StarDestroyer.Net BBS

yeah, elfdart does this alot. He just seems to be a Lucas Fanboy

Galvatron wrote:

Channel72 wrote:Is that supposed to be some kind of actual criticism?

Yeah, it's his routine fallback.

Likewise, for example, Matrix fans who hated the sequels were just masturbating fanboys who simply didn't like the fact that the Wachowskis told their story and not the one the fans expected and/or wanted. It's not that the sequels sucked. No, that couldn't possibly be it.

Except that this is probably closer to the truth. When you listen to fans that loved the OT, or The Matrix when they complain about the PT or Reloaded and Revolution, accompanying all their complaints is almost always the invariable "Lucas/The Wachowski Bros should have done this...".

A big part of why I didn't like the PT all that much is because the story didn't go in the direction I wanted it to. I didn't like how the Jedi were portrayed and I didn't like how Anakin was handled, so yeah, I didn't like them because Lucas told his story and not mine. Elfdart is correct far more often than not when this particular 'fallback routine' is used.

Havok wrote:Except that this is probably closer to the truth. When you listen to fans that loved the OT, or The Matrix when they complain about the PT or Reloaded and Revolution, accompanying all their complaints is almost always the invariable "Lucas/The Wachowski Bros should have done this...".

And how is that an actual criticism? Elfdart seems to think his comment is some sort of rebuttal, when in fact he's just stating something obvious. If I don't like the way something was done, then obviously I think it should have been done differently. The degree to which I express that in terms of specifics is really just a matter of personal interest; I thought the Matrix sequels were terrible, but I never really cared enough about that series to bother forming any clear opinions on how the sequels should have been written; I mostly just forgot about them. But Star Wars has always been more interesting to me, so naturally I have more well-formed opinions regarding how they ought to have been written. I fail to see how that invalidates any actual criticism towards the films themselves.

Channel72 wrote:

Havok wrote:Yeah and? What did we know about the Jedi from the OT? Exactly.

Oh stop...you know very well that's not true. There's never a single line of dialogue that directly explains what the Sith actually are. In the OT, Ben directly informs Luke what the Jedi are.

"For over a thousand generations the Jedi Knights were the guardians of peace and justice in the Old Republic."
"The Force is what gives a Jedi his power. It's an energy field created by all living things."

You think that is a 'single line of dialogue' that explains the Jedi? You are a fuck head.
So what is a Jedi Knight? Is it actually a Knight? Does that mean there is a Jedi King? Are they cops? Military? How are they organized? Who do they answer to? Where did they come from? Who decided they got to guard the Old Republic?

There is so analagous direct statement explaining who/what the Sith are. In TPM, all we get is:

"The Sith have been extinct for a millenium." and "The very Republic is threatened, if involved the Sith are."

Which is why I said the ORIGINAL TRILOGY as in comparing it the PREQUEL TRILOGY as a whole. You know jack and shit about the Jedi after Star Wars, but couple that with TESB and ROTJ and you know... not a whole lot fucking more. We learn that the Jedi train young people. Luke is the last Jedi. The Jedi use the Force for knowledge and defense. Oh yeah, they use lightsabers. Wow, what a plethora of information. Good thing I put on those rose tinted glasses to look at the OT.

Additionally, the nature of the Jedi and their relationship with the Force is thoroughly explored and fleshed out throughout Luke's training session in Empire Strikes Back. In contrast, the nature of the Sith is barely explored at all, and only then in the third act of the final movie, when Palpatine talks to Anakin at the opera.

What, so because the info isn't in the second movie, it isn't valid? And no, the nature of the Jedi and the Force is not explored through Luke's training session. Talk about vague. The Force flows through you. Luminous beings. C'mon. We also know that Luke's training is completely rushed and incomplete so we actually know nothing about the Jedi. What we know is about Luke and his relationship with the Force and the fact that he is completely atypical.

I find it bizarre that people here are trying to pass off the lack of explanation in the Prequels as something completely acceptable. Seriously, what other successful movie of similar genre and popularity is so sparse on details?

Uh... Star Wars. Tell me, after the first Star Wars movie, what did you know about the Jedi? The Empire, the Old Republic? Hell, even the Rebels.

You need to go sit down and watch the OT, because you have a very distorted view of how much 'info' you actually get from it.

Channel72 wrote:

Havok wrote:Except that this is probably closer to the truth. When you listen to fans that loved the OT, or The Matrix when they complain about the PT or Reloaded and Revolution, accompanying all their complaints is almost always the invariable "Lucas/The Wachowski Bros should have done this...".

