# Has the backlash against Star Wars vindicated the prequels?



## MartialHorror (Jun 1, 2018)

Inspired by another debate, I thought I would start a topic on whether or not the Star Wars prequels have been redeemed in the wake of the current backlash against the franchise. I was a kid when "The Phantom Menace" came out and while I remember thinking it was fine at the time, I just went back to playing with the OT Star Wars toys and watching those movies, the first sign that I didn't really like it that much, even if I was too young to realize it. But sometime during the early to mid 2000's, everyone seemingly turned on these movies. To say a kind thing about them would get you mocked in some way.

I now couldn't find anyone who liked them...or at least admitted to liking them...and I've been recently told that I'm projecting my own disdain towards them onto the fanbase. I want to know if this is true, as I didn't really start hating these movies until around 2015- where I revisited them all to prepare for the release of "The Force Awakens". I nevertheless can't believe that these films received anything but scorn from the majority of viewers over the years, as George Lucas admitted to more-or-less retiring over the prequel hate, a documentary was made detailing the conflict between Lucas and his fans and seemingly every online review I have seen in the past 5-10 years badmouths them all.

Yet since the rise of Disney Wars, I've noticed a lot more people speaking in defense of the prequels, so I am curious. Am I really projecting something and the backlash was never really that intense, even though the kid who played Anakin was bullied so much for TPM that he renounced the franchise? Is this one of those cases where it's not so much that people like the prequels, they just prefer them over the sequels or at the absolute least, they favor Lucas over Kennedy? Or has the backlash leveled at the sequels encouraged the fans to come out of the shadows and no longer feel ostracized? Or is this an age thing? Maybe younger fans grew up with the prequels, so nostalgia is tied into it?

Some movies get improved reputations because what follows is worse, such as "Jaws 2" or "Halloween 2". Are viewers simply re-evaluating them?

In short, are the prequels now considered good? Or have they always been reasonably well liked? If you like them or dislike them, how would you compare them to the new movies?


----------



## Shiba D. Inu (Jun 1, 2018)

no lol


TPM didnt get less shitty in 2018

its the worst SW movie and one of the worst ~high-profile AAA Hollywood major releases I've ever seen

Reactions: Winner 1


----------



## Ghost_of_Gashir (Jun 1, 2018)

Revenge of the Sith is the third best movie in the entire series.


----------



## Shiba D. Inu (Jun 1, 2018)

Ghost_of_Gashir said:


> Revenge of the Sith is the third best movie in the entire series.


very true, but that was also true right after it came out


actually RotS even competes with ANH for me


----------



## Kansas City Kipchaks Point Guard (Jun 1, 2018)

Ghost_of_Gashir said:


> Revenge of the Sith is the third best movie in the entire series.


The acting makes that ranking difficult for me. Especially Anakin. also everything feels so fucking plastic.


----------



## MartialHorror (Jun 1, 2018)

I think "The Phantom Menace" was dogshit, but each prequel grew better than the last. "Attack of the Clones" was not good either, but at least contained some good stuff. "Revenge of the Sith" was OK. 

I mean, I can at least understand why someone would prefer the prequel trilogy over the sequel trilogy, because Lucas did introduce a lot of new stuff. It has a completely different visual style and even though I never cared too much for those soldier droids or the Federation outfits, at least they're unique? The sequels have only added variations of old classics like Kylo Ren's lightsaber, but has yet to really introduce anything completely new. 

Now I consider the prequels to be such catastrophic failures in storytelling that I would still favor the sequels, just because I think they're better made, but Lucas is much more of a visionary than Kennedy and her assortment of directors. So I get why the prequels would be favored over the sequels, but let's not pretend like the backlash didn't alter the course of Star Wars back then. 

Which backlash has been more intense? I would say the prequels, but I also have to admit that I can't say that with a lot of conviction. It's hard to compare the two as social media wasn't the same back then. I've yet to see any lives ruined or changed because of the sequels. I've yet to see the backlash become a cultural phenomenon like the prequels did. Internet personalities made their careers out of bashing the prequels, as demand for such was so high at the time. They even made a movie called "Fanboys" where the final punchline was ultimately that "The Phantom Menace" sucks. Granted, this certainly could happen with the sequels too, but we don't know yet. 

Now there is one major hole in my argument. As bad as the backlash was, the prequels were still all very financially successful. "Solo: A Star Wars" story is probably going to be the first Star Wars movie to lose money, something that wasn't even on the table with the prequels. So I could be wrong, but I don't think the issue is one sided.


----------



## Shiba D. Inu (Jun 1, 2018)

prequels have lower lows and higher highs than sequels

Reactions: Agree 2 | Optimistic 1


----------



## Shiba D. Inu (Jun 1, 2018)

RotS is also the most memetic of the SW films


----------



## Fang (Jun 1, 2018)

Ghost_of_Gashir said:


> Revenge of the Sith is the third best movie in the entire series.



Best movie in the franchise you mean besides TESB. ANH comes in at second.


----------



## Atlas (Jun 1, 2018)

I've grown more appreciative of the prequels after seeing how terrible the sequels are. The prequels brought us so much awesome content in the form of characters, vehicles, weapons, locations, video games, an awesome TV show, and the god tier r/prequelmemes subreddit. The sequels are just bland, boring, and terrible.

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Ghost_of_Gashir (Jun 1, 2018)

Sequels suffer from a very big lack of creativity. Which is about par for the course for JJ Abrams, as the Star Trek remakes have shown.

Prequels expanded the world. Sequels have widdled the resistance down to less than 20 people and destroyed five planets worth of allies.


----------



## EVERY SINGLE DAY!!! (Jun 1, 2018)

I'm not sure how the collective re-evaluation of the prequels is going in light of the recent backlash to the Disney stuff. But, I feel that the same criticism levied against them in the past still applies to them today. And that those criticisms really shouldn't be diminished  just because the new stuff may warrant even a harsher  wave of criticism.

Is Nick Anderson's chokejob of missing 4 free throws in a row late in an NBA Finals game from over 20 years ago suddenly made into a retroactively well-regarded winning performance just because JR Smith had a brainfart in the final seconds of a Finals game last night? No it doesn't. It was a chokejob then. It is a chokejob now. Same line of logic applies to the prequels.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## Fang (Jun 1, 2018)

>mfw Sequelfags near me

Reactions: Funny 2


----------



## Glued (Jun 1, 2018)

I remember when Star Wars used to have aliens who didn't just show up as cameos.

I remember there were three monsters in Gungan core.


