Mrebo

Obama said:

*sigh*

hairy_hen said:

The finale of Doctor Who didn't quite win the prize for 'worst thing I've ever seen', but it sure as hell made the list of contenders.

Really?  The time-constant of the universe can be fooled just by shrinking yourself and dressing up in a mechanical suit?

I thought the Demon's Run episode was terrible but enjoyed this one. I don't think there was any issue of the time-constant...since the Doctor simply never died. The idea from the start is that everyone thinks he has.

And seriously, River Song.  You suck.  You're a useless piece of trash so convinced of your own importance you can't see that there's not a single redeeming quality anywhere in your entire character.  Willing to destroy the entire universe just because you wuv the Doctor so so much?  Fuck you, you stupid pathetic piece of shit!  That 'wedding' scene made me feel ill just watching it, and if I could create cracks in the universe myself I'd make sure she was the first thing that went in, so she'd never exist.

Whoa, lol. But I don't entirely disagree. A reason that Rose Tyler quickly fell out of my favor was the sense of her overwhelming importance.

I don't understand...why did River and Doc marry?!

Ziggy Stardust said:

Update, but mostly a shameless plug.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qToWISkZwB0

I want to apologize for the crappy audio. Trust me, my actual videos won't be like this.

Oh yeah, and subscribe!

O:

You-you're not David Bowie?!

I was expecting someone with your reputation to be a bit... older.

bkev said:

Kenkraly it would really do you some good to respond to Puggo's post rather than the people agreeing with him in short, less articulate posts.  Also, Puggo actually gave you some CREDIT whereas all the posts you respond to just detract you.  I honestly cannot believe you are a grown person...

I find myself quite articulate! :P

But I agree...too often the most cogent post is ignored. Answer the man, ken!

kenkraly2007 said:

Mrebo said:

And as you admit here, you support anything GL does. That's simply dogmatic and blind to reason. We're not people who dislike Star Wars. We're just honest people who aren't afraid of critiquing poor decisions.

We have no reason to defend or support anything GL does. Only those who wish to maintain an income at LFL do.

Why do some of you wine and complain every time GL makes a change to the films? He has a right to change his films sure some of them are not good you can't please everyone. Sure not everyone is not going to like the changes but it the changes don't take away my enjoyment of the films.

You must understand the context. George Lucas refuses to rerelease quality versions the actual movies released to the public in 1977, 1980, and 1983. And then tells us whatever changes he makes constitute the real and only versions (at least twice now) and that we all need to accept it. So it's not just complaining about changes we happen not to like. It's the revision of cinematic history and arrogance toward those who loved what he gave us in 1977, 1980, and 1983.

If he were to release the originals, our complaints about the silly, unnecessary, and poorly done changes will fall way into the background. Many of us like some of the changes he made. I like the Wampa in ESB. But the debate is not primarily about liking or not liking the changes. That's merely a symptom of the real problem: not releasing the actual movies he made.

Why we do we complain when he makes yet another change? Because he's poking his finger in our eyes, twisting a film further and further from what it was. And if we truly do hate the change (ie "Noooo!") to a beloved movie...all we get from GL is 'too bad.' Would be a totally different story if GL said, "okay then go watch the high quality theatrical release also included on the blue discs I made with lasers."

Please don't tell me this change is better (please watch it, fun to see the clips back to back). It's truly absurd.

I don't care that GL has a right to change his films. He has a right to burn the negatives of all 6 films and never release them again. I'm not contesting that. GL can do a lot of things.

We are beseeching him to release the movies he made in 1977, 1980, and 1983. We're collectively willing to pay him millions of dollars for it. While his various edits of those movies are interesting and even enjoyable to some, don't pretend that they are the movies he originally made and released to the public.

If I were to go under my mother's bed and take out that drawing I made for her when I was 5, telling her I'm sorry she enjoyed an incomplete piece of work and proceeded to alter it and that it was now the proper version I had always intended it to be, I hope she would look at me like I'm nuts. You might look at it and think it's now quite brilliant (thank you) but its originally charm and appreciation will be undermined.

Similarly Star Wars has an original charm that is hurt with each revision.

