread - * <em><strong>SPOILERS</strong></em> *
Time

I think people are more or less substituting all the same things they used to say about George Lucas (before he inevitably disappointed them in one way or another because they were too busy buying into every last myth about his creative process) onto Filoni now. He’s not really a visionary - a huge percentage of his Clone Wars successes are essentially “which really old movie these kids haven’t seen shall we loosely adapt this month.” It’s not so much “clever homage” as it is strip-mining classic film. Which - again, you can argue “that’s what Lucas did” because we all know the story about The Hidden Fortress, etc… but that plays into my larger point that Filoni gets a lot of rope simply because he “does things” the way Lucas “did things” as if the mere fact that Lucas did them makes them good.

The fact he gets credited for all of “The Clone Wars” despite the fact he had a ton of help in the form of other directors, writers, contributors, animators, voice actors, etc… it’s the same mistakes everyone made with Lucas, just mapped onto a different “visionary.”

It’s not that I dislike him. Like I said, he’s probably better just being “The Story Group” than he is being a hands-on creative. But I don’t think he’s as necessary as people tend to make him out to be, and I think he’s got big problems as a storyteller that get papered over because of that Lucas connection, and the familiarity and habitual nature of just repurposing old forum arguments ABOUT Lucas, and just copy/replacing with Filoni’s name.

The lowest parts of the Mandalorian are all his. And to be fair - many of the lowest parts of The Clone Wars are ALSO all his. I don’t think the “leap” to live-action has very much to do with it at all, because those low points have a lot in common across both mediums. And the things he’s been good at are things other people are also good at, and some people (Favreau, Waititi, Chow, Famuyiwa) are already better at. He’s not as necessary to Lucasfilm’s success as people like to frame it. He’s been part of very good things. I don’t think he’s the answer. He’s PART of AN answer. But I think Star Wars’ future is best served not by consistently asking “What would George Do” and looking to Filoni for not much more reason than “he’s the next best thing to George.”

Post
#1322582
Topic
<em>The Mandalorian</em> Discussion Thread - * <em><strong>SPOILERS</strong></em> *
Time

I’d personally be fine with all future SW shows, both live action and animated, being Filoni-esque.

I wouldn’t. This show’s lowest points are the ones Filoni directed and wrote. The highest points are the ones he has the least involvement with.

“Filoni-esque” doesn’t really mean much, either, since the only real identifiable hallmarks of Filoni’s storytelling are, as stated by his biggest fans:

George Lucas talked to him a lot.
He likes Princess Mononoke.

Filoni’s status seems to be less earned than it is an easy substitution exercise: All the ways fans used to unfairly deify Lucas as a storyteller supreme are just being mapped onto Filoni now because George Lucas handpicked him.

The thing Filoni has most in common with Lucas is that his storytelling instincts are sound but his execution is lacking and he’s probably better off being “The Story Group” than he is actually involving himself in directing or writing.

Post
#1322580
Topic
<strong>The Rise Of Skywalker</strong> — Official Review and Opinions Thread — * <strong>SPOILERS</strong> *
Time

StarkillerAG said:

That’s my main problem with the movie. JJ didn’t want to make a meaningful movie, he didn’t even want to make a good movie, he just wanted a big dumb blockbuster that lots of people would enjoy without really thinking about it.

I don’t think it’s even this purposeful, honestly. I don’t think there’s really much to why this movie is a mess beyond two (possibly three) simple factors.

  1. Time.

  2. JJ Abrams isn’t good at ending stories, or understanding why good endings work.

2.5) Chris Terrio has only ever written one good story, and it was based on real life.

I think JJ probably did want to make a meaningful movie. I think he absolutely wanted it to be great and amazing and to touch people the way The Force Awakens touched a lot of people. I think he simply doesn’t know how to do that. It’s not that he doesn’t want to. It’s just beyond him. And he’s gone out of his way to make sure that he doesn’t have to be in that position most of the time, and that’s benefitted him greatly in his career. His strength is in beginnings, and then stopping when the actual STORYTELLING parts begin to take on more and more importance. And I think maybe he thought with Star Wars he could finally disprove the idea that he doesn’t get why this stuff works, and that he could find substance in a story beyond mimicking what worked before.

The last movie in the Skywalker Saga is one hell of a way to have it irrefutably, irrevocably confirmed that he can’t, though.

For me, suggesting that he didn’t want to make something meaningful is letting him off the hook, because it suggests he COULD if he really tried. And at this point - I just don’t think he has it in him. I really don’t. It’s not a thing he’s built for. He can feint TOWARDS meaning and depth, and hopefully other collaborators can (and will) pick up the baton and take it where he’s pointing. But when you ask him to follow through himself… he can’t do it.