----------



## Fang (Jun 1, 2018)

Ben Grimm said:


> I remember when Star Wars used to have aliens who didn't just show up as cameos.
> 
> I remember there were three monsters in Gungan core.



Disney Wars is so hilariously creatively bankrupt its not even funny.



Like legitimately 80% of the Disney aliens are different variants of butt-face in the movies

Reactions: Winner 2


----------



## MartialHorror (Jun 1, 2018)

Fang said:


> >mfw Sequelfags near me



...Your face becomes 70 years old? No wonder you hate the sequels!

So if someone talks bad about the prequels, that automatically makes them a "sequelfag"?


----------



## Glued (Jun 1, 2018)

Fang said:


> Disney Wars is so hilariously creatively bankrupt its not even funny.
> 
> 
> 
> Like legitimately 80% of the Disney aliens are different variants of butt-face in the movies



More than design, aliens used to play bigger roles in the prequels

Sure we have Maz and Ankarr, but they're the only ones with roles.

Padme got down on her knees before Boss Nas. Sebulba was the Pod racing champion. Watto used to own Anakin. The aliens from Kamino made the clone army. The Geonosians made the droid army and the Death Star. General Grievous lead the droid army, Nute Gunray put the blockade on Naboo. Darth Maul revealed the survival of the Sith and took on both Obi Wan and Qui Gon at the same time.

Aliens were an integral part of the Star Wars world.

I felt like I was in a universe of alien life.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## MartialHorror (Jun 1, 2018)

Ben Grimm said:


> More than design, aliens used to play bigger roles in the prequels
> 
> Sure we have Maz and Ankarr, but they're the only ones with roles.
> 
> ...



And there was also Jar Jar Binks!


----------



## Rukia (Jun 1, 2018)

Yes.


----------



## Glued (Jun 1, 2018)

MartialHorror said:


> And there was also Jar Jar Binks!



Indeed, he was the one who gave Palpatine the power to become Emperor.

Let us all thank Senator Jar Jar Binks.


----------



## Fang (Jun 1, 2018)

MartialHorror said:


> And there was also Jar Jar Binks!



And there's Rose and Finn.

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Fang (Jun 1, 2018)

MartialHorror said:


> ...Your face becomes 70 years old? No wonder you hate the sequels!
> 
> So if someone talks bad about the prequels, that automatically makes them a "sequelfag"?



I don't think you know how mfw idiom works. Or have much common sense. Well the latter isn't a surprise.

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## MartialHorror (Jun 1, 2018)

Fang said:


> I don't think you know how mfw idiom works. Or have much common sense. Well the latter isn't a surprise.



Doesn't it mean 'my face when'? And grow a sense or humor, or at least answer the question.


----------



## Rukia (Jun 1, 2018)

Fang said:


> And there's Rose and Finn.


Rose is the new Jar Jar.

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Fang (Jun 1, 2018)

MartialHorror said:


> Doesn't it mean 'my face when'? And grow a sense or humor, or at least answer the question.



I honestly view you as being not that dissimilar from DDJ dude.

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## MartialHorror (Jun 1, 2018)

Fang said:


> I honestly view you as being not that dissimilar from DDJ dude.



Sort of like how I view you as not being that dissimilar from Suigetsu? Oh, go into one of your Disney related conspiracy theories! Those are always fun!



Rukia said:


> Rose is the new Jar Jar.



Maybe Rose IS Jar Jar!


----------



## Fang (Jun 1, 2018)

MartialHorror said:


> Sort of like how I view you as not being that dissimilar from Suigetsu?



Not following this comparison. I don't go on tirades about SJW but you sound at times as robotic and bland as he does.



> Oh, go into one of your Disney related conspiracy theories! Those are always fun!



Lying about things don't make them true, Martial kun.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## MartialHorror (Jun 1, 2018)

Fang said:


> Not following this comparison. I don't go on tirades about SJW but you sound at times as robotic and bland as he does.
> 
> 
> 
> Lying about things don't make them true, Martial kun.



Would I sound less bland if I randomely plugged "Carnosaur 3: Primal Species" into the conversation, Fang-Chan? Because that movie has dinosaurs eating people.

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Fang (Jun 1, 2018)

MartialHorror said:


> Would I sound less bland if I randomely plugged "Carnosaur 3: Primal Species" into the conversation, Fang-Chan? Because that movie has dinosaurs eating people.



Still not following this passive-aggressive bullshit your preaching at me as a defensive coping mechanic. Also the parroting is really not helping but solidify my point.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Atlas (Jun 1, 2018)

Fang said:


> And there's Rose and Finn.



At least Jar Jar had some significance to the plot.


----------



## MartialHorror (Jun 1, 2018)

Fang said:


> Still not following this passive-aggressive bullshit your preaching at me as a defensive coping mechanic. Also the parroting is really not helping but solidify my point.



Maybe I'm just trying to...poison the well...even though I still don't know which one I'm poisoning?

And remember this dude, I've always tried to be cordial with you. I never like getting into internet fights. Our lovers quarrel only happened because you got butthurt over me talking shit about the prequels. I would personally think someone who seemingly spends almost all day of every day bitching about the sequels would have a little thicker skin, but...you're just not very Wizard, I guess.


----------



## Fang (Jun 1, 2018)

>lovers quarrel

Gay.

>also "all day bitching about the sequels"

Also false.


----------



## Aeternus (Jun 1, 2018)

I'll agree with another user here that if something wasn't good enough back then, it is not going to magically become better now. Sure some things might be more appreciated now but the quality still remains the same.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## hcheng02 (Jun 1, 2018)

My impression is that while the prequels weren't very good, in the fullness of time the fandom has come to appreciate that the prequels have two redeeming factors that the sequel trilogy does not have.

1. A strong centralized theme that firmly differentiates it from the original trilogy - basically while the original trilogy was a traditional Hero's Journey, the prequels center around the theme of the Fall of the Republic and the Rise of the Empire. As a result of this theme, the prequels by necessity have to have a different plot than the original trilogy. Furthermore, its a timeless theme that can be applicable both now and in the future. Even now the scene where the Senator Palpatine destroys the Republic to thunderous applause is remembered and discussed. Whereas the sequels seem to lack a strong theme and just focus on very recent social justice hashtag-worthy beats that often don't even gel with the overall plot - see the whole casino subplot in the Last Jedi. As a result, it makes the sequels seem somewhat dated once time has removed the context of those social justice references. Does anyone remember the Shrek series? They were really popular at first, but people eventually forgot about them because it relied so much on the pop culture references and memes of the day.