You can like it all you want, but it is not the movie that GL made and released to the public.

Warbler said:

grisan said:

On a personal level it is sad and tragic if someone dies pretty young because of cancer. My mother died because of esophagael cancer last year, so I know how hard and painful this is for family and friends.

As an IT professional, that has a very strong dislike for Apple, its overpriced products, blatant ripoffs of other products, ruthless business strategies, explotation of workers, pollution, non-conformity to open standards, lawsuits against other innovative, competing companies, etc. I can only say: Thank God his tyranny is finally over. Let's hope Apple will eventually get on the right path.

I never realized he exploited workers.   or that he polluted.    what is meant by non-conformity to open standards?  

grisan, surely you know that the negative parts of corporate activity happen with many/most/all tech companies. I really don't know how bad Apple was on those fronts, but to be honest we'd have to view it in context of other such companies.

I hold a negative view of Apple products but what makes them special is that they operate in such a relatively closed system focused on design as much as technology. It takes a lot to sustain such a business model. I wager, but Apple has done it for this long. Whether Apple will continue to do so without Jobs...I doubt it. I don't think there is a "right path" but there is a more generic one. I don't desire Apple to lose what makes it special as I imagine it has a unique competitive influence on other companies.

Whether we need to reform patent (I think so) and other laws is a separate matter.

Puggo - Jar Jar's Yoda said:

Ken, you actually seem like a kind and gentle person, so let me try, just this once, to explain something...

There are many things in this world that I recognize as being wrong that I am not passionate enough about to protest. 

...

If someone came up to me when I was eating a chicken nugget and said "hey, don't you realize you're eating a tortured chicken?", I'd have to say something like "yeah, I know, it's probably wrong, I'm sorry but I don't want to deal with that right now."

...

So much good in this post and I have a fondness for analogies. Also, I had Chicken McNuggets today. The Monopoly contest always draws me in. I share your views on animal treatment vs tasty meat.

I also appreciate that Star Wars preservation ranks above chicken torture in your list of concerns ;)

kenkraly2007 said:

So just  because we support anything GL does where called  Lucas apologists?

I must join the chorus here...YES, that is precisely what makes one an apologist!

The word "apologist" is not inherently negative. It refers to defending a position against all criticism. It usually refers to those who defend religion. It takes on a negative connotation because apologists are immune to any other reasoning or debate. Their role is simply to defend.

And as you admit here, you support anything GL does. That's simply dogmatic and blind to reason. We're not people who dislike Star Wars. We're just honest people who aren't afraid of critiquing poor decisions.

We have no reason to defend or support anything GL does. Only those who wish to maintain an income at LFL do.

kenkraly2007 said:

Now I understand why some fans want the original cuts of the original trilogy because that is the versions fan's grew up with and it's a very good point.

...

Now I do like the original cut's of the original trilogy but my preface [sic] are the special editions because those are the ones I saw in the theaters and their is nothing wrong with that.

You must understand that we don't want the original movies just because that's what we happened to see first. It's because they were/are the movies.

The movies that were beloved and inspiring to fans. The movies that were so successful that Lucas was able to make two sequels and earn billions of dollars. The movies that won awards. Those original movies were/are Star Wars.

Imagine if Spielberg went back to Jaws and replaced the shark with a new CGI shark. First time watchers might love it. They might think the original is boring in comparison. Even some older fans might also think it's pretty cool. But nobody should pretend for a moment that it's still exactly the same movie. The work that went into the original shark, the awards, the movie that existed for several decades would be changed.

Do you see how this is not only about nostalgia? It's not just about preferring the version we happened to see? It's about what the movie actually is.

And it certainly doesn't help that Lucas declares the original actual Star Wars movies somehow obsolete or incomplete and not worth re-releasing to the public. It also doesn't help when so many of his additions and changes look out of place and poorly done (as much as you might like them). What Lucas does is disrespectful to his fans and to cinematic history. Lucas is free to make a billion changes with each release, but nothing will change the fact that Star Wars were the films released in 1977, 1980, and 1983 (not in 1997 or 2011).

