Oh, and sorry for lumping you in with Jimbo.
Your sports analogy isn't a very good one, either. Let's stick to movies.
My sports analogy was quite sound, in fact. But just for you, I'll go with with your Michael Bay example, which I find flawed. For me, a sports season, or a movie frachise, is where one thing builds on the other. The overall quality of the individual events may fluctuate, but the events are still connected, like it or not, and there is an overall goal . The Rock doesn't pick up where Bad Boys left off. I don't see the PT this way. The prequels, by their very nature, are intended to be one big story, at least to me. Which leads to...
If I don't like a couple movies by a director, and then I watch one that's good--Why should I hold those other two movies against the one I enjoyed? Why should I completely dilute and sabotage the fun time I had with the GOOD movie just so I can maintain my grump status? What's the point of that? Where's the logic in watching a movie, liking it, and then having to convince myself it's bad by way of bringing up the directors past movies in a way to belittle the enjoyment I just had?
I commend you on this. Honestly. I guess I just don't have the discipline to seperate things that I find to be intrinsically related. I'm not saying that any time a movie has a crappy sequel, that I have to write off ALL movies in the franchise. I literally wouldn't have anything to watch. However, I believe there's a difference between the the initial movie in a franchise being the good and the subsequent ones sucking than vice versa. For me, it's much easier to handle disappointment after the success of the initial movie than the other way around. I can remember the feeling and the fun I had the first time, and especially the fact that at the time something was made, the sky was the limit. Not to mention I hadn't tasted the disappointment yet. It will be hard to watch Anakin in Ep III (if in fact I see it) and say, "He's the baddest ass Jedi ever" when automatically I think of him saying corny shit to Padme by a fire, losing his lightsaber a few times, and whining incessantly. But maybe you are right, and I may need to condition myself into seperating things.
Again, I commend guys like you, and even Jimbo. I would much rather enjoy something than whine about it, but it's just my nature to observe and analyze things the way I do. If that means I'm seen as 'cynical' so be it.
As opposed to the other option of being in denial then, right? Also, by that logic, say my favorite sports team (i.e. the Cubs) who are loaded with talent but have had by all accounts a terrible, disappointing season, and miss the playoffs, but then happen to win their last game. I should just forget about the first 161 games and take solace in their final, albeit meaningless win??
And I don't think it's at all provable to say audiences now are more retarded and braindead than audiences prior.
While audiences may not be "more retardeder" now than ever before, they definitely have gotten younger. Look what movies make the most money these days. And the gap is widening.
It's also weird that people who tend to list as their favorite movies popcorn flicks, fantasy flicks and mostly thin, fast moving action adventures are the one pulling this "artistic integrity in the audience" card. I'd buy it a bit more if it was a board dedicated to Godard or Truffaut or Fellini, but on a Star Wars board, the above complaint seems to come off as a little ironic.
I think that's a broad generalization. And we're not talking about Independence Day, we are talking about the OT, which is far from mediocre 'popcorn fluff'. For me it's filmmaking at its best. Sure some stuffed shirt could call me silly for thinking that, but I don't care. To hold the prequels to the standard set by the originals, only to be subsequently disappointed by their crappiness is only natural, not to mention reasonable.
Hey Luke, you like downloading games right? Why don't you check it out for us?
Anyway, I see Lucasfilm focusing the vast majority of the marketing hype on the Anakin/Vader deal. It's obviously the single biggest element this movie has going for it, and perhaps if they hype it enough it will distract enough people from wondering how crappy the rest of the movie will be.
Anyway, what do you prefer? Do think the SW universe should be a human one, with a random 'alien' thrown in here and there for good measure? Or do you prefer a more fantasy oriented universe with a wide variety of creatures and races? Would it help if they kept the large amount of aliens in the PT, but instead made the bad guys (battle droids, Geonosians) human (MPAA-rating not withstanding)?
Carry on with the Alien discussion...
If you have both, by all means pop'em in and tell us!!
Sam_Lu, you are a true poet.
And he's absolutely right. So be it.
But Figrin_Dan is absolutely right. By definition, this site is pro-original version. That's undisputable. So if there happens to be Lucas-bashing and pessimism, I think that's to be expected, not to mention tolerated. It's just par for the course.
and this quote...
there are a lot of people here who need to learn to be content with what we do have.
is the antithesis of tolerance. It's saying one side is right and the other is wrong. Lame.