While I get what you're saying, take note that I did mention his human blood several times in my last post. Just saying...
Actually, to be more specific, Spock almost killed Kirk because of pon farr. But I digress...
To answer your question, it would be against continuity because of this: Vulcan males are supposed to go through pon farr every seventh year of their adult life, beginning in puberty. In the aforementioned "Amok Time," Spock tells Kirk that he had hoped his human blood would keep him from having to go through it, implying that it had never happened before. Maybe his human blood did delay it until well into adulthood. But if the 2nd season was his first time, it sure couldn't happen in a movie that's supposed to take place before that.
Well, I, and this might just be me personally, have a harder time believing someone who says a scene is missing than one who says a scene is added. While a person who believes something's there who wasn't probably had some stimulus to provoke it (storybooks, novelizations, etc.), someone who claims that something is missing might have simply forgotten that scene. Hell, as I said the other day in another thread, the first two times I saw ROTS, I could have sworn there was never a wookiee battle. I wish I'd been right...
Ooh, the composer for The Incredibles is doing music for Star Trek? Awesome, because, like you, Johnny, I loved the score for that movie.
Yes. He is old! I'm not trying to convince you that flying in the OT would be a good thing. I'm just pointing out that the logic you are using to say that it's bad in the OT is the same logic you (and Lucas) ignore when saying it's perfectly fine in the PT. And, if you take PT era logic, Obi-Wan's not even that old. He's in his 50s now, according to the official timeline, which is much younger than he was originally supposed to be. But Count Dooku is at least as old in the PT as Obi-Wan is in the OT. And Christopher Lee is definitely old enough that he had to have a stunt double do most of his fighting for him. So why is it okay to have Dooku jumping around like a maniac but not old Ben? The answer: it's not.
Ooh, they should have ISS Spock in this movie! Bring back the goatee!
Referring to twister's earlier comment, I happened to be thinking about that as I glanced at my Trek calendar. This month is Spock from Amok Time, and it gave me an idea. Maybe Spock is beating the crap out of Kirk in the trailer because he's pon farr-ing! He certainly had no trouble beating up Kirk in the series because of that. Granted, that would totally ruin continuity as well, but before I got pissed off because of it, I would certainly laugh heartily at the thought that Spock was choking Kirk on the bridge because Spock wasn't gettin' any!
I like 'em too, actually, in the sense that they never bothered me, and I found it hilarious that they worshipped 3PO.
skyjedi2005 said:They have a lot to prove since these guys wrote the awful script for Transformers. Bayformers as it is now called by its haters. That was a good popcorn flick but raped its source material i hope the same is not done here.
I grew up with and loved Transformers myself, but I gotta call this into question, sky. I admit I haven't seen the whole of the new movie, but I have seen parts of it. And I have heard quite a bit of people saying it didn't respect the source material. But that's never really bothered me too much. Because, honestly, how much serious respect can you give the original cartoon knowing that it only existed to promote a line of action figures?
Yeah, I'm relatively satisfied with the GOUT too. And by that, I mean that it's the best out of everything else I have: '95 VHS, '97 VHS, '04 DVD, and '95 LD rips. The GOUT even looks pretty good on the high def monitor on my computer, even when it's zoomed in. It's not great, but it's certainly watchable. In fact, the only moment that really pulls me out is that extreme moment of ghosting where the sandtrooper has two sets of eyes.
Of course, just to clarify, that doesn't mean I'm satisfied with the principle of the GOUT. Star Wars deserves better. The whole thing was a joke and an insult. I'm just saying that when I sit down to watch the trilogy, I do so with the GOUT because... as I said, sadly, that's the best there is, right now. It's definitely far below industry standard. It's just not as unwatchable as others might say.
I might think this was a good idea... and in some ways I think it would be cool if someone did manage to pull it off seamlessly. However, the idea of fighting on the Wookiee planet lost all its appeal to me after ROTS. That part of the movie was so forgettable that the first two times I saw the movie, I left wondering why I never saw any wookiees. Yes, those parts bored me so much that within two hours, I'd actually forgotten I'd seen them. The third time I went to see the movie, I went in with the specific purpose of making sure I paid attention for the Kashyyk scenes. And, finally, I managed to do so. And.... Eh.