Cuchulainn said:

ReallyPuggo - Jar Jar's Yoda said:

Cuchulainn said:

I'm not sure that it's such a big deal as the prequels are intended to be watched after the OT. Either that or Lucas is an even shittier writer than I thought.

I believe that Lucas has indicated that his intent is for PT movies to be viewed before the OT.  So as to your second sentence, QED.

Really? Jesus, he hasn't a clue, has he?

Good read on that here.

TV's Frink said:

 

Mrebo said:

...then his face accepts the truth.

So he searched his feelings?

 

His face did :p

I can imagine the anguish he must have felt at his age. Will be fun to have kids one day!

It seems quite real. The kids know their father is recording them, maybe that he wants their reaction to what they're about to see. You have to take that consciousness of being recorded into account.

The little boy gasps with a look of real surprise in his eyes and then looks at the camera, at which point he does exaggerate the gaping mouth for a second, perhaps for the advantage of his father. That is hardly mugging for the camera. That distraction from the action on screen quickly melts away as the little boy then has a genuine look of disgust, not mock surprise. You see his face turn serious, his eyebrows furrow slightly. You can see him hoping that Vader is lying and then his face accepts the truth.

Pure awesomeness

TheBoost said:

Mrebo said:

http://www.listology.com/litgeek/story/vebber-and-goulds-fifty-reasons-why-jedi-sucks-rebuttal

I don't have the desire to do a thorough rebuttal to the "50 Reasons Jedi Sucks" link a couple pages back but fortunately someone else did. It's a multipart reply but that's the first page for anyone interested.

 While that list is sure rebuttal worthy, this dude's work is a little weak. Lots of "George's vision" stuff, including faulting the first list for calling "Star Wars" "Star Wars" and not ANH.

Yeah, yeah, I agree...but I don't want to do my own rebuttal!

Some of the 50 Reasons are just so completely stupid, it's hard to rebut them beyond stating the obvious (eg #12 3PO is annoying and doesn't serve an integral purpose...what else is new?). Eh, maybe I'll be less lazy and respond to the first 10 or something.

http://www.listology.com/litgeek/story/vebber-and-goulds-fifty-reasons-why-jedi-sucks-rebuttal

I don't have the desire to do a thorough rebuttal to the "50 Reasons Jedi Sucks" link a couple pages back but fortunately someone else did. It's a multipart reply but that's the first page for anyone interested.

theprequelsrule said:

Bingowings said:

I think what hurt ROTJ most was the, "knock it out quick, it'll do" attitude of Lucas which percolates through the whole piece.

The story is practically a cut an paste rehash of elements from the previous two stories.

The director was Medvedev to Lucas' Putin.

The sets were largely a collage of bits left over from the other films and photographed with very little sense of cinema (compare Jerjerrod's control room to Tarkin's in ANH, there are 1970's Doctor Who sets that look practically the same, no wonder most of the footage ended up on the cutting room floor).

In terms of characterisation ESB was a big step up from ANH because it had to be.

The audience had already entered the world and fallen in love with the core characters so the next film couldn't just coast along on the same level.

Lucas had the good sense to get a director in who could not only handle/control actors but also listened when they had good ideas which gave them a sense of personal investment in their roles.

Mark pretty much kept that going in ROTJ but almost everyone else seemed to be in it to close that paragraph of their resume/CV.

This is why to me Jedi hurts more than the PT.

I can choose to ignore it the PT but if I want closure from ESB's storylines I have to sit through ROTJ so it becomes as much of a contractual obligation to myself as it was to the people who made it.

At least the characters were still charming and likable, and the action sequences made sense, were well edited, and actually exciting. Compare that to the unlikable characters, boring and over the top action sequences, and crummy CGI of the prequels.

I can understand why a person might prefer Empire to the Original (a blasphemy to be sure, but understandable), but I cannot for the life of me put myself in the head space of people who prefer any of the prequels to Jedi. Jedi is vastly superior to those films in every way that a film can be evaluated; acting, dramatic effect, special effects, pacing, editing etc. etc.

I concur, theprequelsrule.

I do appreciate the Medvedev/Putin analogy, Bingowings.

