hello possessed. please don’t leave like that again.
happy birthday mfm.
Anakin Starkiller said:
TV’s Frink said:
Anakin Starkiller said:
do people hate dex’s diner’s scene because dex himself is a big pile of cgi shit or are there other reasons?
How about Ewan McGregors terrible reshoot beard?
Oh, and the wig.
It’s not even noticeable. General Dodonna’s the only one in SW with a distractingly fake beard.
Obi Wan in AoTC outside the club would like the world’s biggest word with you.
Mind provide a screenshot?
My eyesight must be failing me; I can’t see a difference.
The Force seems kind of stingy about revealing specific details like that though. Luke could see his friends suffering at Cloud City, but even Yoda couldn’t say if they were going to die or not.
which is why it’s out of character for luke to do what he did
I’m curious as to how people would have reacted to the “flying Leia” scene had something similar been done back in the 80’s. I really think this scene has the most polarized reactions in the entirety of TLJ. Some people love it, and others think it’s complete nonsense. Even my first reaction was “is this brilliant or silly?”. Maybe it’s the obvious CG-look of the moment that puts people off?
Or maybe it’s the fact that many anticipated a Leia death scene,
then all of a sudden she “flies” back to safety (it’s pretty jarring the first time). Or maybe GotG vol.2 was still to fresh in people’s memory and all they could think of was Yondu’s Mary Poppins scene.
I personally think it’s a really interesting idea, but I can’t help but find the execution of the scene to be a tad off. It’s the wide-shot of her flying (this shot) that weirds me out a bit. But none of this makes it a “bad” scene in my mind. Plus, it’s a scene that to me gets less weird the more I watch it, though I can’t tell if that’s a good or bad sign.
emphasis mine, i agree with much of your post, but that part stands out, and i think it is impossible for most of us to effectively gauge what our subconscious was doing as we watched this, but i strongly suspect that our collective thought was “ok, this is how she dies”, and then we were all wrong.
That’s exactly what I thought the first time I saw TLJ, so when her hand suddenly started twitching and her eyes opened it really caught me off guard. It’s a scene I didn’t really appreciate until I saw it a second time. For me that actually applies to all of the new films; I don’t properly watch them on their own terms until I sew it a second time.
I think the Internet has shifted a lot of the focus on the actual production of movies, and as a result we’re simply watching movies differently than before. Nowadays we expect so much beforhand, and there’s such a diverse range of opinions, preferences and pre-suppositions. Back in the 80s people really just wanted more SW. Now people want their interpretation of what SW should be. And of course there’s no established template for what that is.
This feels spot on. I had a similar experience watching TFA the first time where I had trouble accepting what it actually was trying to do and didn’t fully love it until my second viewing. Didn’t make the same mistake with TLJ and went in with no expectations and allowed it to tell the story it wanted to tell. Loved it right away.
me too, but i didn’t love TLJ. i think nowadays i dislike TFA so much because i tried really hard to like it and failed.
i recall realizing that leia was force pulling herself to the ship and not flying, the problem for me is she being alive.
good for you.
It’s kind of hard to judge all of this though. I mean aren’t most people on this forum old enough to remember SW before the PT? Even the younger people here seems to have grown up with the PT (like myself), so I don’t think too many here really knows what the general consensus about the new movies really are. Though I personally wouldn’t go as far as saying “jumping the shark” (not yet anyway), I too feel like they’re overdoing it a bit. But then again I’m used to a more old fashioned formula of filmmaking, so I honestly have no idea what people under the age of twenty feel about the new method.
i’m 17, so maybe i’m eligible? i’m sort of biased given that i’m here so naturally i’m a huge star wars fan, but i can speak for my unbiased friends: all (most) of them went to see TFA in the first couple of weeks. not as many went to see Rogue Onebut still a considerable amount nonetheless. almost none of them even watched TLJ. and i still haven’t talked to one who’s seen Solo (myself included in this group of people).
just an anecdote i feel might add to the discussion.
i LOVE detective obi-wan in AotC. the best part of the movie imo, so i’d never cut that scene. it’s the only change i made to hal’s TAS, i added that scene back.
plus, there were 3 years in between the prequels. to me, the answer is yes too. i went to the first available session in my town for TFA, RO and TLJ, and haven’t even seen Solo yet, for example. not sure if I’ll ever watch it, or Episode IX when that comes out.
