Topic: Star Wars Fanhouse, Chewie, we're home!

[NWR_insanolord]

Mario and Zelda games are released on a frequent enough basis that that doesn't set in, though. Peoe don't have time enough to put one game on so much of a pedestal before the next one comes out.

[marvel_moviefan_2012]

I the spousal abuse metaphor sounds like your relationship with Star Wars, not mine, I agree the PT has flaws, but they are not terrible movies and the flaws are no worse than the flaws in the OT but people dismiss the same flaws when it comes to the OT because nostalgia and that pedestal Insanolord is talking about.



It seems everybody pretty much agrees the movies will not live up to any expectations so I suppose nobody else is going to offer their hopes or predictions?

[oohhboy]

The PT doesn't have flaws as they are mistakes better off erased like a holiday special. The OT has endured because they are fundamentally solid movies at heart not because they got put on a pedestal. Saying they are good because they were put on a pedestal is putting the cart before the horse.

Hey, you're the one wilfully taking the abuse. You're the one willing to accept beatings for any Star Wars. You're the one who wrote that awful wall of scum that brought us here.

Mario and Zelda games are released on a frequent enough basis that that doesn't set in, though. People don't have time enough to put one game on so much of a pedestal before the next one comes out.

The series itself is the pedestal, each new game is compared to every predecessor. What's new, old, improved, bad? How different is it? Add the greater time investment to play a game and the interact with the player. The pedestal is there alright, its so big you're standing on it and think it's the ground.

[shingi_70]

 I like the PT and they're the Star Wars films I chiefly grew up with (I was seven when Phantom Menace came out) but they're not the greatest movies with Attack of the Clones being downright horrdenus. That said I wouldn't trade them for anything.

[marvel_moviefan_2012]

The PT doesn't have flaws as they are mistakes better off erased like a holiday special. The OT has endured because they are fundamentally solid movies at heart not because they got put on a pedestal. Saying they are good because they were put on a pedestal is putting the cart before the horse.

Hey, you're the one wilfully taking the abuse. You're the one willing to accept beatings for any Star Wars. You're the one who wrote that awful wall of scum that brought us here.

Mario and Zelda games are released on a frequent enough basis that that doesn't set in, though. People don't have time enough to put one game on so much of a pedestal before the next one comes out.

The series itself is the pedestal, each new game is compared to every predecessor. What's new, old, improved, bad? How different is it? Add the greater time investment to play a game and the interact with the player. The pedestal is there alright, its so big you're standing on it and think it's the ground.

And how is that different than Star Wars? You keep saying the originals are great films, nobody is arguing that, but they are NOT just films, they never have been their mythology and merchandise have been larger than life for the entire run.

The fanbase is deeply divided on Jedi, over the most trivial thing Ewoks. Everyone working on the first film expected it to be a flop, EVERYONE. It turned out to be a right place at the right time thing, yes it is a good film but it certainly has flaws too. It was put on a pedestal on day one, it has seeped into pop culture as the definitive sci-fi film and that itself stirs controversy by those who argue if it is even science fiction or not. There has NEVER been a unified Star Wars fanbase period. The comic books and novels, graphic novels, toys, video games, and storybooks were all there from the beginning.

You don't think EMPIRE divided the fucking fanbase? Really have you never heard the **** storm over A New Hope retrofitted to have Episode IV added AFTER Empire to make it fit in with Empire, changing the films previously released to fit the new films has been going on since day one, that is the norm. But somehow people get it in their heads there at some point in time was a definitive Star Wars, their version that they watched is the *right and true version* which isn't even real its fantasy. There are those who are so stubborn they even suggest the Special Editions are entirely different movies that should be wiped from the face of the Earth, obviously George Lucas thought the movies were flawed or else he wouldn't have tried to correct what he perceived as flaws. Not all of those were technical in nature many were artistic choices he made in 76-81 and then changed his mind latter. So the way I see it either you accept that Star Wars is a living organism that is constantly evolving, or you stay in a twilight zone bubble where time stopped in 1977.