As for my preferences, Jabba and the Ewoks were new and fun. Luke was now much more confident than before. I don't know that I would have wanted Star Wars to become increasingly more dramatic. A sequel does need to step it up and I think RoTJ did. To my eye, it was more exciting than ESB. I recognize ESB as the 'better' movie but it would not have taken much to bring Jedi to that same level. For the level of fun and dynanism, Jedi is my favorite. I don't think it's fair to turn a blind eye to ANH's "flaws" simply because it made ESB possible while treating Jedi like an aberration and failure.

Interested, also.

TheBoost said:

haraldo23 said:

sonnyboo just got PWNED!

While Sonny's blog was a catalyst to the idea, I didn't mean to directly attack him, although I do see it totally came off that way.

What really annoyed me was the "50 Reasons ROTJ Sucks" list linked to in that thread. I even remember a thread where some dude said the Saga was stupid because Yoda said "Size matters not" but Obi didn't just hurl the Death Star into the sun.

Besides me just taking a piss, I hope this list and the other one is kind of a commentary on what I see are weak arguments against a lot of things: ROTJ, hating the PT, hating CGI, giving Lucas a sinister purpose to every decision in the creative process, condemning the movies for not being what we would have done, constant talk about "missed opportunities," liking things in the OT while condemning the same thing in the PT.

And while I don't want to get into the opinion vs. fact debate, not all art is subjective. There are objective points to be made, and some are stronger than others.

And of course, I hope the thread's a hoot.

Haha, glad you had the desire to make these threads.

The other thread idea I had that would touch on these issues is about those whose love for Star Wars basically begins and ends with Empire. No doubt that Jedi is more freewheeling than the previous movies. Personally, I love that.

I enjoy Empire's more somber mood, meeting Yoda, seeing the battle on Hoth, the climactic moment in which Luke is told the truth.

I enjoy the adventure of ANH, the wonderful characters, creatures and droids, even silly moments in which the tortured and mourning Leia casually asks Luke, "aren't you a little short for a stormtrooper?" or when Ford ad libs in the cell block intercom.

Certainly there are some things that bother me. It's just silliness when Luke falls into the water in the garbage compactor the second time. The way Leia says "I knew there was more to you than money". I can think of fewer "flaws" in Empire than ANH but that doesn't mean I enjoy ANH less.

Jedi takes the role of spectacular and more upbeat finale. All the characters come together, we meet Jabba, Ewoks, bigger DS. And like both previous movies, there are darker moments like Yoda's death and Luke's confrontation with the Emperor.

We can criticize Yoda's 'convenient' death but it was not markedly different from the too convenient pacing in the previous two movies. Having the Empire brought down by the assistance of unassuming and unadvanced Ewoks is a good story. Their behavior is not markedly sillier than R2's whistling submerged on Dagobah, Chewie startling the mouse droid, 3PO most of the time, trash compactor scene, etc.

Much of the humor comes from the contrast with blaster wielding heroes and tough Imperials. It's not because they talk like idiots, trip over themselves, and generally exhibit stupidity. On the contrary, they have their own 'real' language and habitually exhibit ingenuity and bravery. The silliness mostly comes from the intended obvious contrast.

Some complain about the beginning part at Jabba's. But I don't see it as less purposeful as the start of ESB on Hoth. And I thought Jabba's palace was a lot of fun. A bigger DS was not original, so what? The DS ultimately wasn't the focus of the movie like it was in ANH. And building a bigger DS is just the sort of thing the Empire might do.

Did Leia's Endor costume change portend Padme's wardrobe? Did Ewoks portend Gungans? Such arguments are so inane its mind-numbing. The PT failed for its own reasons, whatever clues of that failure we might tease out of any movie in the OT. I love each of the OT movies, not because of rose-tinted nostalgia glasses. Not because without ANH there wouldn't be Empire. But each on their own merits.