I really think that’s the big lesson here. It’s not a story about corporate interference, or meddling bosses.

It’s the story of a couple guys, under the gun and on the clock, delivering sub-par work because their instincts are inherently bad. That’s it.

Post
#1322083
Topic
<em>The Mandalorian</em> Discussion Thread - * <em><strong>SPOILERS</strong></em> *
Time

Make a small-scale TV show that respects the canon

I don’t think “respecting the canon” has a whole lot to do with why it’s liked though. Not to any real degree. Nor should it be, honestly. Canon isn’t that important, ultimately. It’s just as malleable as any other story element. What’s important is whether or not you put some thought into why you’re breaking - or adhering - to it, and execute that thought well.

Post
#1321464
Topic
The Kenobi <s>Movie</s> Show
Time

The Mandalorian comparison might also be alluding to how Mandalorian very obviously plays like a movie that got rewritten, split into parts, and had 3 bottle episodes shoved into the middle of it, and maybe they don’t want that to happen here, too.

But they could release it as a movie on Disney+ if they wanted, as well. It doesn’t have to be a “TV Show” - but I get why they’d rather have four weeks of subscription retention as opposed to one.

Post
#1321451
Topic
The Kenobi <s>Movie</s> Show
Time

And… it’s delayed indefinitely. They’re worried the story Amini came up with is going to seem too similar to the Mandalorian’s, and they want to reduce the episode count from 6 to 4. Which makes me wonder why they even bothered turning it into a TV show. That’s basically movie length if they’re using Mandalorian-sized episodes.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/obi-wan-kenobi-series-hold-as-calls-goes-new-scripts-1272499

Post
#1321431
Topic
Most Disappointing Aspect of Sequel Trilogy? Most Satisfying? * <strong>TROS SPOILERS WITHIN</strong> *
Time

I don’t think Carrie’s passing had much to do with it at all. I think Trevorrow couldn’t come up with a version of the story where he could redeem Kylo, and that’s what caused the split. None of his drafts have it, and the Jack Thorne draft that does have it… he probably didn’t want his name on that once he read it, because shortly after it came in, he was gone. Most of the other aspects of the two approaches share similarities (which is probably why Trevorrow got the credit he got, even if Abrams and Terrio really did page one rewrite it) but the only really big difference is Kylo.

I do believe the wedge issue was Lucasfilm execs believed this story needed to have the redemption of its bad guy, and the writer/director they initially hired to deliver that ending didn’t feel the same way. The guy they got to replace Trevorrow not only would do it, but he’d resurrect Carrie Fisher in order to get it done. Oh, and he ALSO directed the biggest domestic earner of all time, whereas the other guy just made Book of Henry.

That probably seemed like a pretty brilliant move in September 2017.

Post
#1321415
Topic
Most Disappointing Aspect of Sequel Trilogy? Most Satisfying? * <strong>TROS SPOILERS WITHIN</strong> *
Time

DominicCobb said:

I’ve heard the 50 completed scripts thing too. If it’s true, it’s crazy it never got made, though I guess that’s how Lucas rolled. You almost have to think it’s a shame too? Unless it sucked of course. I wonder if they’d ever consider reviving the concept for D+, but I doubt it.

My bet is that they’ve basically been parting it out for whatever they need.

But yeah, if they ever need a quick hit of content for their streaming network, it’s got to be very tempting to know the development process on a full 5 season series is already finished. Literally all you have to do is start shooting it.

Post
#1321399
Topic
Most Disappointing Aspect of Sequel Trilogy? Most Satisfying? * <strong>TROS SPOILERS WITHIN</strong> *
Time

IIRC, Underworld had a Palpatine Origin Story episode that essentially made the case Palpatine only really sought out the Sith because he couldn’t handle getting done wrong by his girlfriend.

Ronald D. Moore talked about it some after everything got sold, and I think that interview he gave is where we found out the whole show had something like 50-plus completely finished scripts? Also that Moore and Lucas would get in full-on FIGHTS over the story direction. Not gentle disagreements, but very heated arguments about what “Star Wars” can be.

Which I thought was awesome. Make that dude fight for his story, not just sit there and dole it out. Make him do the work of justifying the ideas that fly into his head, as opposed to just handing them down to people like they’re historical documents.

Post
#1321034
Topic
Episode VIII : The Last Jedi - Discussion * <strong><em>SPOILER THREAD</em></strong> *
Time

FreezingTNT2 said:

Wish they made it clear within the film itself that he didn’t really want the Jedi to end.

They did. He literally says it to Kylo at the close of their duel.