O, that show was made by the same guy behind Rick and Morty?
*adds to anti-watchlist*
oh man DE. good luck to you and to her 😕
i love that scene. people tend to use it as an example for “hey look how bad and non star warsy aotc feels” and i use it as an example for “hey look how awesome AotC can be”. ok maybe not that much but still.
do people hate dex’s diner’s scene because dex himself is a big pile of cgi shit or are there other reasons?
Yeah, correct. It’s around 1:56:06. Is there a possobility to upload pictures around here?
I am watching Star Wars Despecialized Edition V 2.7 now. Towards the end there seems to be problem with the picture. I cannot really explain it. But when Luke, Han and Chewie enter the hall you see Luke first, then Han and finally Chewie. Then cut to the bystanders right in the middle of the shot of the bystanders, a frame of Chewbacca shows up and quickly goes away. Does somebody else have the same problem?
Do you have a timecode for when this happens? This is for the ending celebration, right?
yes. upload the picture somewhere and do this:
!(INSERT LINK TO PICTURE HERE)
Pens is an abbreviation for penalties, mate 😃
In the knockout stages of a tournament, if the scoreline is tied after 90 minutes there is an extra-time period of 30 minutes to see if one team can triumph. If the scores are still level, penalties are then used to decide the winner.
Each team gets 5 penalties each - whoever scores the most penalties, wins. Each penalty has to be taken by a different player.
However, on occasion, the ties are still level after the 5 penalties are taken… this then results in a further round of 1 penalty each (sometimes referred to as ‘sudden death penalties’) - to be taken by players who have not yet taken a penalty - and it continues until there is a winner.
Sometimes this results in both goalkeepers taking penalties, occasionally against each other - which is quite a rare event, and usually fun/entertaining to watch.
If the scores are still level after everyone has taken a penalty - it just resets back to the players who originally took the set of 5 penalties - and continues until there is a winner…
This video may show / explain it better (a 15-14 win on penalties for Liverpool a couple of years back)…
If it was up to me, if teams were still tied after the 30 minute extra time period, I would turn off the clock and have them play soccer until someone scores. (Team that scores wins the game)
well, after playing for 120 minutes the players are usually exhausted, and most of them have ran something like 10 miles, so making them play until someone scores sounds brutal, because that could last for several more minutes.
what you described is how extra time used to be though. in brazil we called it ‘sudden death’ - the first team to score in extra time would automatically win. when it was like that, every attack from the adversary was a mini heart attack, so i’m kind of glad that that’s no longer how extra time works.
after spending so much time in the US being absolutely clueless as to how baseball and american football work, it’s refreshing to see warbler a bit lost 😉
are the colors of RotJ’s blu-ray bad?
the problem here is that this
God Dammit America.
I want to actually read the amendment to the referenced bill, because I want to approach this with a balanced opinion, but this article doesn’t cite it. The article doesn’t at all say what bill it was.
Now, because I live in Oklahoma, I clicked on the link in the article that mentioned Oklahoma passing a law that “let welfare agencies discriminate against same-sex couples who want to foster or adopt children.” The linked-to article then immediately starts out with “Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin has signed into law a bill allowing faith-based adoption and foster care agencies, even those with state contracts, to turn away prospective parents who pose a conflict with their religious beliefs.”
and… Yes? So? They’re faith-based organizations who hold to certain beliefs, and they want to be selective with regard to parents based on certain principles they hold to.
Well okay then. Moving on.
Then they shouldn’t get state contracts.