I dislike the PT because the story was confusing and whenever it seemed to make sense, it fell flat. There was no grandeur (trade dispute, "secret" bad guys), no meaningful moments of quiet, excessive and poorly rendered CGI, contradicted the OT in ways that no speech about different points of view could fix, despiritualization of the Force, abundance of throwaway characters, a character who does nothing but speak, act, and think stupidly, costume changes every 5 minutes, abundance of poor acting, etc. Throughout the PT, there is truly a lack of dramatic tension: Anakin is dangerous and troubled...oh that's okay, we know; I just killed women and children...oh that's okay, you're human. These flaws are so rampant and pervasive they cannot compare to any silliness or missed opportunity of the OT.

I offer the usual disclaiming pretense that it is not my intention to change anyone's mind, that this is my own opinion, etc. But I do think harshness toward Jedi is based on a point of view that ignores elements of Star Wars that existed since ANH.

sonnyboo said:

xhonzi said:

When you bring up objective points to validate your subjective viewpoint, you are begging discussion and disagreement.  Especially if you haven't done a good job.

I think we can all deal with it just fine.  You didn't do a very thorough job of trying to make your point.  So most of us will just ignore it and move on.

I wasn't aware that I had to do a thorough job of making my point.

You should have been.

That is sort of the point of presenting your thoughts in a public forum.

I just made a point, and I respect your opinion that you feel it wasn't done to your liking.

I've been waiting for you to move on for some time...

Now you only fall back on clinging to your opinion as if the only point of such a thread is for randomdude57 to announce he thinks Jedi sucks /thread.

The issue here is not that we don't like how you expressed your reasons for your opinion, it's that there is an obvious disconnect between your criticisms and the idea that Jedi "sucks" or is the "worst."

By whatever logic/non-logic you do think Jedi sucks, the reasons you give here only suggest how it could have been better. And it's not just that you give lousy reasons that don't appeal to me, it's that the same kinds of criticisms are easily leveled against ANH and ESB. This is a point you refuse to acknowledge.

Jaskoen said:

Usually when people criticise Jedi, it's based on what the film isn't, as opposed to what it is.

Well said.

Darth Bizarro said:

For educational purposes, I would like to hear why you think Jedi is worse than Phantom Menace.

C'mon, that's his opinion. He's not here to write a thesis :p

Darth Bizarro said:

twooffour is easily startled, but he'll soon be back, and in greater numbers.

HAH!

sonnyboo said:

Mrebo said:

 But again, if this is purely your opinion not subject to debate or discussion, okay.

Isn't someone saying, I like this movie more than other movies, an opinion? A purely subjective opinion?

Please see bolded. Makes one wonder why the thread was created.

If I were to write a list of my personal subjective reasons why ROTJ is worse than Phantom Menace, aren't anyone's responses also personal subjective reasons?

And people are entitled to disagree and point out flaws with your reasons. If you do not wish to defend your reasons and instead fall back on saying your ultimate conclusion is opinion, then you really really do not need to say anything more (see underlined above).

What exactly will you gain from that? My goal was never to change anyone's mind or make them suddenly remove years of rancor (pun intended) towards prequels or special editions. I made a list of the Top 10 Reasons Return of the Jedi Sucked. I feel I am repeating myself a lot. I guess the public education system really does fail in many ways.

Your reasons don't make much sense. But you are entitled to have whatever opinion of RoTJ you wish.

Aside from me absolutely and with no doubt whatseover WINNING the debate and argument with TWOOFFOUR, who lost so poorly in the most humiliating way online where millions of people can see his intellectual prowess demolished to my superior debate skills, taking that entire victory aside - there isn't much more to say, unless you all want to congratulate me on my beating TWOOFFOUR so concisively.

So you made a thread about your opinion that you don't want to engage in discussion about because it's your opinion and then declare "victory"? This is the kind of nonsense that says a whole lot about your intent in posting here.

Mr. Snoops said:

50 Reasons why Return of the Jedi sucks

It's funny. Most of the OT fans always bitch about how prequel fans behave like retards resistent to any kind of rational argument. But when it comes to ROTJ most of the OT fans are exactly like prequel fans. Is ROTJ better than the PT? Yes, but that doesn't mean it can't suck.

Actually you find a lot of criticism here of RoTJ by the OT fans. Those of us engaging the issue here are not behaving "like retards resistent to any kind of rational argument." We do get that kind of ad hominem attack and figurative arm-crossing, however.