2. A unified artistic vision - Its pretty clear based on the two main sequels that the production has no real overall vision or storyline and is just making it up as they go along. The result are massive inconsistencies in story and tone between JJ Abrams and Rian Johnson that leaves the audience in a state of confusion and frustration. This also relates to point one. Part of the problem with the sequels is that it doesn't have a centralizing theme. So The Force Awakens becomes pretty much a rehash of A New Hope complete with a battle with Death Star 3.0, and then when fans complained about it being too much of a retread it overcompensated in The Last Jedi by blowing up all the expectations but at the expense of destroying any coherent plot, character development, or world building. Whereas the prequels - despite George Lucas having deficiencies in execution - had one consistent artistic vision that allows other artists to at least figure out his best intentions and then make something better from it like the animated Clone Wars and Rebels series.


----------



## Fang (Jun 2, 2018)

Eternal Dreamer said:


> I'll agree with another user here that if something wasn't good enough back then, it is not going to magically become better now. Sure some things might be more appreciated now but the quality still remains the same.



I'll just put myself out there. The Prequels were a mixed bag but there has never been a scale of hatred set at series of Star Wars films when they were concurrently still running like we're seeing with the Sequels. Maybe this is a consequence of alienating and shitting on both OTfags and PTfags but the fact remains Disney has essentially isolated themselves from 2/3rds of its franchise's followers with the ST. They are starting to see and look at the PT with rose-tinted glasses and comparing what was the standards of the heyday with the lowered ones of today and going "Shit, at least Lucas did this and this right."

But then again I'm a fan of both the PT and OT equally and generally dislike every Disney film save Rogue One for a variety of reasons both for technical aspects and the general flaws they have which are so severe their lows do not get nullified by their highs (or general lack of them).  But I'll still put forth that RotS/Episode III alone is still far and away superior to anything the Sequels have done. Biggest issues being with the ST:

- Chinese/Asian pandering that is going no where and essentially killing the brand in Asia while alienating the Japanese (who have been traditionally huge Star Wars followers)
- The cringy dialogue (particularly Poe's lines to Kylo at the start of TFA and the entire opening sequence of TLJ not too even tack on the shitty yo momma joke and god awful Marvell style one liner quips that sound retarded)
- Nonsensical disjointed and not remotely connected different sub-plots throughout TLJ (Canto Blight/Casino arc, lack of its relevance or any form of connection to Kylo/Snoke/Luke/Rey storyline)
- Lack of shared vision or continuity (Rian outright admitting or at least claiming there was no script linking 8 to 9 or his version he wrote with 7 that JJ did and JJ claiming contrary)
- Space Battles being very clearly castrated in the Sequels (glacially slow, painfully like watching molasses run down a slope, nonsense with the "bomber sequence" in the opening act of TLJ, low end scale of battle in terms of numbers or kinetic energy visually speaking)
- General lack of creativity by far (almost all the "Resistance" aka not-Rebels starfighters and starships are either the same as what was in the OT for the Rebel Alliance or only altered with a new paintjob (X-Wings with blue-stripes, A-Wings with blue-stripes, slightly altered horizontal oriented versions of B-Wings and for the Empire I mean First Order there's just regular Ties and the Ties that have a bit of red in them ignoring the Strikers from Rogue One) as well as no unique design in new creature or monsters with aliens
- Even costumes and outfits are lacking (almost every alien or person in the background or foreground is wearing the same ragged robes or clothing in the color of drab greys, browns, and what not; none of the colorful mix of outfits like in the PT where Lucas drew inspiration from Roman, Greek, Hindu, and Middle Eastern cultures)
- Characters like Maz Kanata who echoes the first point of a character made solely to pander to Chinese audiences (voiced by an Asian woman who almost ended up being a literal Yoda clone in the old storyboards for TFA who can use the Force and conveniently existed for thousands of years despite being a massive plot hole)

Just too many issues.

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## MartialHorror (Jun 2, 2018)

Fang said:


> >lovers quarrel
> 
> Gay.



lol...I got nothing. This was fun. 



hcheng02 said:


> My impression is that while the prequels weren't very good, in the fullness of time the fandom has come to appreciate that the prequels have two redeeming factors that the sequel trilogy does not have.
> 
> 1. A strong centralized theme that firmly differentiates it from the original trilogy - basically while the original trilogy was a traditional Hero's Journey, the prequels center around the theme of the Fall of the Republic and the Rise of the Empire. As a result of this theme, the prequels by necessity have to have a different plot than the original trilogy. Furthermore, its a timeless theme that can be applicable both now and in the future. Even now the scene where the Senator Palpatine destroys the Republic to thunderous applause is remembered and discussed. Whereas the sequels seem to lack a strong theme and just focus on very recent social justice hashtag-worthy beats that often don't even gel with the overall plot - see the whole casino subplot in the Last Jedi. As a result, it makes the sequels seem somewhat dated once time has removed the context of those social justice references. Does anyone remember the Shrek series? They were really popular at first, but people eventually forgot about them because it relied so much on the pop culture references and memes of the day.
> 
> 2. A unified artistic vision - Its pretty clear based on the two main sequels that the production has no real overall vision or storyline and is just making it up as they go along. The result are massive inconsistencies in story and tone between JJ Abrams and Rian Johnson that leaves the audience in a state of confusion and frustration. This also relates to point one. Part of the problem with the sequels is that it doesn't have a centralizing theme. So The Force Awakens becomes pretty much a rehash of A New Hope complete with a battle with Death Star 3.0, and then when fans complained about it being too much of a retread it overcompensated in The Last Jedi by blowing up all the expectations but at the expense of destroying any coherent plot, character development, or world building. Whereas the prequels - despite George Lucas having deficiencies in execution - had one consistent artistic vision that allows other artists to at least figure out his best intentions and then make something better from it like the animated Clone Wars and Rebels series.



I tried to positive rep you, but NF is being a bow legged whore for some reason. You are right that there is a lack of overarching vision in the NT. I mean, it's cool if Kennedy wants to give the directors creative freedom, but the franchise probably would've been a lot more stable if they just put an established director (like maybe JJ Abrams) in charge of the overarching story. As is, it sort of feels like there are too many cooks in the kitchen...even if said cooks are more refined than George Lucas.

Reactions: Friendly 1


----------



## Fang (Jun 2, 2018)

>JJ
>Rian Johnson
>refined



Also ultimately not even getting into how I personally view TFA or TLJ but:

- First is an uninspired safe repeat of ANH with aspects of TESB and ROTJ thrown in it; locale wise its also the same old ride; Not-Tatootine, not Yavin-4, not-Death Star, not-Hoth so it shows a genuine fear of going outside of what worked in the OT with Episode IV which is why KK and her bosses picked JJ whose not known for his creativity
- Second one is basically the same except worse with ripped segments of TESB and ROTJ in inverted order (throne room scene is unabashedly a rip from the RotJ finale with Luke, Vader and the Emperor, not-Hoth being Crait, major fleet battle (and I put air quotes for this)

They broke the franchise in two movies.