Why should I be denied the right to adopt, the right to be a parent, because of something that doesn’t interfere with them?
people in these organizations who perceive homosexuality as a harmful lifestyle choice.
is fucking insane
well, those are the discussions the movie prompted. imo they’re productive, seeing as i wouldn’t have considered several aspects of the film and gotten to the point i’m at with my opinion if not for these discussions.
I never actually intended to go away, but I haven’t really posted in a few weeks now because in the time since The Last Jedi came out I’ve grown to find the sorts of discussions that take place here exhausting. I’m not at all tired with Star Wars itself, I’m just tired of having to be a fucking lawyer about it. Call me when you guys want to speculate and theorize about stuff without re-litigating whether or not TLJ worked every six posts.
who needs discussion about star wars in a star wars discussion forum amirite?
It’s mainly Frink who complains. Two or three others pipe up after he’s challenged.
There’s no “problem” in having new threads. The backseat modding is extraordinarily tiresome.
In response to oojason: (https://originaltrilogy.com/topic/action/reply/id/61688/quote/1225338)
respectfully, having 8 different people start PMs would be even worse. These things are always best discussed in the open, but you are right in that in can derail threads and make them ugly. That is what this thread (https://originaltrilogy.com/topic/The-New-The-New-Thread-Thread-Thread/id/60401) tries to solve: an open place to discuss the merits of a thread, without cluttering up the real threads.
and guess who has been trying to solve this problem for ages? TV’s Frink.
when you have a forum that has no search, we have to resort to insane organization in order to keep things functional. that is part of why this forum is unique in how much we complain about new threads, and pointless threads.
The thread creator can always edit his OP to let people know he’s addressed any issues, or adapted their thread to give a clearer insight as to what it is about - if they so wish/think it’s warranted. A bit like Handman did in his thread.
It’s not like there’ll be much call for this anyway - the vast majority of threads are fairly self-explaining by nature. I don’t think there will be situation where 8 (or 12 - which the number Frink used to voice the same concerns shortly before your post) members are going to PM the mods and thread creator with issues as to the make-up of a thread before it is already addressed after the first couple of PMs. For many there may not even be an issue with the make-up of a thread - and just want to participate.
Or we can just carry on… with people giving their opinion as to whether a thread is valid or not, redundant or not etc - and taking it off course, or derailing it, and resulting in another promising thread going by the wayside. It also has an effect of deterring others from creating new threads - or just not participating in the certain sections of the site at all.
This my attempt to try and remedy this - if Jay, Wook or Anchor don’t agree - or come up with a better way/plan (which is more than likely) there well may be a change to it. At present I think we’re all of a mind we’d like to see more quality debate, more threads on specific issues or subjects of interest, and more members participating in them (especially outside The Cantina).
If someone wants to post in a thread something along the lines of - ‘I think we already have a thread on this very subject mate, here - (insert link)’ then great, do so - politely or courteously etc - and leave it at that, or PM the OP & the mods to discuss it further. We’re not going to have debates in-thread as to whether something is redundant or not. If a thread doesn’t interest someone - let it be, if it does interest them - great, nice one.
Re the organisation of the forum… yes, there’s no functioning search - yet there are pointers on how to search for threads on here. There are now also About and Help sections, new Feedback & Assistance forums, and also Index Threads for pretty much every section of the site to help members find certain threads too. Some forum categories have been created so topics are more in tune with each other and threads should be easier to locate as well; ie Media, Culture and Cantina. There are also numerous members on here who lend a hand to help their fellow members out in many differing ways - including Frink.
That there is a ‘new thread new thread thread new new’, or whatever the later incarnation is called, is cool - for those that know what it does. It doesn’t really help new members as they likely wouldn’t know what it is or does - or may not have clicked on it. To be honest I didn’t until late last year - and mistakenly thought it was another thread re Frink, and never clicked on it.
