Star Wars Discussion Thread

3,177,036 Views | 30672 Replies | Last: 4 hrs ago by TCTTS
redline248
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
SpreadsheetAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Yeah but hat about Greivous - an organic thing in a cyborg/droid suit who has a cough?
YouBet
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I've never heard mid-40's and older (the "Older Fans") be described as "neck beards".

I've only ever heard that term for a demographic in the millienials, is it not?
Duncan Idaho
How long do you want to ignore this user?

Millienials can be as old as 38. So it sounds like you are splitting hairs.
fig96
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TCTTS said:

"The only reason these movies were hated so much is because people didn't like them!"

What magnificent insight!
Not to mention that the CGI was a product of its time...but so was the stellar work in LOTR done at just about the same time.
MuckRaker96
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
i miss the days when I could just like star wars without someone being mad at me about it.
these arguments make my face hurt.
TCTTS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Except no one here is mad at anyone for liking Star Wars, or the prequels, or whatever. I think it's great that you, Spilner, or whoever can find joy in the prequels, and I genuinely mean that. At least for me - and it feels like it's the same for others - it just drives me nuts when people who defend the prequels defend them in a manner that labels the rest of as "haters" simply because we think it's "cool" to do so. Or paints our opinion as nothing more than some bandwagon mentality; as if we genuinely don't believe they're bad movies, or haven't been able to articulate exactly why we believe they're bad movies. It's such a BS way to defend something, and that's what makes me "mad."

If you genuinely like something - no matter the quality - it shouldn't matter what anyone else thinks of it. Defending your love of something doesn't have to equal defending the quality of something. I ******* love Armageddon irrationally. But I can understand why so many people think it's dumb, nonsensical, and cheesy. That acknowledgement doesn't diminish my love of it. And I'm definitely not going to try and convince people that it's actually a really smart, innovative movie (it's not) and that anyone who dislikes it is simply a Deep Impact fan.

For some reason, when it comes to the prequels, especially, so many people on the internet - and at times on this board - think they have to justify their love of the movies by justifying the quality of the movies. But those two things aren't mutually exclusive. On the same token, when we're bashing the prequels, we're not bashing your love of them. Us being "mad" at the prequels doesn't mean we're "mad" at you. Those are two completely separate things.
MuckRaker96
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TCTTS said:

Except no one here is mad at anyone for liking Star Wars, or the prequels, or whatever. I think it's great that you, Spilner, or whoever can find joy in the prequels, and I genuinely mean that. At least for me - and it feels like it's the same for others - it just drives me nuts when people who defend the prequels defend them in a manner that labels the rest of as "haters" simply because we think it's "cool" to do so. Or paints our opinion as nothing more than some bandwagon mentality; as if we genuinely don't believe they're bad movies, or haven't been able to articulate exactly why we believe they're bad movies. It's such a BS way to defend something, and that's what makes me "mad."

If you genuinely like something - no matter the quality - it shouldn't matter what anyone else thinks of it. Defending your love of something doesn't have to equal defending the quality of something. I ******* love Armageddon irrationally. But I can understand why so many people think it's dumb, nonsensical, and cheesy. That acknowledgement doesn't diminish my love of it. And I'm definitely not going to try and convince people that it's actually a really smart, innovative movie (it's not) and that anyone who dislikes it is simply a Deep Impact fan.

For some reason, when it comes to the prequels, especially, so many people on the internet - and at times on this board - think they have to justify their love of the movies by justifying the quality of the movies. But those two things aren't mutually exclusive. On the same token, when we're bashing the prequels, we're not bashing your love of them. Us being "mad" at the prequels doesn't mean we're "mad" at you. Those are two completely separate things.
I have no idea what you're talking about. I wasn't referring to anything you said.
SpreadsheetAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
My 5 year old daughter LOVES Jar Jar (cringe). I don't hate the prequels (not like I do the Last Jedi) - I even enjoyed them all the first several times I saw them in the theater because they were new, they had alot of Jedi, I was a SW geek, and they had decent plots that were entertaining.

It wasn't until much later, when I rewatched several times, and went back and really thought about some of the odd things that were thrown in there (mostly the strange dialogue and some of the over-the-top goofiness for kids) that I saw some of the more egregious flaws in the movies. I still like them and enjoy them, but they are 5's or 6's compared to some other epics. Certainly not 2's or 3's (like TLJ)
veryfuller
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
AG
Look, I'm no prequel defender, but this argument about quality vs. enjoyment does annoy me. What typically happens when someone doesn't like a movie is they attack the quality of that movie, so that the person that does enjoy the movie has no recourse in a debate over the movie.