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Aeternus (Jun 2, 2018)

Fang said:


> I'll just put myself out there. The Prequels were a mixed bag but there has never been a scale of hatred set at series of Star Wars films when they were concurrently still running like we're seeing with the Sequels. Maybe this is a consequence of alienating and shitting on both OTfags and PTfags but the fact remains Disney has essentially isolated themselves from 2/3rds of its franchise's followers with the ST. They are starting to see and look at the PT with rose-tinted glasses and comparing what was the standards of the heyday with the lowered ones of today and going "Shit, at least Lucas did this and this right."
> 
> But then again I'm a fan of both the PT and OT equally and generally dislike every Disney film save Rogue One for a variety of reasons both for technical aspects and the general flaws they have which are so severe their lows do not get nullified by their highs (or general lack of them).  But I'll still put forth that RotS/Episode III alone is still far and away superior to anything the Sequels have done. Biggest issues being with the ST:
> 
> ...


I find myself agreeing with most of the things you mentioned and especially the highlighted part. That just felt like a complete waste of time.


----------



## Fang (Jun 2, 2018)

Eternal Dreamer said:


> I find myself agreeing with most of the things you mentioned and especially the highlighted part. That just felt like a complete waste of time.



I mean look at how hard TLJ tries to be the TESB of the Sequels. We have compelling reasons for being emotionally invested in Han, Leia, Chewie, Artoo, and C3PO aboard the Falcon being hounded by Vader's personal fleet of Star Destroyers and numerous Tie-Fighters through the Hoth asteroid belt or their arrival and Lando's betrayal of the group to Vader and the Empire on Cloud City. Which leads into Luke's visions of their lives being in danger and fucking up his training with Yoda that leads him into disaster.

There's fucking none of that with Rey.

The absurdity of the gag humor in TLJ also robs it of any build it up has. We have Finn and Rose getting into trouble and arrested because they "illegally parked on a beach". And I now remember the other stupid shit like the "free the space horses" angle which meant nothing except being another waste of 10-15 minutes of action to put in a backdoor pilot for Rian's unlikely spin-off trilogy. Christ, none of this at all has any bearing with Rey's training or connection to Luke or Kylo or the implications of Snoke and why he's obsessed with the Jedi and Sith.


----------



## MartialHorror (Jun 2, 2018)

Fang said:


> >JJ
> >Rian Johnson
> >refined
> 
> ...



George Lucas was not a very good director by the time he made "The Phantom Menace", whether it was him being rusty or if it was the editors of the OT who kept his shortcomings in line, I don't know. But the shot compositions, the framing, the often static camerawork, it's just not very good- especially in "The Phantom Menace". Just watch the Pod Racing scene, which not only goes on forever, but often seems to be repeating the same shots with the same angles. Once again, the actors sometimes are even looking at the wrong part of the screen. 

Abrams and Johnson, whether they're mediocre directors or bad storytellers, have a better grasp of actually shooting a scene and how to keeping the shot from becoming cluttered or repetitive. That is what I mean when I say 'refined'.


----------



## Fang (Jun 2, 2018)

MartialHorror said:


> Abrams and Johnson, whether they're mediocre directors or bad storytellers, have a better grasp of actually shooting a scene and how to keeping the shot from becoming cluttered or repetitive. That is what I mean when I say 'refined'.



They aren't.

JJ isn't known for anything besides Lost and he still ruined the ending of it and his films are basically Micheal Bay tier lite even before the uninspired TFA with its blandness came into existence. And Rian has next to fucking NOTHING. All he's done is Looper and the only reason that has wooed anyone in the film industry was because of its technical achievements, not its garbage story or everywhere else where its held as a steaming pile of shit.

You aren't selling me on this bullshit that Rian or Jar-Jar Abrams are refined in even directing films. Rian especially.


----------



## Unlosing Ranger (Jun 2, 2018)

MartialHorror said:


> Abrams and Johnson, whether they're mediocre directors or bad storytellers, have a better grasp of actually shooting a scene and how to keeping the shot from becoming cluttered or repetitive. That is what I mean when I say 'refined'.


Did Lucas rehash his OT twice for the prequels? No?
Well, I'm glad that discussion solved itself.

Reactions: Agree 2


----------



## Aeternus (Jun 2, 2018)

Fang said:


> I mean look at how hard TLJ tries to be the TESB of the Sequels. We have compelling reasons for being emotionally invested in Han, Leia, Chewie, Artoo, and C3PO aboard the Falcon being hounded by Vader's personal fleet of Star Destroyers and numerous Tie-Fighters through the Hoth asteroid belt or their arrival and Lando's betrayal of the group to Vader and the Empire on Cloud City. Which leads into Luke's visions of their lives being in danger and fucking up his training with Yoda that leads him into disaster.
> 
> There's fucking none of that with Rey.
> 
> The absurdity of the gag humor in TLJ also robs it of any build it up has. We have Finn and Rose getting into trouble and arrested because they "illegally parked on a beach". And I now remember the other stupid shit like the "free the space horses" angle which meant nothing except being another waste of 10-15 minutes of action to put in a backdoor pilot for Rian's unlikely spin-off trilogy. Christ, none of this at all has any bearing with Rey's training or connection to Luke or Kylo or the implications of Snoke and why he's obsessed with the Jedi and Sith.


The thing with Rey is that imo, she has no reason to be involved in all of this. She just feels like she is there. Not really connected.

I really wouldn't have minded that sub-plot that much if it was way shorter or if it had actually led to something. IIRC more people died because of that. It just didn't lead to anything.


----------



## MartialHorror (Jun 2, 2018)

Unlosing Ranger said:


> Did Lucas rehash his OT twice for the prequels? No?
> Well, I'm glad that discussion solved itself.



Well, you can make an argument of "It's poetry, so it rhymes". I'm not going to say that Lucas rehashed his movies, but he certainly did rehash some elements, as that...what even was it? The droid mothership thing? It was an obvious stand in for the Death Star. Then you have the crippling reliance on nostalgia, which both trilogies are guilty of. Why else would C3PO be in the prequels? Why Chewbacca? Abrams had his reasons for making what can definitely be described as a soft reboot, as he felt it was the only way to win back the crowd after the prequels divided them. Just as Lucas had his reasons for inter-cutting an intense life-or-death struggle between Qui Gon, Obi Wan and Darth Maul with goofy ass scenes of Jar Jar Binks doing hi-jinks...It doesn't mean their reasons panned out the way they wanted them to. 