For those that do know it’s purpose (and also not)… there is also an issue in Frink stating his opinions whether a thread is redundant or not - it is not for Frink to pick which threads are or not. Nor is it then getting into why - or why not not - a thread is redundant etc, in that very thread which has the action of derailing it / taking it off further topic.
As stated in Handman’s thread, Frink has been asked not to derail threads, which eventually lead to a warning(s) for continuing to do so - though for obvious reasons I’m not discussing this matter further in here.
If you have any further concerns or questions dahmage, please feel free to PM me - as is anyone is welcome to do and I’ll do my best to provide them with an adequate answer.
If a thread doesn’t interest you, don’t post in it. A polite question asking for clarification is fine.
This is not:
TV’s Frink said:
This thread has no reason to exist.
Anyone who doesn’t understand why this post was a problem and triggered official warnings should consult what happened here for clarification.
yay i remember that!
what about season 1 and 2?
I agree. The PT ends where the OT begins, right down to the twin sunset on Tatooine. Going from ROTJ to TFA is far more jarring to me, where an obvious total victory is suddenly and without explanation completely reversed, while all the victors have become shadows of their former selves. General Solo has again become a smuggler in debt with everyone, who hides from his problems. Luke’s hiding from his problems on a rock, and has closed himself off from the Force. Even Leia has been demoted from princess, and senator to the general of an even smaller band of rebels, whilst Han and Leia have apparently won the worst parents of the year award.
This is my main issue with the ST. Despite the fact that they’re very good films, the story is just so nonsensical to me. What we’re told happened between VI and VII is far more interesting to me than what’s happening in VII and VIII. We’re right back where we started in the OT (if not worse, the rebels are down to a handful of folk on the falcon), with no real explanation as to how we got there after the triumphant victory in VI.
I would have much more enjoyed a story of how Ben got seduced by Snoke, how the First Order came to be, etc.
Many who don’t like it see things back where the OT began, but it isn’t. That is my point. While there are echoes of the OT in the ST (there were in the PT as well), the ST is telling a unique story that I don’t think we will totally see until the third story is out for us to follow the plots. In TLJ, the First Order has not yet taken over. Rey says it directly. While the Republic government and fleet have been wiped out, the First Order still has to actually seize power. They have only eliminated the other power that Snoke thought could stop him.
I disagree. The New Republic in TFA doesn’t play any role of significance, and by the start of TLJ it’s been written out of the story altogether. The destruction of Hosnian Prime is equivalent to the destruction of Alderaan, only bigger. The fact that the FO actually has to seize power also does not translate to the films, since the FO are behaving just like the Empire throughout both TFA and TLJ. There’s very little in the films, that suggest the FO are a rising power, a reality made all the more clear by the fact, that the destruction of the SKB doesn’t affect them in any way.
We are no in the same place at the end of TLJ that we were at the beginning of ANH. It is a must different landscape. For one thing, there were no Jedi on the Galactic stage in ANH. There is Luke and Rey in TLJ and Luke has just left a lasting impression to give power to the new rebellion. Please find that in the years leading up to ANH. Even Rebels doesn’t have such a public display of power, and definitely not one that spread like wildfire across the galaxy.
What public display of power? Luke made a symbolic act, only seen by a handful of rebels, and a legion of FO troops. The fact that people are inspired by this, is a good way to end the story on a note of hope, but considering that the rebels have been reduced to a dozen people on a single ship, I don’t see that as some great victory. I would consider the destruction of the first Death Star as being a far greater victory in both a military and symbolic sense. I would think the destruction of SKB, the FO’s home base, and their most powerful weapon should be much more important in a military, and symbolic sense, but RJ certainly turned that into a pretty hollow victory, considering TLJ’s events follow directly from TFA, and the fact that the FO were supposed to be a rising power. I predict, that the FO will have a firm grasp on the galaxy by the start of episode IX, whilst the rebels will still be struggling to survive. The fact that they survived at all, is to Luke’s credit, but considering he played a major role in getting the galaxy to this dark place, I again would not see it as a huge victory.