Star Wars movies are a great example of this. When people don't like a Star Wars movie, they quickly attack the plot, writing, etc. and say it's just a bad movie, when if they took those same arguments to a Star Wars movie they enjoy, that movie would not hold up to the same scrutiny. There are definitely "bad" movies that I enjoy and know they are bad, but I think people (including myself) are WAY too quick to label a movie bad just because they didn't enjoy it. And instead of arguing "this is why I didn't enjoy the movie" the argument is "Here is why it sucked, and if you liked it then you are just liking a bad movie."

Not to bring TLJ up, but this is a prime example of that. If you take the same arguments people make about it, and apply them, to say, the Empire Strikes Back.....Well, a lot of that movie falls apart as well.

OK...end rant...
CJS4715
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
veryfuller said:

Not to bring TLJ up, but this is a prime example of that. If you take the same arguments people make about it, and apply them, to say, the Empire Strikes Back.....Well, a lot of that movie falls apart as well.



Flashdiaz
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
veryfuller said:

Not to bring TLJ up, but this is a prime example of that. If you take the same arguments people make about it, and apply them, to say, the Empire Strikes Back.....Well, a lot of that movie falls apart as well.

OK...end rant...

Please allow me to retort....




No it doesn't.
CJS4715
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
To be fair, I probably don't completely disagree with you regarding scrutiny of the SW franchise, however you may have been a little overzealous to make a point.
veryfuller
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
AG
Ha. OK maybe not A LOT of the movie falls apart, but there are definitely some questionable plot holes and logic leaps we are all willing to make because the movie is so good.
Brian Earl Spilner
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TCTTS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
MuckRaker96 said:

TCTTS said:

Except no one here is mad at anyone for liking Star Wars, or the prequels, or whatever. I think it's great that you, Spilner, or whoever can find joy in the prequels, and I genuinely mean that. At least for me - and it feels like it's the same for others - it just drives me nuts when people who defend the prequels defend them in a manner that labels the rest of as "haters" simply because we think it's "cool" to do so. Or paints our opinion as nothing more than some bandwagon mentality; as if we genuinely don't believe they're bad movies, or haven't been able to articulate exactly why we believe they're bad movies. It's such a BS way to defend something, and that's what makes me "mad."

If you genuinely like something - no matter the quality - it shouldn't matter what anyone else thinks of it. Defending your love of something doesn't have to equal defending the quality of something. I ******* love Armageddon irrationally. But I can understand why so many people think it's dumb, nonsensical, and cheesy. That acknowledgement doesn't diminish my love of it. And I'm definitely not going to try and convince people that it's actually a really smart, innovative movie (it's not) and that anyone who dislikes it is simply a Deep Impact fan.

For some reason, when it comes to the prequels, especially, so many people on the internet - and at times on this board - think they have to justify their love of the movies by justifying the quality of the movies. But those two things aren't mutually exclusive. On the same token, when we're bashing the prequels, we're not bashing your love of them. Us being "mad" at the prequels doesn't mean we're "mad" at you. Those are two completely separate things.
I have no idea what you're talking about. I wasn't referring to anything you said.

Then perhaps clarify what you were talking about? The convo up until your post had been mostly about the prequels. And when that conversation usually comes up, it's quite common for someone to express the general sentiment you did. So, given that context, it seemed fairly apparent to me what you were referring to. In fact, I don't see how to take your post any other way.
TCTTS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
veryfuller said:

Look, I'm no prequel defender, but this argument about quality vs. enjoyment does annoy me. What typically happens when someone doesn't like a movie is they attack the quality of that movie, so that the person that does enjoy the movie has no recourse in a debate over the movie.

Star Wars movies are a great example of this. When people don't like a Star Wars movie, they quickly attack the plot, writing, etc. and say it's just a bad movie, when if they took those same arguments to a Star Wars movie they enjoy, that movie would not hold up to the same scrutiny. There are definitely "bad" movies that I enjoy and know they are bad, but I think people (including myself) are WAY too quick to label a movie bad just because they didn't enjoy it. And instead of arguing "this is why I didn't enjoy the movie" the argument is "Here is why it sucked, and if you liked it then you are just liking a bad movie."

Not to bring TLJ up, but this is a prime example of that. If you take the same arguments people make about it, and apply them, to say, the Empire Strikes Back.....Well, a lot of that movie falls apart as well.

OK...end rant...

