Sign In

Mocata

User Group
Members
Join date
8-Feb-2017
Last activity
17-Oct-2021
Posts
2,078

Post History

Post
#1450736
Topic
Why Rogue One doesn't work well as a prequel to Star Wars
Time

SparkySywer said:

CarboniteSolo said:

Vader was only trying to get the plans that were stolen. All these people were in his way shooting at him, it’s either sit there and let the firing squad kill him, or mow them down with a lightsaber. I myself, in that situation would have done the same thing.

Because if he loses the plans, he has to face the Emperor and the consequences for failing.

Darth Vader’s a fictional character though, justifying a story decision with in-universe facts doesn’t work. The writers could have just not had that be the case.

Imagine if a WW2 movie, which people like to reference to RO, ended with a scene in which a Gestapo agent slaughtered a bunch of resistance fighters. And then people cheered.

Post
#1448241
Topic
Why Rogue One doesn't work well as a prequel to Star Wars
Time

thebluefrog said:

Infernal Affairs II
Twin Peaks Fire Walk With Me

Better Call Saul

These were referenced above–now, I haven’t really watched much of them, but are people saying them because they are good PREQUELS or because they’re just good QUALITY? What did they change about the perception of the original story?

I chose these specifically, and didn’t pick Temple of Doom or The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly for example.

Post
#1447871
Topic
What do you think of the <strong>Sequel Trilogy</strong>? - a general discussion thread
Time

Shopping Maul said:

I see Star Wars in general as being a ‘band effort’ rather than the sole vision of one man. Yes, SW is/was Lucas’ creation, but the input of folks like Kurtz, Dykstra, MacQuarrie, Johnston, Burt, Marcia Lucas, Kershner, Kasdan etc etc really helped shape this universe significantly. If anything I see the PT as the equivalent of Mick Jagger reforming the Stones with an all-new lineup. So I don’t buy into the ‘George as canon’ thing at all. A Lucas-ST probably would’ve sucked.

Harsh. But fair.

Post
#1447641
Topic
Favorite Episode title?
Time

SparkySywer said:

The Empire Strikes Back. There’s no screwing around, you know exactly what this movie is going to be about. It’s not that I think more interpretive titles or more vague titles are bad, but I just think it’s kind of funny how absolutely straight to the point it is. If you count “Star Wars” instead of “A New Hope”, this is why I’d also say “Star Wars” has the second best title.

Yeah, this.

Post
#1447631
Topic
Why Rogue One doesn't work well as a prequel to Star Wars
Time

I have many issues, but purely from a prequel sense the scale is all wrong. I imagined more a guerilla battle against great odds. Or a heist gone wrong. Instead it’s an enormous battle that dwarfs the original Death Star assault. What remains is a spectacle that doesn’t lead into the next film in terms of tone or momentum.

Post
#1447320
Topic
<strong>The Book Of Boba Fett</strong> (live action series) - a general discussion thread
Time

timdiggerm said:

Robert Rodriguez said:

Wait until you see what’s coming. It’s going to blow your mind. That’s all I can say. I can talk it up all I want, because I know it over-delivers. It way over-delivers. People are going to be so pumped when they see it.

This may be true, but surely this is also how he talks about every project?

Yes. And there are some very lengthy spells of WTF in between his handful of good ones.

Post
#1447319
Topic
What do you think of the <strong>Sequel Trilogy</strong>? - a general discussion thread
Time

With some clever writing in part three this could be something I enjoy despite a few very rough patches early on. Sort of like how the wonky Marvel movies lead up to some of the best scenes in the Infinity War plot. But I’m not really sure I can watch any of these again. I just don’t care now the conclusion is just a pathetic brainless product. Star Wars is still just a trilogy for me.

Post
#1445196
Topic
Anakin Skywalker's turn to the darkside; your alternatives?
Time

From what’s actually shown in the movies I always assumed Anakin enjoyed being aggressive to win battles. He would have naturally grown impatient with the Jedi teachers and taken the easier path. It’s a far more human response to their doctrine. Instead of all that “I need the secret to preventing death” nonsense. The only part that makes any real sense is his anger against the Tusken Raiders. But it falls down because we don’t ever see how that anger gives him more strength, and there are no repercussions. Where is the fallout or his anger towards Obi-wan and the council for letting this happen, or letting the slave trade continue? What does he learn from the experience, did he enjoy killing or see how rage is a powerful ally? It’s basically forgotten instead of being a genuine part of his character development.

Post
#1444211
Topic
Unpopular Opinion Thread
Time

SparkySywer said:

If Force Sensitivity was a thing, why does Vader say this so casually? Why would he just kind of note “Hmm, the Force is strong with this one” and not flip shit that you just discovered someone with lots of midichlorians?

Checkmate atheists

At the time it was described as being something anyone could be weak or strong with, but actual training was what mattered. I think Gary Kurtz said it was like being a martial arts master, you gotta practice. Some people/families are stronger than others but it’s always there because all life generates it.