Around 2004-2005, I tried a couple of times to watch the movies in numerical order, with the 2004 OT, just to see if it worked, and if I could see the OT in the context of the PT. It was... interesting. With a strong suspension of disbelief, supression of the history of the development of Star Wars, and a grandiose imagination, it is possible. However, I quickly learned that I preferred to watch each movie in context of itself, not in terms of its retcons: I watch Star Wars truly believing everything that Owen and Ben claim at face value. I watch Empire happy to see Luke and Leia make out because the love triangle is totally legitimate.
Since I no longer watch the 2004 versions at all (after having gotten the GOUT), the prequels have become a different story. Without the forcefed changes, the OT doesn't fit with it nearly as well. Granted, even with the forcefed changes, it's still pretty incongruous... a fault of the PT, not the OT. Ultimately, though, I don't really think about it. I still watch the PT on occasion and enjoy it for it what it is and occasionally hate it for what it is. And for the connections/allusions/foreshadowing to the OT that are made, I briefly try to make the connection without thinking about it too hard.
Eh, I guess what I'm trying to say is that, while watching the PT, I can manage to see the OT as the future of that. However, while watching the OT, it's much harder to see the prequels, exactly as they are, as being the past. It's a bit more of a stretch.
negative1 said:Gaffer Tape said:Yes. And it looks weird to see Yoda, Palpatine, and Count Dooku fly through the air.
not to some people.
it was perfectly ok for me,
and i had no trouble believing it, or watching it....
if they had been like the slow/plodding fights of the old series THEN
it would have been dull and boring..
later
-1
Excuse me. I was talking to rcb. I don't mind that you answered for him, but since you did, I assume that you share all his opinions in this matter. As such, I will respond to you in that assumed context. And since rcb did just recently respond, I guess this is for both of you.
Rcb said he was able to get used to seeing old men characters fly and jump around in the prequels. Negative 1 said it was perfectly okay. I assume that negative 1 agrees with rcb that it would have been weird to see Alec Guiness and Darth Vader fly around. How is it okay and acceptable for one set of characters but wrong and bizarre-looking for another? Especially since both those OT characters have PT counterparts who are constantly seen jumping around like crazy. And, as I said before, robots and old men have analogues in the PT that do those acrobatics. I can't shake it from my head that you're implying a double standard only to support your opinion.
Yay, I'm glad the owner stepped up, because I wanted to give credit because I thought that was hilarious, but I just couldn't remember who it was who had said that!
Yes. And it looks weird to see Yoda, Palpatine, and Count Dooku fly through the air.
C3PX said:Gaffer Tape said:C3PX said:rcb said:since when was jar jar stuck in?
Since 2004.
Okay, now, is this really fact? I thought that was just a fan colloquialism that the screaming gungan at the end of ROTJ was Jar-Jar Binks. Officially, though, isn't he just a random gungan?
No, I do not believe it has ever been officially stated that it was actually Jar Jar. It was a Gungan who sounds exactly like Jar Jar yelling out "Weeesaaa freeeee" in a very Jar Jar esque manner. So, at the end of the day, does it really make a difference if it was actually Jar Jar, or just another Gungan EXACTLY like him and equally annoying?
Haha, thanks for replying. That gave me a good laugh. I have to ask, though: haven't you said you have yet to watch the 2004 editions?
This is one of those arguments that nobody can win because both sides are wrong and both sides are right. When you get right down to it, art is entirely subjective. There is no way to give an absolute evaluation of any type of art. However, because a large number of people can agree on what is good and what is bad, criteria has been established, and art can be valued against the criteria to come up with an assessment of its value based on these categories. While it is not perfect, studying art enough to come up with definable characteristics does lend credence to opinions rather than simply, "I may not know art, but I know what I like." It may be true, but it's impossible for the speaker to explain what it means to anybody else. People who define art as purely subjective might dismiss any kind of attempt to grade art as impossible or wrong. And those who believe art has to live up to at least a certain standard would argue that criteria are necessary for any type of discussion about art. What's probably true is that the answer is somewhere in between. As a certain user here wonderfully misquoted recently: "Opinions are like assholes. Everybody is one."
I don't know if I can really add to what you've already said, but, yeah, it was originally supposed to be a two-handed grip. Mark Hamill talks about this in the Empire of Dreams documentary that George had told him that it was like holding a heavy broadsword. It required two hands because the amount of energy made it really heavy. Of course, by the sequels this rule is broken repeatedly, and by the prequels it completely disappears.
C3PX said:skyjedi2005 said:The worst films Final Frontier, Insurrection, Generations and Nemesis. I can honestly say those are the worst.