He’s angry and upset and he’s got an audience to vent to in Rey, so he’s trying to convince himself as much as he is trying to convince her that the last few years of his solitary life on this rock mean more than they actually do. His behaviors are saying just as much as any line of dialog would (and even then, he gets an actual line of dialog that makes it explicit later in the movie)

But it’s not an accident we see him carefully folding his Jedi robes, or that he’s still got a shrine with the Sacred Jedi Texts up and standing, or that he can’t make himself destroy the tree, and that he’s very upset at the possibility of Yoda having burned those books. All of those things are clear evidence that he’s not really dedicated to letting the Jedi end. He’s talking a good game but he hasn’t convinced himself, and every time push comes to shove he chooses to PROTECT the Jedi way, not destroy it. The very fact he chooses to train her at all speaks to the idea that he’s not convinced that it’s really “time for the Jedi to end.”

Post
#1321031
Topic
Episode VIII : The Last Jedi - Discussion * <strong><em>SPOILER THREAD</em></strong> *
Time

When did Rian Johnson say that? He’s obviously afraid - it’s in Hamill’s performance, it’s in Luke’s behavior, it’s definitely present in the moment where he talks a good game about burning down the tree and then doesn’t do it because he’s scared to.

Yes, he wants to stop the cycle, but he’s also scared to do it. And eventually he learns that his method of stopping the cycle is a bad one anyway, because while his intent was good, the way he went about it wasn’t.

He’s not “suddenly” on Ahch-To because of fear, it was always a part of why he went there. Fear, Shame, Anger, Sadness… all of that is mixed together in his motivations to cut himself off and stay cut off.

Him having Leia’s saber stashed away in there isn’t a “plot hole.”

Post
#1321022
Topic
<em>The Mandalorian</em> Discussion Thread - * <em><strong>SPOILERS</strong></em> *
Time

Streaming has become so mainstream and prioritized that for many people, the option to watch, much less own, physical discs isn’t even really an option to them. The idea that there’s a big enough number of people who would buy physical releases of the show instead of streaming them doesn’t seem realistic to me, I agree. They wouldn’t lose money if they issued this series on blu-ray or 4K UHD.

For better or worse (largely worse if you care about things like picture quality) the mainstream audience considers streaming to be the primary home video format now, and prefer to watch their shows via the internet. The discs wouldn’t be competition with that. They’d be a very cool secondary income stream for the property though, and they should exploit that.

Post
#1321021
Topic
Episode VIII : The Last Jedi - Discussion * <strong><em>SPOILER THREAD</em></strong> *
Time

He also kept his Jedi robes. And when he went to go burn the tree - he couldn’t burn it. Yoda had to do it for him. Luke didn’t really want the Jedi to end, (“I will not be the last Jedi” are some of the last words he ever speaks") and he couldn’t make himself do it. That he kept Leia’s lightsaber as a memento isn’t a “plot hole” because it doesn’t undo or mess up anything from a plotting perspective, much less a thematic or character one. It’s absolutely in keeping with the Luke from The Last Jedi. Luke was being dishonest to both himself and Rey about why he was really on that island, and it wasn’t some big noble aspiration. He was depressed and scared and ashamed.

Post
#1320906
Topic
Episode VIII : The Last Jedi - Discussion * <strong><em>SPOILER THREAD</em></strong> *
Time

I didn’t ignore what you said concerning the fire range - the movie also establishes that the First Order probably could have, at any point, jumped ahead and just wiped them out, but Hux instead chose to just follow behind and essentially torture them instead of just getting it over with. He’s being sadistic and awful and enjoying it instead of putting in the work.

Which is ALSO a thematic element that keeps getting referenced and paid off later in the movie - the villains’ hubris and arrogance gets them ruined. Had Hux been as ruthless as he pretends he is, the movie would have ended after 30 minutes. Had Snoke been paying attention instead of feeling himself, he wouldn’t have gotten bisected. If Kylo had been paying attention instead of raging out on Crait, he would have figured out what was really going on before it was too late.

Here’s a larger point that I’m trying to make - aside from the fact these “plot holes” aren’t really plot holes at all, if your deconstruction of the story is being done solely to point out how there are ways to effectively end the story after 30 minutes because the bad guys “could have” done something else that they didn’t do and it would wipe out the good guys, then you’re not really worried about the story or the plot-holes, you’re basically trying to invalidate the movie, period. That’s not fixing a story, that’s anti-storytelling. That’s suggesting that our heroes need to be so pigeonholed BY the plot that the course of action they take is the only possible course of action they COULD take. That’s video-game routing, not large-scale movie storytelling. What’s the end goal of this criticism, and what is it that it’s saying about the story and the characters and the themes and ideas they represent?

The rate of cannon fire and the distance on that cannon fire isn’t important enough to invalidate whole themes and arcs, and suggesting the story needs to work that way in order to be successful doesn’t make any sense to me. Especially not in the face of how clearly the film DOES communicate all its ideas and details as they’re happening.