Fang said:


> They aren't.
> 
> JJ isn't known for anything besides Lost and he still ruined the ending of it and his films are basically Micheal Bay tier lite even before the uninspired TFA with its blandness came into existence. And Rian has next to fucking NOTHING. All he's done is Looper and the only reason that has wooed anyone in the film industry was because of its technical achievements, not its garbage story or everywhere else where its held as a steaming pile of shit.
> 
> You aren't selling me on this bullshit that Rian or Jar-Jar Abrams are refined in even directing films. Rian especially.



I can't sell you anything because you've already made up your mind on all of this and there is nothing that can change it. You've already said in the past about how you hate corporations like Disney and I've heard your complaints about these directors. If you think they suck, you think they suck. The only thing I can comment on is that J.J Abrams was known for a lot of shit before "The Force Awakens". Everyone mistakenly thinks he directed "Cloverfield", he brought "Star Trek" back, "Super 8" was successful and he did a "Mission Impossible" movie. I also could be wrong about this, but I remember reading somewhere that Abrams really only was creatively involved in the pilot of "Lost" and not much else. 

Rian Johnson has been an indy darling for awhile, as all of his films have been critically successful. I haven't seen most of them myself, but I hear "May" and "Brick" were pretty good. I know you hate "Looper" and all, but most people don't agree with you and it grossed nearly $200,000,000...is that your definition of "NOTHING"?

Here is a question for you, Fang. Who do you think would've been a good director for Star Wars?


----------



## Unlosing Ranger (Jun 2, 2018)

MartialHorror said:


> Well, you can make an argument of "It's poetry, so it rhymes". I'm not going to say that Lucas rehashed his movies, but he certainly did rehash some elements, as that...what even was it? The droid mothership thing? It was an obvious stand in for the Death Star. Then you have the crippling reliance on nostalgia, which both trilogies are guilty of. Why else would C3PO be in the prequels? Why Chewbacca? Abrams had his reasons for making what can definitely be described as a soft reboot, as he felt it was the only way to win back the crowd after the prequels divided them. Just as Lucas had his reasons for inter-cutting an intense life-or-death struggle between Qui Gon, Obi Wan and Darth Maul with goofy ass scenes of Jar Jar Binks doing hi-jinks...It doesn't mean their reasons panned out the way they wanted them to.


>Things are similar to other things if I stretch it far enough.
Yeah, no one is buying it.


----------



## MartialHorror (Jun 2, 2018)

Unlosing Ranger said:


> >Things are similar to other things if I stretch it far enough.
> Yeah, no one is buying it.



You don't know what a soft reboot is, do you?


----------



## Kansas City Kipchaks Point Guard (Jun 2, 2018)

Fang said:


> They aren't.
> 
> JJ isn't known for anything besides Lost and he still ruined the ending of it and his films are basically Micheal Bay tier lite even before the uninspired TFA with its blandness came into existence. And Rian has next to fucking NOTHING. All he's done is Looper and the only reason that has wooed anyone in the film industry was because of its technical achievements, not its garbage story or everywhere else where its held as a steaming pile of shit.
> 
> You aren't selling me on this bullshit that Rian or Jar-Jar Abrams are refined in even directing films. Rian especially.


I would love to watch a Michael Bay SW  movie as long as he has a strong producer to keep him check. His Benghazi movie was great.


----------



## Fang (Jun 2, 2018)

MartialHorror said:


> Rian Johnson has been an indy darling for awhile,



So what? Also Brick is shit too.



> as all of his films have been critically successful.



Ignoring TLJ, commerically by mainstream Hollywood metric they aren't that successful outside of being in some noir sub-genre. So no not really.



> I haven't seen most of them myself, but I hear "May" and "Brick" were pretty good. I know you hate "Looper" and all, but most people don't agree with you and it grossed nearly $200,000,000...is that your definition of "NOTHING"?



I said nothing about Looper's gross. I said it was a terrible film outside of its technical achievements. Work on your reading comprehension.



> Here is a question for you, Fang. Who do you think would've been a good director for Star Wars?



Anyone with vision, creativity, and a spine not to cowtow to corporate pressure or being spineless yes-men or dipshits like Spielberg, Abrams, Johnson, or Michael Bay. Cameron possibly.


----------



## Fang (Jun 2, 2018)

The Kamal Haasan Crazy Hour said:


> I would love to watch a Michael Bay SW  movie as long as he has a strong producer to keep him check. His Benghazi movie was great.



>BayWars

God please no. Lin, Johnston, the Russo Brothers, anyone is valid but this fucker.


----------



## Aeternus (Jun 2, 2018)

Tbh, if it was just for the lols, I wouldn't kind seeing SW being made by Bay. The reactions would be amazing


----------



## Kansas City Kipchaks Point Guard (Jun 2, 2018)

Eternal Dreamer said:


> Tbh, if it was just for the lols, I wouldn't kind seeing SW being made by Bay. The reactions would be amazing


Look at Benghazi? Very restrained well made action movie.




Fang said:


> >BayWars
> 
> God please no. Lin, Johnston, the Russo Brothers, anyone is valid but this fucker.



Why is he inherently invalid? H already proved that he can restrain himself once.


----------



## Aeternus (Jun 2, 2018)

Never heard of that movie tbh. But anyway, I am not judging his skills and whether a SW movie by him would be good or not. There are some of his older movies like the Armageddon for example, that I liked. Regardless of the result, there would be reactions anyway. That I would like to see.


----------



## MartialHorror (Jun 2, 2018)

Fang said:


> I said nothing about Looper's gross. I said it was a terrible film outside of its technical achievements. Work on your reading comprehension.



You said "next to NOTHING". The guy made movies that were critically acclaimed and a box office hit prior to "TLJ". Either you don't understand what that means, you're lying or you weren't aware of his filmography, although the latter can't be true because we've been through this before.



> Anyone with vision, creativity, and a spine not to cowtow to corporate pressure or being spineless yes-men or dipshits like Spielberg, Abrams, Johnson, or Michael Bay. Cameron possibly.



Well this was a disappointingly boring answer. Do you seriously not know of any other directors, other than the one who's arguably too big for Star Wars?