This is my entire point, though. It shouldn't be a "debate." If you love something, you shouldn't have to defend it or argue in its favor. You shouldn't have to "prove" its worth. This is exactly why I included my Armageddon example. I love that movie but I have no need or desire to "defend" it, and I could not care less what others think of it.
Brian Earl Spilner
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

If you genuinely like something - no matter the quality - it shouldn't matter what anyone else thinks of it.
I think this is the crux of veryfuller's argument. The quality is in the eyes of the beholder, it's not a measurable, objective fact.

A lot of times, people who like the prequels are told they're of low quality but it's "ok to like them".
TCTTS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
We've had this conversation a dozen times, and this is where we differ. I absolutely believe that quality is not 100% in the eye of the beholder. It's just not. There ARE measurable variables in movie making that can be judged as objectively bad or good. Movies aren't *solely* artistic visions immune to objective, concrete criticism.

It's like if a house fell down due to a sh*tty design and then you just shrugged your shoulders and said, "Welp, the quality of the house was in the eye of the beholder." No. It wasn't a properly designed house. And any expert would come along and say that the architect instead needed to use [X] for the foundation here, should have put [X] here, etc - and no one would go, "But that's just your opinion!" Story telling/movie making isn't that much different. It's WAY more technical than you think, and certain "materials" and "designs" objectively support the "house" better than others.

Now, I know your reply would likely be, "But it's your opinion that the house fell down in the first place." And to that I would argue that the VAST majority of fans disliking the prequels is the equivalent of "the house falling down." They dislike it because it wasn't designed well. It's as simple as that. That doesn't mean that there weren't some really cool rooms, some awesome furniture, and a sweet pool in the backyard. But the house still fell down for a reason.
Brian Earl Spilner
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
And I disagree.

But just pointing out fuller's point, and that's where the "debate" comes in.
TCTTS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
But no one's debating your LOVE of that house.

We're debating the QUALITY.

Just because it fell down, doesn't mean you didn't have great memories there.
Brian Earl Spilner
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The millions of people who DO enjoy the movie will say the house didn't fall, and their opinion is just as valid.



This is a dead-end discussion and we've agreed to disagree on this many times.
veryfuller
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
AG
The age old argument.

I'm good with people judging the quality of films if thats what they are wanting to do, I just don't like it when the standard is not applied evenly and seems to be coming from a subjective place instead of judging actual quality, which is often the case.

I think it's easy to avoid that trap by not making judgements on a movies quality, but by articulating what one likes or finds enjoyable about a movie and where it didn't work or what one didn't like. That is all I am saying.

Also, people definitely like to defend the things they like, especially if they think objectively its good and someone is arguing that it isn't, so I'm not sure saying you don't need to do that is realistic.



TCTTS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
veryfuller said:

The age old argument.

I'm good with people judging the quality of films if thats what they are wanting to do, I just don't like it when the standard is not applied evenly and seems to be coming from a subjective place instead of judging actual quality, which is often the case.

But you're making the assumption that the standard isn't being applied evenly. That's a pretty big assumption. Moreover, your assumption essentially argues that all the movies are of equal quality, and those of us who don't like certain ones somehow aren't being objective in our praise/critiques. For instance, it sounds like you're concluding that because we like, say, the Luke/Vader fight in Cloud City the most, that we're somehow blind to all of Empire's other flaws; that if it weren't so enamored with that fight (again, for instance), we would see that Empire has just as many holes in it as, say, Attack of the Clones.

This is such a strange position to take, IMO.

You're choosing to believe that the movies are of equal quality over choosing to believe that some movies are simply better-made than others, and that we're not capable of making that distinction for ourselves, or that we're somehow being disingenuous.

Quote:

I think it's easy to avoid that trap by not making judgements on a movies quality, but by articulating what one likes or finds enjoyable about a movie and where it didn't work or what one didn't like. That is all I am saying.

No one is arguing against this. If you like Jar Jar Binks, great. From the start of this conversation, the only thing I have an issue with is when someone like that person Spilner posted tells us that the only reason we don't like Jar Jar Binks is because we're merely jumping on the bandwagon of hate or whatever.
Brian Earl Spilner
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Honestly, I think a better example for this discussion would be Return of the Jedi, mainly because Empire Strikes Back is such a universally loved film that almost nobody criticizes, but there's a lot of very valid criticism of ROTJ and a lot of OT fans who don't want to admit that some other movies are better. (Maybe even prequels?)

Ultimately though, nobody is going to change anybody's mind when it comes to Star Wars fandom. It's probably the best fandom in all of pop culture, but also so staunchly divided at times, and it's a tough one to crack.

I seriously do hope that Episode IX finds some miraculous way to unite the fanbase.
veryfuller
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
AG
My assumption is not that all movies are of equal quality. I think people judge the quality all they want.