[oohhboy]

Ahh the George Lucas defence. Considering he botched 4 films in a row, anything he says and do with films should be in serious doubt. The amount of revisionism and retconning would make Stalin proud.

The special editions came about not because he wanted to fix the flaws, but to spite his first wife. He got very lucky with ANH when Marcia rescued ANH from George with her editing. He didn't want to give her credit she deserves, so to this day we don't have a high quality theatrical cut.

I haven't gone down the rabbit hole as deep as you have so I don't really know how decisive everything is. Most of the OT is actually before my time. Sure I saw them as a kid back in the late 80's early 90's, but I have continually found I had to reassess that period of time. Removing the nostalgia as it were and look upon that time with a more critical eye. The kid is dumb as hell and I have to adjust for that.

ROTJ flaws was that there was too much handwaving and yes the Ewoks are a problem. How Han's rescue doesn't make much sense even even for speed chess gambit. They Ewoks should have been Wookies as I have no doubt someone intervened (GL) to sell more toys to younger audiences. Closer to the ending you get, the more unfocused the film becomes as you have too many plot threads to cut back and forth.

[Nile Boogie Returns]

What "four" films did GL mess up?  I'll give you "Clones" (2nd half of the movie is fine) and "Menace " but Sith and the OT are fine. Are you sure you even like Star Wars, or is the jade far too strong to overcome?

[NWR_insanolord]

Mario and Zelda games are released on a frequent enough basis that that doesn't set in, though. People don't have time enough to put one game on so much of a pedestal before the next one comes out.

The series itself is the pedestal, each new game is compared to every predecessor. What's new, old, improved, bad? How different is it? Add the greater time investment to play a game and the interact with the player. The pedestal is there alright, its so big you're standing on it and think it's the ground.

We're talking about different things. This isn't a factor of quality, it's a factor of time. Nobody considers it sacrilege to make a new Mario game, because we get those at least every other year. Some are better than others, but you never have enough time to dwell on any one of them before it's time for another.

[oohhboy]

PT and Red Tails. ANH is the only film that is directly his and even then he shares credit with atleast 5 other people. His retconning of SW and is own history shows he is either incompetent, stupid, narcissistic or a combination there of. His management is a menace to SW especially if you examine games. We would likely have double the number of SW games had he not kept poisoning them and that includes the likes of 1313, his latest victim.

If it is the factor of time that builds a pedestal then everything past x years without a squeal is a classic by default. No body considers it sacrilege to make Mario games because it defies statistical norms on quality. WE want more and we know it will be good.

[marvel_moviefan_2012]

I will say this about George doing what he wants with his movie, so what it is HIS fucking movie or well it was now its Disney's movie but still he created it it was his world he imagined who the hell are you to tell him his vision for his imagination is wrong?

[Nile Boogie Returns]

I never underwood why GL gets so much flack for his Directors Cuts when so many directors do it.




Can't speak on Red Tails, other than the camera he uses in some seems is very inexpensive and it allows younger, less endowed film makers have a shot with some hollywood level tech.

[oohhboy]

GL cuts are universally detrimental to his own movies. Other directors have their own cuts, but they are usually little trims here and there mostly to help clarify or change the pacing a beat here and there. GL cuts though tend to be straight up retcons which change the tone of a scene or breaks the established character arcs or just plain gratuitous in the extreme. No other director goes out of their way to suppress their original work.

GL is wrong not because he make some mistakes, he has made a massive series of mistakes. That pattern of behaviour makes him wrong. Just because he is the creator doesn't mean no one should say no to him especially if he is wrong. The worship of him over the years reinforced all the bad aspects he has and left him impossible to control by himself or others.

Disney buying SW is probaly the first time Disney has saved something. JJ is not a good choice, but GL is the worst choice. I rather Brett Rathner or Bay to take it than GL. With Brett or Bay it would be holy **** laugh about it bad compared to WTF is this.