----------



## MartialHorror (Jun 2, 2018)

Eternal Dreamer said:


> Never heard of that movie tbh. But anyway, I am not judging his skills and whether a SW movie by him would be good or not. There are some of his older movies like the Armageddon for example, that I liked. Regardless of the result, there would be reactions anyway. That I would like to see.



I think Bay Wars would be pretty funny too, albeit more because of Fang's probably reaction. In fact, how about they just put the prequels in the vault and remake them, with Zack Snyder doing Episode 1, M. Night Shyamalan doing Episode 2 and...let's just let Kennedy make her directorial debut with Episode 3. They can also be called the 'Special Editions'.


----------



## Mider T (Jun 2, 2018)

TPM was great!  I thought so when it was first released and I think so now, I still remember the promotion for toys and such that it had.

Reactions: Disagree 1


----------



## Fang (Jun 2, 2018)

MartialHorror said:


> You said "next to NOTHING". The guy made movies that were critically acclaimed and a box office hit prior to "TLJ". Either you don't understand what that means, you're lying or you weren't aware of his filmography, although the latter can't be true because we've been through this before.



Wrong. Absolutely and utterly, and my words are still correct, Rian is relatively a nobody. Looper is terrible, Brick sucked, and everything else is you praising him for being not well known. He has no accolades or accomplishments that puts him as someone relevant.

"More refined than George Lucas"

My ass.



> Well this was a disappointingly boring answer. Do you seriously not know of any other directors, other than the one who's arguably too big for Star Wars?



"Unless your picks are indie ^ (not the meaning of the word "respect".) who are outside of the normal mainstream, I'm going to be deliberately contrarian."

Boring.


----------



## Aeternus (Jun 2, 2018)

MartialHorror said:


> Zack Snyder


Actually that I would like to see. If there is someone to keep him in check, I think the result could be interesting.


----------



## dr_shadow (Jun 2, 2018)

Eee.... nowsa!


----------



## ~Gesy~ (Jun 2, 2018)

I wouldn't say better,  but the Star Wars franchise actually had an identity with Lucas...doesn't seem like the current people who are helming the franchise know what they're doing.

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Aeternus (Jun 2, 2018)

True, curious to see how Abrams is going to handle the stuff RJ did in the TLJ.


----------



## RAGING BONER (Jun 2, 2018)

I haven't read the thread but pretty sure it's all been said already...

But for its many flaws (wooden acting, overuse of nascent CGi and questionable characters etc); the prequels had a unifying vision and a coherent story. 
Many things could have been done to improve it obviously...but you could see that had Lucas worked with people who could "_curb his enthusiasm_" (like the people who dared tell him "no" while making the OT) it could've have been something just as great as those were.

HOWEVER.  

No movie, _not even the Star Wars holiday special_, has so thoroughly killed my interest in the future of Star Wars as what that shit tier Writer/Director Rian Johnson did with The Last Jedi. 

The movie has *no* redeeming qualities outside from being "pretty" to look at.

From the opening scene to the time the credits roll there is NOTHING of value; nothing resembling a plot that makes sense, no tension, no compelling character growth and WORST OF ALL:_ it didn't leave me wanting more_. 

An absolute CRIME when it comes to cinema like this...it sucked all enthusiasm i had for the franchise.

Star Wars is finished. 

JJ doesn't have the skill to repair the travesty that RJ has wrought.

And Kathleen Kennedy needs to fuck off and go back to number crunching as opposed to thinking she can rise to the level of her betters.

Bitch, you will never be a Spielberg or a Lucas and you sure as hell will never be a franchise head on the level of Kevin Feige.

Feige took C-list nobody heroes and made something no one has ever done in cinema history. 

Kennedy, otoh took one of the most beloved and recognizable franchises in modern history and has driven into the ground. 
She needs to go away forever.

Reactions: Like 5


----------



## Fang (Jun 2, 2018)

Kennedy will probably "retire" either during or after IX comes out. I don't think Bob Igor is going to let her stay with the debacles of TLJ and Solo. Much less corresponding to the fact her public appearances and on-screen interviews with the press and media journalists are down to zero in the last 4-5 months.

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Suigetsu (Jun 2, 2018)

~Gesy~ said:


> I wouldn't say better,  but the Star Wars franchise actually had an identity with Lucas...doesn't seem like the current people who are helming the franchise know what they're doing.


They are more concentrated on self projecting and their feminist agenda than on doing an actual good job.


----------



## MartialHorror (Jun 2, 2018)

Fang said:


> Wrong. Absolutely and utterly, and my words are still correct, Rian is relatively a nobody. Looper is terrible, Brick sucked, and everything else is you praising him for being not well known. He has no accolades or accomplishments that puts him as someone relevant.
> 
> "More refined than George Lucas"
> 
> ...



If making a $200,000,000 grossing blockbuster makes you a nobody, then who is a somebody? That was part of why I wanted to see who you could select to direct Star Wars, as your standards are stupidely high. No wonder you have a chip on your shoulder, as apparently the only director who isn't a 'nobody' or a 'dipshit' is a guy who was driven into retirement by a fanbase that you claim to represent.


----------



## Ghost_of_Gashir (Jun 2, 2018)

Johnson is nothing without Joseph Gordon-Levitt.


----------



## ~Gesy~ (Jun 2, 2018)

Neither am I


----------



## MartialHorror (Jun 2, 2018)

I don't know who would be a good Star Wars director, to be honest. I would be interested in a Spielberg SW flick, but I would be more interested if it was back in the 1980's. The problem with a lot of the blockbuster directors, whether it's Snyder, Whedon, the Russos, Emmerich or Bay is that I feel like they would make Star Wars into their own kinds of movies and I don't think that would translate well into this franchise...or they just aren't very good directors. I like Joss Whedon and all, but his style of dialogue would seem odd in a Star Wars flick... Snyder would probably have a convoluted story mixed in with a cartoonish visual style. Bay would jack up the sexiness and explosions. Emmerich would have a lot of nice CGI effects, but nothing else...and this isn't even going into the fact that I don't think Snyder, Emmerich or Bay are especially good directors.

I thought "Jurassic World" was weak, so felt nothing when Colin Treverrow backed out. Josh Trank did "Fantastic Four". I like J.J Abrams, but he's yet to do anything that isn't just harmless, fluffy action. While hiring him to do "Star Wars" makes some sense in that he more or less made a "Star Wars" movie and called it "Star Trek", but it was a safe option that neither concerned or excited me. I loved "Looper", so was intrigued when Johnson was hired, but whether I like "TLJ" or not, he probably did damage the brand and it seems like he wanted to almost hijack the trilogy for himself. Gareth Edwards also didn't seem like a bad choice, but "Godzilla" was a little underwhelming, so I wasn't excited either.