The mere existence of the Resistance and Leia’s role as its leader tells us that the new Republic is not what she had hoped and that she fears they do not take the First Order seriously. It paints a picture of a complacent Republic that is probably more worried about internal squabbles than a theoretical outside threat. That they had so few ships that the entire fleet was in orbit of the capital shows that it it was a very weak republic.
Yes, but in the service of rehashing the Empire versus rebels conflict of the OT. The only reason the New Republic is so complacent and weak, is because the writers of the ST desperately wanted to reset the Star Wars galaxy to a pre-BFE state, including a rebellion, stormtroopers, an Emperor figure, and a fallen Jedi student.
I seriously don’t get what some of you want. Do you want a sequel trilogy with a story or a pointless story set in a perfect Utopia? To get a story you have to have conflict and the easiest way to get it is for things to go wrong. In the ST we are getting, things went wrong about 15-20 years after ROTJ (and ROTJ wasn’t the last battle). That is 15-20 years when things went right. The Republic was flourishing and Han and Leia were together. And the worst part is you are blaming Kennedy, and Johnson and leaving out Lucas and Abrams. This whole ST is Lucas’s doing. He created a treatment, he sold his company, he turned it over to Kennedy. How much of his treatment they are using is unknown, but they are using his girl force sensitive hero and his exiled Luke and I bet there is a lot more they are using. But let’s sit tight and wait for IX before we write off the ST. We can’t even tell what the main story is, just like the redemption of Anakin/Vader didn’t become part of the story until ROTJ. In the PT, we all knew where it would end up so we knew the arc from the moment we heard the name Anakin.
I didn’t want two movies, that essentially remix the OT. I didn’t want Empire versus rebels 2.0 right down to the stormtroopers, x-wings, tie-fighters, and a Death Star. I didn’t want an another Jedi apprentice seduced by a Sith Lord wannabe. Been there, done that! What I wanted was an original story with original villains, and a completely different setup, that follows naturally from the events of ROTJ. I’m aware that’s a lot to ask for, but when it comes to Star Wars I have high expectations. I think TFA and TLJ are both pretty good films seen in a vaccuum, but as sequels to the OT, they’re a dissappointment to me.
But it is not a total rehash. Since you are focused on the Jedi/Sith part, in the PT you have Palpatine, a hidden sith lord, lose one apprentice, gain Dooku, all the while his aim is to turn Skywalker (the PT makes it very clear that Palpatine has been Anakin’s mentor from TPM on). In the OT, Palpatine has Vader. When they learn of Luke, they set the goal to turn him. When Luke finally comes before Palpatine, Palpatine no only tries to turn him, but tries to replace Vader. In the ST, Snoke has turned Ben/Kylo. Or has he. There is conflict an in order to end that conflict, Kylo kills his father only to find that conflict has grown not gone away. Snoke sees it and while Kylo tries to turn Rey, Snoke really doesn’t bother, instead having Kylo kill Rey. But that conflict has turned to resolve, not to destroy Rey, but to kill Snoke. And how the story plays out from there we don’t know. So from the Jedi/Sith/Whatever perspective, the three trilogies are completely different. In both the PT and the OT, the Jedi tale is much the same. Boy meets mentor, mentor dies, mentor arranges for another teacher. Boy is taught and becomes a Jedi. The third act for the PT and OT differ as one has the boy fall and the other has the boy redeem his father by sacrificing his life. The ST has a girl search for a mentor (the PT and OT didn’t have a search as the mentor just happened to find the boy), find him, have him refuse to teach her, relent and give some lessons. But then the girl leaves to learn on her own and the mentor dies and will train her from the grave. A couple of points are the same, but the rest is very very different in the ST.
i find it interesting that you think there are more similarities between the PT and the OT than the OT with the ST Jedi-wise. i think that most similarities between the PT and the OT are some very few plot points that were executed drastically differently using very different characters and a much different context, making your comparison feel forced to me.