[Nile Boogie Returns]

Disney buying SW is probaly the first time Disney has saved something. JJ is not a good choice, but GL is the worst choice. I rather Brett Rathner or Bay to take it than GL. With Brett or Bay it would be holy **** laugh about it bad compared to WTF is this.

Do you really believe this or is it colorful language to reinforce your point? Because if it's the former then I think I need some adult supervision while having this conversation.

[oohhboy]

A slight exaggeration. In a choice between bad SW and no SW, I would choose no SW. Bay and Rathner are the comedy options but I really would have them over GL so I can laugh about it.

[Nile Boogie Returns]

In truth, I really enjoyed Transformers 1 and I and think that pace and style of humor could translate to a good Spin-Off movie. I know they already have a director for the Boba Fett film but he fits that mold. Or if there was a JAR-JAR Ninja movie.


 (I really want him to be redeemed, like a masked thug gugan in episode 7 and you don't find he true linage till


If you have 20min:
JJ Abrams: the mystery box - YouTube


This dude gets it, I know you son't like his movies per se but after I watched this I had a new respect for the man!

[Nile Boogie Returns]

Also, is that Sith in the snow on ENDOR?  IS SUCH A THING EVEN POSSIBLE?

[ShyGuy]

People keep saying GL, and I think Green Lantern. Or Graphics Library.

[oohhboy]

Watched the video and it has reinforced why I don't like him. His gimmick is the mystery or in the video the concept of the mystery box. Mystery has its place and is a great starter and isn't the only starter, but it isn't what everything is about and he frames everything around this one concept.

The problem with this is that he is missing half the equation, the payoff. Its why I hate LOST. From the very first episode I knew they had no possible payoff as they "Mystery" had no possible solution other than "Bullshit". He is so obessed with the mystery he doesn't build any other elements properly, it all has to serve the box.

Magic is mystery and you don't know how the magician does it, but the payoff is the rabbit that comes out of the hat. JJ has no rabbit, never had one(Ironic given IM:3 rabbits foot). His movies are multiple boxes and none of them payoff, because of this the box might as well be empty as it is all marketing to sell you an empty box. This is made worse in that even JJ doesn't know what is in the box if there is something in it.

He really misses the point of the Die Hard opening. He does identify the need to build character before you get to the main course but he doesn't apply this properly in his movies. In Star Trek the characters aren't characters, they are plot devices. He commits wholesale character assassination in order to do this. This is despite being able to identify great character arcs and moments.

The Tom Cruise finisher is a sleight of hand to distract you from the fact that what he said during the talk is incoherent and is missing many factors. The opening is intentionally rambling to place the audience in a perplexed state looking for anything to hook into.

He is a snake oil man.

[Stratos]

JJ Abrams needs to learn a thing to two from quality fantasy writers. A basic outline of the plot including the ending would do him a heap of good.

[King of Twitch]

My favorite was using fusion energy to freeze a volcano.

[marvel_moviefan_2012]

I have no faith in his story telling, which is why I all I want is spectacle that is what he is good at and that is what Star Wars has turned into, I can read the books if I want a good story that is not what I want from a Star Wars movie. Anyone expecting great writing from a Star Wars film has never seen any previous Star Wars films, even the original was not close to great writing.

[oohhboy]

Movies are one of the few places where the the engineering problem of 3 options pick 2 doesn't have apply.

The OT had awkward dialogue which is part of storytelling, but not the whole equation. The plot is fine expect maybe in the case of ROTJ because of the problems stated above but in turn it didn't have the awkward dialogue of the first 2. The elements the film focuses on is fine and this becomes increasingly important when you start adding multiple ongoing threads which can get pretty extreme like in Inception. Then there is the pacing and they are very steady in the OT which some people mistaken for boring since they tend to be people who must have always have something happening now.

So no, I most definitely disagree with your assessment. There is no reason why we can't have a spectacle and have good storytelling. If one was to get every single element right you would have movies that could surpass the originals. It would be very hard, but JJ just isn't up to it.