Though Final Frontier and Insurrection feel like star trek. Generations was a crap way to kill off the kirk character and an awful movie above all. The same theme of death and aging had been dealt with better in wrath of khan and did not need a rehash in generations or nemesis. Shit they even revisited it in insurrection.
I always hated Final Frontier, from the first time I saw it I though it was pretty boring and lame. It is probably my least favorite of anything ST (other than Enterprise). The first time I saw generations, I thought it was awesome. I certianly see it as a more flawed movie now, but I still enjoy it well enough. I like Malcolm McDowelll, so I always thought it was pretty cool having him as the main bad guy.
I have also always thought Insurrection was pretty cool, it doesn't feel like a huge epic sci-fi film, instead it feels like something that would have been a two part episode of TNG, which is something I really like about it.
I liked Nemesis' futuristic ST feel, by that I mean how the uniforms and technology were a step ahead of what we had seen in the other movies and shows, giving it a feeling a technological progression. But that was just an atmospheric thing, and does nothing to help the story, which seriously needed some help.
About a year ago, I was still progressing through my Trek moviedom. I'd seen II, III, and IV, and Generations, but that was it. So one weekend, I filled in a couple of gaps by renting TMP and V. Honestly, TMP bored the hell out of me. So when I watched Final Frontier, I actually enjoyed it quite a bit more. Yeah, it was a bit hokey, but at least it was interesting. It's still fun as a bit of a romp, and I also enjoy the scene with McCoy and his dad. I can understand, and on many different levels, why it's considered the worst, but I have no problem watching it.
Not being a big TNG follower, I also don't get the hate associated with Generations. I enjoyed it as well. I wasn't exactly thrilled with killing Kirk off, but I'd known about it long before I ever saw the movie, so it was something I was prepared for. It's actually funny to listen to the commentary, though. The writers spend the entire two hours doing nothing but bashing and lambasting their own movie!
I see that, briefly, the rationalization of the old man vs. the machine was used in this conversation. I have to say that's one of my least favorites. Thankfully, this thread moved on to users' preferences, because that's really the only way to gauge the fights. I pretty much agree with a lot of what's been said here. Empire's duel is my favorite. It always has been since the first time I saw it. It always felt the most real and the most grueling. Jedi's was good too but in a different sense. It has an emotional resonance, but since Luke refuses to fight for most of it, it doesn't have the same sense of action that Empire's had. I also enjoy watching the prequels' fights because some of them do look cool, like in TPM. I even enjoyed Vader vs. Obi-Wan, although the balancing on various bits of metal at the end broke my suspension of disbelief completely!
But the fights of the two trilogies were created under two totally different mindsets, choreographed by different people, and they just don't mesh together. It's up to the viewer's preference if they prefer the more down-to-earth, grueling battles of the OT or the flashy acrobatics of the PT. But to try to rationalize why the fights in the OT didn't look like the fights in the PT because of the old "Ben's an old man, and Vader's a robot" is just silly, especially because, even though George coined it, he largely ignored it. Let's explore:
Ben's an old man--Yes, but there are old men characters in the prequels: Dooku, Yoda, and Palpatine.
Vader's a robot--Somewhat, but there is a mechanical construct in the prequels: General Grievous.
And, guess what? All of those characters are constantly seen jumping around like they have briars up their asses, so... how exactly does this argument hold water?
C3PX said:rcb said:since when was jar jar stuck in?
Since 2004.
Okay, now, is this really fact? I thought that was just a fan colloquialism that the screaming gungan at the end of ROTJ was Jar-Jar Binks. Officially, though, isn't he just a random gungan?
Heh, I like how his pic is droid sex, too. ^_^
Come to think of it, would it have been any more suspenseful if it had been made in between episodes II and III? Nothing too terribly earth-shattering can happen to any of the movie's main characters, otherwise, it would be in the movies instead of the spin-off series. At the end of the day, it's like watching Star Trek. You know that when the landing party beams down, Kirk, Spock, and McCoy will be alright, but that redshirt you never saw before...
Lame fights?! Oooooooooooooooooooh.
You know I can't counter Leia bikini, as my keychain, t-shirt, and life-sized cardboard cutout would prove.
But if I were to do a prequel to this thread, I suppose it would have to be The Re-inserted Jabba Scene in Star Wars=REVISIONIST BAD FX REDUNDANT PLOT LINES FAIL!!!