and i still think that in the ST there have been more similarities (to the OT) in that regard anyway: comparing the trilogy’s Jedi’s journey itself, (which ends up being Rey’s journey) to Luke’s - both had a kind mentor who liked them and never refused to teach them stuff in the first movie, that ended up dying. then in the second installment they have to go to a distant place to find another mentor to train them, except that this time the mentor is, well, not what they expected at all, even refusing to train them at first. Rey/Luke even decide to leave the planet before they complete the training due to outside reasons.
now, Anakin has none of those similarities. he’s a kid in the first one, he loses his master, yes, but Obi-Wan never refuses to train him. he refuses to ‘rank him up’, but that’s a very different thing. from a certain point of view it might not be as different as i’m saying it is, but i still think it is regardless.
not to mention how similar the rest of the ST’s plot is to the OT’s makes it look like Rey is Luke 2.0 even more, except that she’s an overpowered version of him.
And we don’t have an all powerful, galaxy wide empire. We have a power on the Rim invading the core. Their first strike was the PT equivalent of destroying the Coruscant system (not Alderaan) and decapitating the fledgling Republic. Nothing in TLJ says that the FO have actually conquered anything yet. Rey says it will happen in weeks. Only hours or days have passed since the end of TFA. So the FO is in the position of the invader, not the local power. They are more like the Separatists in the Clone Wars. They are not the nearly all powerful Empire of the OT. They are the aggressors where in the OT the Rebels are the aggressors trying to unseat the tyrannical power.
but we do have a galaxy wide empire. let’s take a look at what the movies show us: in SW, the movie shows us a strong Empire, one that even has the power to blow up a planet! they have this huge moon-sized Death Star, and several cruisers. at the end of the movie, the moon sized battle station is destroyed, which is a big hit to the empire. after that we see several cruisers in TESB and even more cruisers and another half completed DS in RotJ. those are the imperial forces that are shown to us in the OT, and they give us the idea that the empire is a very wealthy, influent and large organization, given that even when their superweapon was destroyed they were still extremely powerful.
with that in mind, let’s head on to TFA. it shows us that the FO has a humongous force too. they have built not a moon sized battle station, but a planet sized one. that’s huge, and must have cost a lot of money and manpower. plus we see a few cruisers. now, at the end of that movie the battle station is destroyed too, like in SW, which, of course, leads us to believe that it’s going to be a great hit to the FO.
TLJ follows TFA directly (as you said, one movie is hours apart from the other), so they had the opportunity to show us a scattered First Order, struggling to survive now that the Resistance blew up the thing they had invested in the most, not only making all that investment pretty ineffective but also killing billions of their men. instead, TLJ shows us a First Order that’s stronger than TESB’s Empire. they didn’t even seem to take the hit of the destruction of the base at all, to the point where it’s mentioned MAYBE twice in the movie - which is telling of their power.
considering all of that i find it hard to believe that the First Order is a limping force in the galaxy and not the dominant one.
You keep focusing on some small points of similarity and saying it is the same, yet when you dig in to the details they are not. I am really finding the nature of this argument to be very much like the arguments against the PT (why is Anakin a boy, why all the politics, etc., etc., etc.), the only difference is the quality of the finished product - at least to some. I really can’t see the substance of all the TLJ hate. Most was setup in TFA and TLJ just carries on the story. And the story appears to be close to GL’s treatment (definitely the Luke arc), but with characters created by Abrams (one thing he is very good at).
a couple of plot points in the PT are the same as in the OT, yes, but it’s nothing compared to how TFA’s plot was basically Star Wars’. and the natural progression to that story was there in TLJ again - we basically had TESB and RotJ for the first 3 acts of TLJ, with the 4th act being the most original aspect of the movie (alongside canto bight and a other story beats).
the thing is, the similarities between the OT and the PT are nothing more than a few plot points. the similarities between the OT and the ST are not only a heck of a lot of plot points, but how similarly executed they are, even with the story being told getting similar at times.