[marvel_moviefan_2012]

Movies are one of the few places where the the engineering problem of 3 options pick 2 doesn't have apply.

The OT had awkward dialogue which is part of storytelling, but not the whole equation. The plot is fine expect maybe in the case of ROTJ because of the problems stated above but in turn it didn't have the awkward dialogue of the first 2. The elements the film focuses on is fine and this becomes increasingly important when you start adding multiple ongoing threads which can get pretty extreme like in Inception. Then there is the pacing and they are very steady in the OT which some people mistaken for boring since they tend to be people who must have always have something happening now.

So no, I most definitely disagree with your assessment. There is no reason why we can't have a spectacle and have good storytelling. If one was to get every single element right you would have movies that could surpass the originals. It would be very hard, but JJ just isn't up to it.

The characters are flawed, the plot in A New Hope is evil Empire built super weapon that destroy planets and gets blown up by a farm kid saying a prayer. I love Star Wars but I don't pretend its great art when it is not. It was right place at right time plain and simple. Empire was a little better but not plot wise. Empire was great as a technical achievement, it was spectacle it was more polished but the dialog was still pretty bad, the acting was better but not much. The movies get praised for their special effects, their technical achievement and for making a believable world that people can get lost in, all spectacle no substance. The fact they appeal to the most massive of the masses only supports their fluff because real art with substance rarely appeals to the masses and you always have oddballs who try to pretend its more artsy than it is to make themselves feel better about liking something so fluffy.

[oohhboy]

I think we are using two different languages. When A character has flaws or is flawed, it means the character has something that is detrimental to the character and is maybe something for them to overcome. The character in the OT has flaws like any good character should have.

When one talks about bad characters they talk about dimensions. Ever heard people describing a character as a cardboard cut out? It because they don't have any depth to them. Well written characters can be described by their audience by their personality traits good and bad. this is improved with good acting.

Han Solo is a cock sure guy who is has a mercenary streak who gets into trouble who evolves into someone who remains confident but now works for the betterment of others. Luke goes from a naive child dreaming of fun and glory of war to a man who has seen the curtain lifted before him. Liea is defiant regardless the situation and she breaks the stereotype of being the damsel in distress. The dialogue is awkward at times, but this doesn't affect the depth of the characters. If the characters actions aren't consistent with who they are then you have a problem.

Compare this with the PT, the character don't have any real personality, they have jobs, but a job isn't a person. Jedis are suppose to be against injustice but do jack **** about it even when it is right in front of them. They keep telling me that Jango Fett is some badass Jedi killer but we never see him do this so not only does he have no personality, he is **** at his job. If you want broken awkward dialogue look no further than Sand and I killed them all.

Even if you consider the OT as nothing but spectacle, it is better than PT because it is internally consistent and this reason alone makes it better. We could touch on the other reasons, but it would be redundant. In ANH they establish that Luke is a good pilot with the Womp rats. Anakin on the other hand doesn't have this established for him in a chronological order made worse when he is flying as a kid and lucks out multiple times without any setup. We don't see him fly again until ROTS opening and he is so reckless he gets people killed for no reason. Atleast Luke had the then mysterious Force going for him and the now dead Kenobi as a mentor to him along with the rest of Red Squardon.

Beyond that compare the Battle of Hoth to Geneosis. BOH had a proper scenario constructed. Why didn't the Empire blast it from orbit? Energy shield, Ozzel dies for it. So they make landings and have a clear defined goal to bring down the generator. The Rebels know this and their goal is to escape. The have the plan and equipment to do this which gives you this great moment where they announce that the first transport is away and everyone cheers.

Clones doesn't have this, there Yoda is a psychopath who completely disregards countless lives to kill the other guys I guess? There is no objective, just unfeeling slaughter. It didn't make tactical sense either if the goal was to kill the other side. The whole battle is illogical in the universe it is in. Its bad spectacle.

[Nile Boogie Returns]

I find your lack of faith disturbing!