And how is that an actual criticism? Elfdart seems to think his comment is some sort of rebuttal, when in fact he's just stating something obvious. If I don't like the way something was done, then obviously I think it should have been done differently. The degree to which I express that in terms of specifics is really just a matter of personal interest; I thought the Matrix sequels were terrible, but I never really cared enough about that series to bother forming any clear opinions on how the sequels should have been written; I mostly just forgot about them. But Star Wars has always been more interesting to me, so naturally I have more well-formed opinions regarding how they ought to have been written. I fail to see how that invalidates any actual criticism towards the films themselves.

If you bothered to actually read what I wrote, I said that this ACCOMPANIES the criticism.
What I'm saying, and what I think ED means, is that that is the underlying reason for the criticism. I.E. If the stories went the way I wanted, I wouldn't mind the wooden acting and corny dialogue and I wouldn't nitpick stupid little things like 'going through the planets core'. Basically finding every little thing wrong with the movie because I didn't think Anakin Skywalker was bad ass enough and he was too emo.* etc., etc..

*I'm saying 'I' meaning generic pissed off fan boy, not me.

From earlier in the thread...

Galvatron wrote:

Jim Raynor wrote:Seems to me that people are willing to be generous with the OT, which is often seen through rose-tinted glasses. Meanwhile the PT gets slammed over anything and everything.

I think it's been said several times so far that TPM's minor problems (like the planet core thing) would be easily forgiven if the movie was otherwise coherent and entertaining.

What Efldart intends as a scathing indictment of the prequel-detractors is something that most of us don't really deny, so what's the point of mentioning it in the first place?

My earlier example was just to show that the same "accusation" could be made against those who didn't like the direction taken in other popular sci-fi franchises, but I've yet to see the defenders of those franchises pull Elfdart's argument out of their asses and think they've made some sort of point. No, it's only when George Lucas gets questioned that this peculiar line of reasoning rears its head.

Havok wrote:What I'm saying, and what I think ED means, is that that is the underlying reason for the criticism. I.E. If the stories went the way I wanted, I wouldn't mind the wooden acting and corny dialogue and I wouldn't nitpick stupid little things like 'going through the planets core'. Basically finding every little thing wrong with the movie because I didn't think Anakin Skywalker was bad ass enough and he was too emo.* etc., etc..

That's not an insightful rebuttal; that's just obvious. If the story went the way I wanted, of course I'd have a higher opinion of the movie and be more likely to forgive things like bad acting or stupid dialogue. I think the OT told a great story, and so it's easy to forgive stupid things like Leia's temporary British accent. Anyway, it's been stated countless times that nobody here thinks the "planet core" dialogue is a big deal. Ironically, if you look back over this thread, the only reason the "planet core" conversation turned into such a fiasco was because the people defending the Prequels adamantly insisted that the dialogue was intentionally inaccurate. The main criticism leveled at TPM throughout this thread had nothing to do with planet cores, or minor details; rather it was the overall failure to write a compelling, coherent story with interesting characters.

The original complaint about traveling through the planet core wasn't even that it was stupid for being unrealistic. The complaint was that if going through the core is the fastest way to the capital it implies that the droid army landed on the opposite side of the planet from their target.

Kon_El wrote:The original complaint about traveling through the planet core wasn't even that it was stupid for being unrealistic. The complaint was that if going through the core is the fastest way to the capital it implies that the droid army landed on the opposite side of the planet from their target.

That's true; I suppose the idea was that there were other cities or installations which the droid army had to secure as well. However, given that Naboo was a peaceful planet with no real defense capabilities, it's unclear why the Trade Federation would even bother with anything except the Capital. Regardless, the way the movie portrayed the whole affair really gave the impression that Naboo was a mostly uninhabited planet with a small Capital containing a few citizens.

Hmm. I didn't quite get that feeling. I mean, we saw pastoral landscapes, but there was no reason to assume that there weren't other cities in the background, was there?

EDIT: I mean, obviously, you could tell the planet wasn't an industrial Mordorscape ecumenopolis, but I wouldn't have been surprised to hear population figures of a billion, or multiple billions. Even on Earth there are some big damn areas of uninhabited wilderness for things like the Gungan-Droid battle to happen, after all.

I guess a case could be made that Lucas wanted to show the Trade Federation bulldozing through Naboo's unspoiled wilderness first. I don't really have a problem with this aspect of the movie either, although it certainly wasn't as riveting as it could have been if they'd touched down in a populated area and we'd seen panicked civilians running about just like on Cloud City when Lando announced the Imperial takeover.

Its kinda hard to "bulldoze unspoiled wilderness" when your tanks never have to touch the ground. If that was the intention, I would say they didn't do a good job of it.

Well, they did knock over some trees.

Well, A for effort, then. But I would still get a better sense of despoilment if they had come in with juggernauts or something with treads. Nothing says "scorched earth" like a proper tank.

And corpses. This movie needed some charred corpses.