James Cameron has too much of an ego to work on someone else's property, Peter Jackson still hasn't recovered from "The Hobbit"...or "The Lovely Bones"...Has he done an exceptional film since Lotr? Matthew Vaughn is a big 'maybe', but "Kingsman 2" disappointed a lot of people.

I understand why studios like going for directors of indy films or just smaller projects in general, but it's always a risk and you never know whose talents will pay off. Taika Waititi is a success story, whereas Josh Trank was not. But speculating is difficult because even though you might think that the direction of a movie is great, it doesn't necessarily mean they can comfortably handle big budgeted affairs (just ask Ava DuVernay).

If I could settle on one person, it might be Guilermo del Toro, but even that might be a predictable choice and...I'm like the only person in the world who was underwhelmed by "Pacific Rim", so...we ultimately will only know the good ones after they've turned in a good movie.


----------



## ~Gesy~ (Jun 2, 2018)

MartialHorror said:


> even that might be a predictable choice and...I'm like the only person in the world who was underwhelmed by "Pacific Rim",


A lot of people were underwhelmed by Pacific Rim.

Reactions: Agree 2


----------



## Fang (Jun 2, 2018)

MartialHorror said:


> If making a $200,000,000 grossing blockbuster makes you a nobody, then who is a somebody? That was part of why I wanted to see who you could select to direct Star Wars, as your standards are stupidely high. No wonder you have a chip on your shoulder, as apparently the only director who isn't a 'nobody' or a 'dipshit' is a guy who was driven into retirement by a fanbase that you claim to represent.



>gigantic non-sequitur

"They only count if their underground to me."

I also mentioned the Russo brothers and Lin of the F&F fame but you ignored those earlier who are hardly triple A directors but still have a lot of respect of guys like Lucas, Howard, and so on. You are selective in your blindness I guess.


----------



## Crimson Dragoon (Jun 2, 2018)

Fang said:


> Anyone with vision, creativity, and a spine not to cowtow to corporate pressure or being spineless yes-men or dipshits like Spielberg, Abrams, Johnson, or Michael Bay. Cameron possibly.



or Lucas with a bunch of people willing to say "no George, that's fucking stupid" when necessary 

it's the simplest answer

Reactions: Agree 2


----------



## MartialHorror (Jun 2, 2018)

Fang said:


> >gigantic non-sequitur
> 
> "They only count if their underground to me."
> 
> I also mentioned the Russo brothers and Lin of the F&F fame but you ignored those earlier who are hardly triple A directors but still have a lot of respect of guys like Lucas, Howard, and so on. You are selective in your blindness I guess.



I asked a question, you answered with Cameron, not them. I don't memorize all of your past posts. I barely even retain your present ones. 

The Russo brothers would probably good choices though. Not sure about Lin.


----------



## MartialHorror (Jun 2, 2018)

Crimson Dragoon said:


> or Lucas with a bunch of people willing to say "no George, that's fucking stupid" when necessary
> 
> it's the simplest answer



Assuming Lucas doesn't just say "You're fired". Or just override them like he did with "Return of the Jedi".


----------



## Gilgamesh (Jun 3, 2018)

It's made people appreciative of them and George more imo.

Reactions: Agree 2


----------



## Fang (Jun 3, 2018)

Crimson Dragoon said:


> or Lucas with a bunch of people willing to say "no George, that's fucking stupid" when necessary
> 
> it's the simplest answer



Yep.




MartialHorror said:


> I asked a question, you answered with Cameron, not them. I don't memorize all of your past posts. I barely even retain your present ones.
> 
> The Russo brothers would probably good choices though. Not sure about Lin.



So you have memory problems too? That explains a lot of why you repeat yourself so often or can't remember anything I say..


----------



## MartialHorror (Jun 3, 2018)

Fang said:


> Yep.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



When I post, I do so because it's fun, not because I'm on any kind of crusade. I enjoy discussing film, but I often don't pay attention to whom I'm responding to, much less retain most of what they say over a long period a time. Mock me for it all you want, but when trying to talk with people who become mean spirited, petty and immature over some silly movies, it's easier to just flush it all away after the topic either ends or changes. I just don't care enough to retain it.


----------



## Sennin of Hardwork (Jun 3, 2018)

I don't think so. For me it is more about how similarly this is to when the new hot gf dumps/disappoints you (NT) and you go crawling back to your ex. (PT) It is pure reaction.

We could make a list of all the things that everyone has hated and still does about the prequels from the overuse of too many special effects and CGI, the over the top choreographed lightsaber battles, Jar Jar Binks and the Gungans, pod racing, the romance between Padme and Anakin and the writing for Anakin, Hayden Christensen's acting back then, sand, the pace of the movies and things that the fans didn't sign up to see like the politics in Corruscant or that video that the OP posted where Ewan McGregor appeared to be doing an excellent job at not laughing at that line, etc and it would all still pale to the current movies because...IDK really. 

Nothing seems to ever be enough.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Fang (Jun 3, 2018)

MartialHorror said:


> *snip*



You get that reaction from me because you often say the same nonsense over, that simple. Stop being a robot.




Sennin of Hardwork said:


> I don't think so. For me it is more about how similarly this is to when the new hot gf dumps/disappoints you (NT) and you go crawling back to your ex. (PT) It is pure reaction.
> 
> We could make a list of all the things that everyone has hated and still does about the prequels from the overuse of too many special effects and CGI, the over the top choreographed lightsaber battles, Jar Jar Binks and the Gungans, pod racing, the romance between Padme and Anakin and the writing for Anakin, Hayden Christensen's acting back then, sand, the pace of the movies and things that the fans didn't sign up to see like the politics in Corruscant or that video that the OP posted where Ewan McGregor appeared to be doing an excellent job at not laughing at that line, etc and it would all still pale to the current movies because...IDK really.
> 
> Nothing seems to ever be enough.