My assertion is that most of us are incapable of applying our quality standard evenly or we use it as a crutch to bolster an argument about what we like more or to crush something we don't like at all, and conveniently leave it out if it doesn't suit are argument one way or the other.

I only brought up Empire because it is so enjoyable and beloved. It hasn't had to run the gauntlet of criticism that say, TLJ has, even though objectively, they are of similar quality. One just doesn't work as well for fans, so the movie is seen as a failure and a "bad movie" even though it's not at all. The standard applied by many to that movie, if applied to Empire, would yield interesting results, in my opinion.

Again, not arguing that quality is completely subjective, or that all movies are of the same quality, just that when you like something (or hate it), it becomes a lot harder to view it objectively and apply whatever standard you have evenly.



veryfuller
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
AG
ROTJ is my #6 in my ranking of Saga films....as in Attack of the Clones and The Phantom Menace are the only ones below it.....

Brian Earl Spilner
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I suspect we have VERY similar rankings.
Brian Earl Spilner
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

Again, not arguing that quality is completely subjective, or that all movies are of the same quality, just that when you like something (or hate it), it becomes a lot harder to view it objectively and apply whatever standard you have evenly.
This is well said, and is probably a lot more accurate than how I have argued my point. (Quality being 100% subjective.)

There's very obvious things that can clearly be seen when a movie is terrible (ie. The Room), so I can't well defend my stance in some regards.

I think ultimately the main issue I have is when someone argues that their opinion is objectively more valid than someone else's.
redline248
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Anyone that puts Jedi at 6 out of 8 movies can be ignored
Render
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Looking at my past comments, I feel I was way too rude in some parts. Calling people "fanboys" was rude, unfair, and stupid. And overall my tone was too aggressive. I apologize.

Everyone is different and likes different things. I'll try to be less of an a-hole going forward.
CJS4715
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I think fanboys is a fine term to use; I'll wear it. There is something about the look of the Star Wars universe that immediately draws me to the world, so there is zero doubt in my mind that I overrate them and look past flaws.
CJS4715
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
This. The original version without the Jabba's Palace musical change & Vader saying "nooooooooooo" is great.
MuckRaker96
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TCTTS said:

MuckRaker96 said:

TCTTS said:

Except no one here is mad at anyone for liking Star Wars, or the prequels, or whatever. I think it's great that you, Spilner, or whoever can find joy in the prequels, and I genuinely mean that. At least for me - and it feels like it's the same for others - it just drives me nuts when people who defend the prequels defend them in a manner that labels the rest of as "haters" simply because we think it's "cool" to do so. Or paints our opinion as nothing more than some bandwagon mentality; as if we genuinely don't believe they're bad movies, or haven't been able to articulate exactly why we believe they're bad movies. It's such a BS way to defend something, and that's what makes me "mad."

If you genuinely like something - no matter the quality - it shouldn't matter what anyone else thinks of it. Defending your love of something doesn't have to equal defending the quality of something. I ******* love Armageddon irrationally. But I can understand why so many people think it's dumb, nonsensical, and cheesy. That acknowledgement doesn't diminish my love of it. And I'm definitely not going to try and convince people that it's actually a really smart, innovative movie (it's not) and that anyone who dislikes it is simply a Deep Impact fan.

For some reason, when it comes to the prequels, especially, so many people on the internet - and at times on this board - think they have to justify their love of the movies by justifying the quality of the movies. But those two things aren't mutually exclusive. On the same token, when we're bashing the prequels, we're not bashing your love of them. Us being "mad" at the prequels doesn't mean we're "mad" at you. Those are two completely separate things.
I have no idea what you're talking about. I wasn't referring to anything you said.

Then perhaps clarify what you were talking about? The convo up until your post had been mostly about the prequels. And when that conversation usually comes up, it's quite common for someone to express the general sentiment you did. So, given that context, it seemed fairly apparent to me what you were referring to. In fact, I don't see how to take your post any other way.
I was talking about Render and his endless stream of ****ing stupid posts.

You don't have to swing in here on your rope with your 300-word Lord of the Board essays every time someone voices an opinion counter to your status quo of how discussion boards work.
TCTTS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Huh? I just went back and looked and Render hadn't posted in five days. You didn't directly reply to him, and a whole entire other conversation had taken place in between. How on earth was I or anyone else supposed to connect those dots? It absolutely appeared as if you were commenting on the conversation at hand, and given that assumption, I was merely defending my position. It absolutely looked as if you were griping at those of "mad" at the prequels. Apologies for assuming so and "swinging" into a conversation I was already a part of.
Page 817 of 877
 
×
Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.