I guess a case could be made that Lucas wanted to show the Trade Federation bulldozing through Naboo's unspoiled wilderness first. I don't really have a problem with this aspect of the movie either, although it certainly wasn't as riveting as it could have been if they'd touched down in a populated area and we'd seen panicked civilians running about just like on Cloud City when Lando announced the Imperial takeover.

That was my biggest problem with both first Two prequels, the entire war felt so lightweight and acts as nice metapor for my dislike of the these movies, I didn't hate them quite as much as some here, I just felt they were "screensaverish" mainly, the entire movie just felt too lightweight like the Tradefed Tank funny enough.

Galvatron wrote:And corpses. This movie needed some charred corpses.

Destructionator XIII wrote: Why the fuck didn't they just call in the Jedi, whom the chancellor already sent and saw the whole thing - and he talked to them personally when they got back - to testify about the situation?

RedLetterMedia made that very same observation in his review.

Destructionator XIII wrote:Consider at the end: "I think you can kiss your trade franchise goodbye." Man, what a stiff penalty. We see the viceroy again in episode 3 don't we? Maybe he served a few years in prison for trespassing and assualt, but there's no evidence at all that he was guilty of murder.

In AOTC, Sio Bibble says that Gunray had four trials in the supreme court and still remained viceroy of the Trade Federation.

Destructionator XIII wrote: I'm not minding the lack of talk about the Sith, though Darth Maul doing virtually nothing is lame. Wooo, he made the Queen take the scenic route to the throne room! That is his entire contribution to the main plot. Sure, he killed Qui-Gon right at the end, but that's at the end, so there's no consequence to it.

You mean other than that Anakin; instead of being trained by an experienced and totally zen jedi master gets taught by an jumped up neophyte barely out of his own training? Directly leaded to said training being shitty, directly leading to Anakin's fall to the dark side which is the entire damned point of the trilogy?

Nope, no consequence at all.

I'm not minding the lack of talk about the Sith, though Darth Maul doing virtually nothing is lame. Wooo, he made the Queen take the scenic route to the throne room! That is his entire contribution to the main plot. Sure, he killed Qui-Gon right at the end, but that's at the end, so there's no consequence to it.

Is the meta-plot of the six films not relevant? Because Qui-Gon's death sways the Jedi Council into accepting Anakin Skywalker for training. That's a big deal.

Here's some weirdness: the call for no-confidence was called because the chancellor wanted to send a commission to see if the Queen was lying about the invasion.

Why the fuck didn't they just call in the Jedi, whom the chancellor already sent and saw the whole thing - and he talked to them personally when they got back - to testify about the situation?

Because the issue isn't that Valorum doesn't trust the Jedi, not at all. But he's constrained by corporate interests (gee, that's not at all like the real world, is it?). The Trade Federation is a sovereign power in the Republic and it's claiming that it doesn't trust the testimony at hand. Valorum misjudges the political situation and thinks that he has to appease the Feddies in order to get something done. Then Amidala turns the whole rest of the Senate against him for sucking so bad.

In fact, one of the lawyer guys who's advising Valorum, the big blue guy, is shown in Episode III to be a crony of Palpatine's, maybe even a Force-slave. The whole thing was a set-up.

Naboo surrenders without firing a shot, and there's no credible evidence that anything is actually happening to them. The one transmission of the guy saying "people are dying" was dismissed by the Jedi as just being bait; he was saying what the tradefed thought would get her attention. Mr Viceroy was bluffing.

This is a conclusion brought about from nothing other than your wishful thinking. Sio Bibble is obviously extremely agitated when we do see him talking to Gunray.

This is a franchise that sanitizes death; however, the absolute implication of the film is that Naboo are dying, and this is backed up explicitly by EU I believe. You can say that the film has failed to convey the stakes appropriately, and there I wolud agree. But from an SOD standpoint, you either have to assume either that people are dying, or that everybody's an idiot and that Gunray's a big ol' softie.

Consider at the end: "I think you can kiss your trade franchise goodbye." Man, what a stiff penalty.

His trade franchise has a battle fleet and a seat in the Senate. That's a fairly stiff penalty.

It was also a penalty deferred forever by money, corruption, and the background influence of a Sith Lord who is the Supreme Chancellor of the Republic. And, shortly, the overt efforts of Darth Tyranus and the Seperatist movement.

And nice bottomless pit in the middle of the palace where they are fighting Maul. Also, what were those revolving forcefields for anyway?

Clearly a Dungeon Master designed that room. As well as Palpatine's throne room on the Death Star.

Crazedwraith wrote:

Destructionator XIII wrote:I'm not minding the lack of talk about the Sith, though Darth Maul doing virtually nothing is lame. Wooo, he made the Queen take the scenic route to the throne room! That is his entire contribution to the main plot. Sure, he killed Qui-Gon right at the end, but that's at the end, so there's no consequence to it.

