6 hours ago, Chucknuckle said:Or that it's false. But of the two alternatives, I suspect I know which way you're leaning...
Neither way I've already stated I've no horse in this race, I just want evidence that this actually happened before anyone's condemned.
I'm not well inclined to believe speculation from some random Twitter user.
Well I made good on my promise and watched both of them.
Interesting that both Anakin and Luke both use the term Laser Sword. The only two occurences in the franchise.
Noticed at the end that Luke Skywalker's final words are "See you around kid".
An odd choice of words for someone about to die. Perhaps he will be returning as a force ghost, maybe with Yoda and Obi-Wan Kenobi to battle the dark side?
6 hours ago, Admiral Deathrain said:I've not seen anyone being abusive in this thread. It is absolutely fine to dislike any movie and not a contradiction with being a fan of the franchise. I personally disagree with the premise of this thread, as the sequels are some of my favourite star wars movies, but I won't claim to be objectively right.
Yes and I agree with you. However, my point was that we can still be respectful and polite.
On 6/13/2018 at 7:13 PM, Shadow345 said:The prequels have many shortcomings, but George Lucas never forced Mark Hamill to play Luke Skywalker as a murder hobo that sucks the animal teet. A crime Rian Roundhead Johnson is guilty of.
The scores in the prequels, phenomenal. The scores in the sequels, very bland and forgettable.
Disney do anything good? They made Rogue One. Which had a very satisfying portrayal of Darth Vader.
What would have been more to say polite is:
The prequels have many shortcomings, but I feel like the sequels have more. I didn't like Rian Johnson portrayal of Luke Skywalker he chose for Mark Hamill.
The scores in the prequels, phenomenal. I didn't like the scores in the sequels.
A Star Wars movie by Disney I did like was Rogue One. I was really satisfied with Darth Vader's awesome portrayal. (I read into your statement here, so if you wanted you could add: I wish Disney would make more Star Wars movies as awesome as Rogue One.)
Edited by AwesomeJediOr we could not word police people, I don't approve of cultural Marxist ideas like political correctness.
Let people say things how they want to.
Remember offence can not be given, only taken.
On 6/14/2018 at 12:26 PM, TasteTheRainbow said:...
Made it in without tripping alarms? Accident.
...
That was because
On 6/15/2018 at 10:40 AM, AwesomeJedi said:
Lets not invoke the White Lightsabers of Kathleen Kennedy's personal Jedi guard.
On 6/15/2018 at 2:55 PM, Hobojebus said:Prequels are unwatchable the effects have dated so badly, yet jurasic park a film from 1993 still holds up brilliantly
It's a matter, not just of an obsession with using CGI rather than practical effects (which is understandable because it was the 'new thing' at the time) but with thinking using purely CGI would look convincing.
A comparison just as damming to me is that The Fellowship of the Ring came out the same year, and was made with a lower budget. Compare the Orcs/Elves Last Alliance sequence to the Droid/Gungan Battle of Naboo.
On 6/15/2018 at 5:48 PM, TasteTheRainbow said:
You know.....
That's a fair point. It's arguably all the guy on Vader's left wing's fault.
Now, in the new canon, identities of the black squadron pilots have been 'blanked' such that unless someone has been explicitely named, or at least implied, they're not known.
But it has to be someone who's implied by their background, title or art to be a member of black squadron. Who was in the trench, and on the left hand side of a formation.
But who could be that incompetent as to do something....like....
....wait a minute....
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/11639903/_MG_2064.jpg)
RUDOR, YOU BLOODY IMBECILE.....
I survived the Prequels with my enthusiasm for Star Wars intact. I walked out of Last Jedi just not even caring about the franchise anymore, and only saw Solo because the whole family was going.
As far as I'm concerned, Star Wars ended with Vision of the Future/Union.
Edited by AmbaryernoThe prequels and the sequels are both bad, but it's the prequels for me. The prequels can stand apart from the original trilogy; the sequels butcher it.
On 7/27/2018 at 2:05 AM, Magnus Grendel said:A comparison just as damming to me is that The Fellowship of the Ring came out the same year, and was made with a lower budget. Compare the Orcs/Elves Last Alliance sequence to the Droid/Gungan Battle of Naboo.
I don't think that's a fair comparison for a few reasons.
1) They were actually 2.5 years apart.
2) One battle was in bright sunlight, other was heavily overcast. Much harder to make sfx as convincing the brighter it is.
3) The naboo battle was MUCH longer. So time and money are more strained to have every shot look amazing.
Star Wars at its best is mythology and world-building. That is what makes it timeless.
That is why eps. 7 and 8 fail. They have no respect for the mythology. And the world-building is just a carbon copy. More X-wings. More TIEs. Another Cantina. Another Death Star.
Eps 1-3 broadened the Star Wars horizons and deepen the mythology. They build up the events of the Original Trilogy. They tell their own stories without belittling the OT.
The same can be said about Rogue One and Solo.
If you've watched every Star Wars movie, every canonical cartoon, you see how it weaves together. Pieces of a grand tapestry.
7 and 8 could've started their own tapestry without burning down the old one. But by nullifying the events of 1-6, it just makes the future stories of Rey and Finn irrelevant because anything they're striving for will be dismantled by the next generation.