One could make a similar list about why ANH or ESB "sucks." At some point, the question would arise why a person is here making such lists, but that's another matter.

In my view the worst thing the PT has done is to damage the integrity of the Star Wars franchise so much that it is necessary to pick even the OT to shreds and focus on its perceived deficiencies. Should we focus on how fake the Wampa and Taun-Tauns looked? And those mynocks? My brother remarked that Yoda looked really fake to him when he watched it recently. How about 3PO's more exaggeratedly annoying role and excessive exposition as Han is being put into carbonite? How about the lack of dramatic tension when the kiss with Leia passes as if it never happened? How about the silly part where R2 falls into the swamp simply to be spit out onto land? How about how silly Luke's face looks when he's wailing about the impossibility of Vader being his father? If you deny any of this, you're just like those PT fans, btw.

sonnyboo said:

Mrebo said:

So, as I conceded from my very first post, sonnyboo, your criticisms have some merit and I agree with some of them. But even if I agreed with all of them completely, I don't see how you conclude RoTJ is worse than the PT. And certainly you're entitled to believe that, but you haven't explained it.

RoTJ is my favorite and I like Ewoks. You're certainly not going to convince me otherwise and you've rightfully stated that isn't your motivation. But I would like to understand your thoughts that you wish to express.

The list clearly stated "Top 10 Reasons Return of the Jedi Sucked".... Not sure why this is being like a book report that needs to be graded, as I made an offhand remark that I liked it least of the 6 movies in the blog, mostly in reference to a PRIOR blog explaining that I was watching all 6 movies, but for whatever reason, several people on this site are fixated on that comment.

As already stated, I didn't know I HAD to explain it. It was also, at no time, the purpose or point to the list. If you want me to write an extensive comparative analysis, perhaps I will someday, but I don't really care enough. These are just movies. As I had also written, I am far more concerned about how they were made than the movies themselves.

If this thread has simply devolved into you insisting it is in fact your opinion that RoTJ sucks...then ok, guess it's pointless to say anything really.

I don't see the value you in trying to diminish the significance of your statement that RoTJ is worse than the PT, as that is a notable statement and you reaffirmed it in this thread, but ok.

You don't have to explain anything. That's usually what happens when one makes a thread on a topic, but if you don't want to engage on this topic of yours nobody can make you.

I offered a few reasons why I don't see some of the issues you cite as great departures from things that happened in the OT. I offered counter-examples to your insistence that there was no dramatic tension at all. To say that the matte paintings were more offensive that so many effects in the other episodes (particularly CGI elements) really doesn't make sense. TheBoost offered offered a competing view about story-crafting vis-a-vis killing main characters.

But, again, okay. You have an opinion.

You now emphasize:

As I had also written, I am far more concerned about how they were made than the movies themselves.

Guess it's not always easy to tell what is an "offhand remark" to fixate on or not.

Now if we are truly focused on "how the movies were made" (whatever you intend that to mean) then perhaps this would be a different conversation. But again, if this is purely your opinion not subject to debate or discussion, okay.

If there is any confusion, let me summarize the state of affairs:

Mrebo said:

But I would like to understand your thoughts that you wish to express.

sonnyboo said:

I expressed the thoughts I intended. I was under the mistaken impression that the title of this thread and the blog made the point. If the title had been at any time "Top 10 Reason ROTJ sucked and the prequels are better", then I'd feel more obliged to write the book report for class. But I didn't.

twooffour, lol, you really get your teeth into something. I'm afraid the whole discussion will get overwhelmed/confused/devolved. The argument is about claiming RoTJ is the worst of 6 movies without explaining how it is the worst of 6 movies. This point doesn't need to be driven into the ground because that just gets unpleasant.

So, as I conceded from my very first post, sonnyboo, your criticisms have some merit and I agree with some of them. But even if I agreed with all of them completely, I don't see how you conclude RoTJ is worse than the PT. And certainly you're entitled to believe that, but you haven't explained it.

RoTJ is my favorite and I like Ewoks. You're certainly not going to convince me otherwise and you've rightfully stated that isn't your motivation. But I would like to understand your thoughts that you wish to express.