You mean other than that Anakin; instead of being trained by an experienced and totally zen jedi master gets taught by an jumped up neophyte barely out of his own training? Directly leaded to said training being shitty, directly leading to Anakin's fall to the dark side which is the entire damned point of the trilogy?

That didn't happen in TPM. Darth Maul barely had any impact on the plot of the movie he was in.

As for Anakin's training, it's not clear that Obi-Wan was Anakin's only trainer anyway. If he was, that only demonstrates the overall incompetence of the Jedi order if they entrusted the training of some sort of wonder-Jedi to a rookie. Besides, I don't think Anakin fell to the darkside due to a lack of decent training; rather it seems he was always a bit of a brooding asshole from puberty onwards.

Channel72 wrote:

Crazedwraith wrote:

Destructionator XIII wrote:I'm not minding the lack of talk about the Sith, though Darth Maul doing virtually nothing is lame. Wooo, he made the Queen take the scenic route to the throne room! That is his entire contribution to the main plot. Sure, he killed Qui-Gon right at the end, but that's at the end, so there's no consequence to it.

You mean other than that Anakin; instead of being trained by an experienced and totally zen jedi master gets taught by an jumped up neophyte barely out of his own training? Directly leaded to said training being shitty, directly leading to Anakin's fall to the dark side which is the entire damned point of the trilogy?

That didn't happen in TPM. Darth Maul barely had any impact on the plot of the movie he was in.

Luckily that's not a concept I was arguing, dumbass. I was arguing with the idea that the Death of Qui-Gon was inconsequential. Which is pretty much the most retarded thing in the thread so far. (ok, apart from the whole 'TPM says the Sith are a species' horseshit)

As for Anakin's training, it's not clear that Obi-Wan was Anakin's only trainer anyway. If he was, that only demonstrates the overall incompetence of the Jedi order if they entrusted the training of some sort of wonder-Jedi to a rookie. Besides, I don't think Anakin fell to the darkside due to a lack of decent training; rather it seems he was always a bit of a brooding asshole from puberty onwards.

Which decent training would have curbed and adapted itself to. Obi-Wan just toed to party's line and was completely inflexible with Anakin. Who's different background required different training that Obi-Wan was unable to give.

CrazedWraith wrote:Luckily that's not a concept I was arguing, dumbass. I was arguing with the idea that the Death of Qui-Gon was inconsequential. Which is pretty much the most retarded thing in the thread so far. (ok, apart from the whole 'TPM says the Sith are a species' horseshit)

On the contrary, almost everything that happened in Phantom Menace was inconsequential. Qui-Gon was arguably the only character the audience had any hope of connecting with, and he had no further role throughout the rest of the Trilogy, (unlike Ben who continued to advise Luke from beyond the grave.) Really, we could have started out with AotC and there would barely be any loss to the overall saga. Everything of any consequence we learned in Phantom Menace could have been explained in AotC in a few lines of dialogue. We really didn't need to waste 2 hours to see Anakin as an 8-year old and Palpatine get promoted. The only real emotional or dramatic theme in TPM that connects with the rest of the saga is Anakin's relationship with his mother.

Channel72 wrote:

CrazedWraith wrote:Luckily that's not a concept I was arguing, dumbass. I was arguing with the idea that the Death of Qui-Gon was inconsequential. Which is pretty much the most retarded thing in the thread so far. (ok, apart from the whole 'TPM says the Sith are a species' horseshit)

On the contrary, almost everything that happened in Phantom Menace was inconsequential. Qui-Gon was arguably the only character the audience had any hope of connecting with, and he had no further role throughout the rest of the Trilogy, (unlike Ben who continued to advise Luke from beyond the grave.) Really, we could have started out with AotC and there would barely be any loss to the overall saga. Everything of any consequence we learned in Phantom Menace could have been explained in AotC in a few lines of dialogue. We really didn't need to waste 2 hours to see Anakin as an 8-year old and Palpatine get promoted. The only real emotional or dramatic theme in TPM that connects with the rest of the saga is Anakin's relationship with his mother.

Oh for fuck's sake. Of course, its consequential you stupid fucking imbecile. For exactly the reasons I explained in my post and you have failed to address. It shows exactly how and why Obi-Wan ended up teaching Anakin, and how and why he totally fucked it up. Directly leading to the creation of Darth Vader, the Empire and all the events of the main trilogy.

How is that not a massive fucking consequence?

Crazedwraith wrote:It shows exactly how and why Obi-Wan ended up teaching Anakin, and how and why he totally fucked it up.

It shows how Obi-Wan ended up training Anakin, but none of the prequels really show us why this was a bad thing. Obi-Wan didn't appear to be incompetent as a master in either AOTC or ROTS so how do we know Qui-Gon would have fared any better?