8 hours ago, patox said:7 and 8 could've started their own tapestry without burning down the old one. But by nullifying the events of 1-6, it just makes the future stories of Rey and Finn irrelevant because anything they're striving for will be dismantled by the next generation.
I don't understand this sentiment at all. In what way were the events of the OT nullified? Because they didn't build something that lasted forever?
2 hours ago, Sekac said:I don't understand this sentiment at all. In what way were the events of the OT nullified? Because they didn't build something that lasted forever?
"Nullified" is probably a imprecise choice of word but it is very hard to see Episodes 7 and 8 having done other than taking away the happy ending of ROTJ. Han back to where he was when we met him and so old and dottering that he sort of forgot where he left the Falcon and running cons. Luke off being a hermit. Defeating the Empire only to have the galaxy shrug its shoulders and let a new one grow. Our heroic lovers have a bratty child who murders them to prove he's evil.
We skipped ahead and didn't see that they'd ever built anything as it all seemed to already be in ashes. First Order is back as The Empire and the good guys are back on the run as The Rebellion...errrr... The Resistance. Even people who like TFA call it a reset/reboot. TLJ is very nihilistic despite Rose's trite talk of hope. "Nullified" might be far from the most precise word but it isn't really a wrong one.
4 hours ago, Frimmel said:"Nullified" is probably a imprecise choice of word but it is very hard to see Episodes 7 and 8 having done other than taking away the happy ending of ROTJ
I actually liked that. I mean that's how real life works. There are happy times and bad times. Do the bad times invalidate the good times?
4 hours ago, Frimmel said:Han back to where he was when we met him and so old and dottering that he sort of forgot where he left the Falcon and running cons.
He tried to become something new. He became a hero, a husband, and a father. He didn't want his son brought into the life of a Jedi, but Leia disagreed. When that ended tragically, their marriage fell apart and he retreated into the life he knew before. This mirrors many people's life path.
4 hours ago, Frimmel said:Luke off being a hermit.
He believed he could restore the Jedi order and they would defend the New Republic. He thought he could make The Force be simply a force for good. But exists beyond the Jedi, and beyond his aspirations. He learned that lesson the hard way and ended up following the same solitary path that his master and his master's master followed before him.
4 hours ago, Frimmel said:Defeating the Empire only to have the galaxy shrug its shoulders and let a new one grow.
Much like every single time an evil regime is toppled in our galaxy? I'm not sure why we should expect it to be different there. Also, that would be an extremely uninteresting setting for a Star Wars trilogy.
4 hours ago, Frimmel said:Our heroic lovers have a bratty child who murders them to prove he's evil.
How does that nullify anything from the OT? I don't remember a scene where Leia and Han agreed to only have non-evil, non-murderous children in Return of the Jedi.
4 hours ago, Frimmel said:We skipped ahead and didn't see that they'd ever built anything as it all seemed to already be in ashes.
Star Wars movies skip around, and always have.
But no, it wasn't all in ashes. It got turned into ashes on screen when the First Order who grew in the shadows announced their dominion over the galaxy when they obliterated the standing government. Do you not remember that? Multiple planets were destroyed halfway through the movie.
The New Republic wasn't shown on screen because it didn't need to be. The whole entire point was the New Republic had gotten complacent and didn't think the FO was a real threat.
Does complacency need to be shown on screen? A smash cut to scenes of bureaucratical tedium, perhaps? Again, not interesting film making. They didn't show the Senate at work in ANH before it got disbanded because it is boring and unnecessary.
4 hours ago, Frimmel said:"Nullified" might be far from the most precise word but it isn't really a wrong one.
No, it's definitely the wrong word.
In the OT, Luke becomes a Jedi, Leia and Han fall in love, they all become heroes, and they successfully topple the Empire. The new trilogy changes none of that. It just juxtaposes the idealism and naivete of people in the prime of their lives with the harsh realities of actual life.
There are peaks and valleys in life, but the valleys don't nullify the peaks.
2 hours ago, Sekac said:Blathers at me.
Sir, you asked a question. I answered it. I didn't like that the TFA and TLJ took away the happy ending of the OT. Even you admit the TFA and TLJ did that. Let's leave it at that okay?
Sure thing
given the topic in general, its a salty one at best. i do have to say when i saw episode 1 with my friend, i didnt mind the movie. i was overall entertained, and i watched it several times afterwards. however. my friend did ask me coming out of the theater......."what was the point of this movie?" he was confused at the whole trade blockade of naboo. that part just didnt make sense to him... i told him that was the phantom part lol...
then episode 2 came out. i cant remember who i saw that with. once again, didnt mind it i wasnt a hater. i did think hayden's acting was creepy and cringy at best. and i think my favorite gripe about the movie was the horrid romantic dialog. otherwise. gimmie some of that padme in leather.... lol o wait she's a senator and doesnt do that sort of thing. i really feel for aniken in that scene.
next revenge of the sith. now this one... i didnt have that many issues with it.. alot of lightsaber fights. i think the jedi went down like a bunch of ...... yea i wont say that here lol. but visually it was a pretty good movie. once again Glucas shows his lack of creative romantic dialog. but then again. in the OT the actors did say that his dialog in general was pretty bad.. i guess that one of the reasons harrison ford addlibbed alot of dialog.
so my grade on prequals was a big not bad.
honeslty i wont even talk about the sequal movies.. i already posted my thoughts on them in a different thread.
prequel, sequel, they're both equal
in being awful.