Maybe true but still better than the Sequels that not only suffer from the same problems but have it far worse:

>Jar-Jar Binks
Rose & Finn unironically.
>over the top choreographed lightsaber battles
This is nonsense tbh. Also just gonna keep bringing up the shit that is the TLJ throne room fight.
>Pod racing
Since when has anyone hated the Pod Race scene? The shit was so popular it had two massively successful games as a result. I don't buy this at all.
>writing for Anakin
writing for Rey, Poe, Luke, and Han
>Hayden Christensen's acting back then
Daisey Ridley's acting back then and now or Del Toro's entire stupid character as the stammering slicer with some kind of speech impediment. Also Fisher's performance in TFA was god awful for a veteran actor. I guess cocaine really is a hell of a drug. Or heroin, Whatever same shit.
>pointless shit like repeating Finn's arc with Rose in TLJ or the cancer of Canto Blight which served no purpose story wise or mechanically as a side-plot
Also:
>Sequels can't even find their own identity because their either mired in half way shoving their heads up the Original's ass for nostalgia wank or stabbing them in the back with a knife while promising they aren't a murder

I can go on. Probably though the biggest fuck you to the Sequel Trilogy I have is the crippling lack of creativity or originality that is inherently absent from it. No attempt to go in a different direction, really nothing visually stunning or unique like the locales in in the Prequels at all; which dwarf even what the Original Trilogy did in that regard; Utapu, Mustafar, Kamino, Geonosis, Coruscant, Felucia, Mygeeto, Pol Massa, and so on with my repeat with the aliens and starships too.

Also corny dialogue up the ass like Rose's final line to Finn before she passes out being top cheese level of cringe inducing or even almost all of Finn's quips in TFA or Poe's lines and Holdo's bullshit "GODSNEEZEREBELS" clincher.

So let me put it this way:

PT is the hot girlfriend with a lot of mental issues.
ST is the average looking girlfriend who looks hotter when you first meet her but then realize how fucking disgusting she is once you get to know her past the superficiality (TFA & R1) and see her real rotten core (TLJ & Solo).

Reactions: Winner 1


----------



## Aeternus (Jun 3, 2018)

Fang said:


> >Pod racing
> Since when has anyone hated the Pod Race scene? The shit was so popular it had two massively successful games as a result. I don't buy this at all.


Don't remember hating it back then but man, it sure went on for too long. It felt like a movie within a movie.


----------



## Fang (Jun 3, 2018)

Eternal Dreamer said:


> Don't remember hating it back then but man, it sure went on for too long. It felt like a movie within a movie.



I mean it did go a little long but I still don't get anyone being bored of it. Selbuba made that entire arc in TPM entertaining.


----------



## Aeternus (Jun 3, 2018)

Fang said:


> I mean it did go a little long but I still don't get anyone being bored of it. Selbuba made that entire arc in TPM entertaining.


Nah, don't remember being bored by it. That's for sure. That said, I haven't watched any of the prequels in quite some time, so I don't know what I would think of them now.


----------



## Fang (Jun 3, 2018)

Eternal Dreamer said:


> Nah, don't remember being bored by it. That's for sure. That said, I haven't watched any of the prequels in quite some time, so I don't know what I would think of them now.



Like I said in another thread, I watch the OT and PT films seasonally. I can see flaws and problems but I generally just get comfy and pop some popcorn. A lot of things hold up in them, some things don't. Its on the person who looks at it I guess.

But I can guarantee you this, it sure as hell doesn't get the indication of being a "limited" universe like the ST do. That most definitely not a failing.


----------



## Catalyst75 (Jun 3, 2018)

Eternal Dreamer said:


> The thing with Rey is that imo, she has no reason to be involved in all of this. She just feels like she is there. Not really connected.



Anakin was involved less by choice and more by the fact everyone around him believed he was the "Chosen One", a belief the Jedi held all the way up to "Revenge of the Sith".  Luke's choice to become involved was because he wanted to live up to the legacy of his Jedi father, and avenge him and his family who died because of the Empire.  

While I do understand why people would have been more comfortable with Rey having a "reason" to be involved because of who her parents may have been, I understand it did not need to be a necessity, and that "The Force Awakens" never outright stated Rey's parents were important.  In fact, Maz's words indicated the opposite, to me. 

_Choosing_ to become involved, even if you have no ulterior connection to things as a whole, is in itself a reason.  Just as Finn did, she _found _her own reason for becoming involved.

Reactions: Dislike 2


----------



## ClandestineSchemer (Jun 3, 2018)

Phantom menace gave us the duel of fates music.
Your argument is invalid.


----------



## Magnum Miracles (Jun 3, 2018)

Well, the prequel series felt like a universe that was alive. As other posters have stated, we had tons of creative looking aliens running around. Meanwhile, it seems the new Star Wars is a rehash of the OT with an even smaller universe. Then there's Kylo and Rey who are lame characters, especially Rey. At least Kylo is sort of funny with his childish temper tantrums. Rey is just kinda there.

But the prequels still suck. Cheesy af dialogue for 90 percent of Anakin's scenes, characters like Mace Windu wasted, etc. That said though, Kenobi and Anakin's fight at the end of RotS is amazing. Dialogue and choreography were on point.

But what the hell do I know? I don't really care for the franchise, and my favorite Star Wars movie, Rogue One, had everyone killed by the end of it.

EDIT: I  should also state I have yet to see the Last Jedi.


----------



## Lucaniel (Jun 3, 2018)

the prequels are filmmaking abortions which have some kind of glaring flaw in almost every basic aspect of what you'd use to rate a movie - plotting, dialogue, performance, direction, cinematography, etc.

whether the sequels are mediocre or decent is up for debate, but they are absolutely better than the prequels, just by virtue of basic competence in writing, directing, performance, etc. they deliberately play it safe, and this works out a lot better than the garbage prequels. anyone disputing this for fatuous reasons like "the sequels ruined luke!" or "the prequels had new stuff" or whatever is dumb as shit.

some contrarians love to pretend that really weird, shitty movies like batman vs. superman are better than safe, mediocre movies like ant-man because "they take risks" or something, but i'm a fundamentals guy. achieve a minimum standard of competence or fuck off

Reactions: Agree 1 | Funny 1 | Dislike 1


----------



## Fang (Jun 3, 2018)

"Sequels, decent and up for debate"

Laughable.

Reactions: Agree 2 | Old 1


----------



## MartialHorror (Jun 3, 2018)

Fang said:


> "Sequels, decent and up for debate"
> 
> Laughable.



Almost as funny as claiming that "The Phantom Menace" is good.

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Fang (Jun 3, 2018)

MartialHorror said:


> Almost as funny as claiming that "The Phantom Menace" is good.



Almost as funny as your terrible posts or the fact I never said TPM was good, just better than anything Disney put out.

Two Jar-Jars are worse than one.


----------



## RAGING BONER (Jun 3, 2018)

Lucaniel said:


> *competence in writing*



EL-OH-EL :AncientCthulluRyoma


if RJ had simply directed and handed over the writing duties to someone with _actual competence_ in the craft we wouldn't even be having these inane discussions.

he was either too enamored by Carrie Fisher's charm, tweaking on her cocaine or both to realize the abortion they put to script. 
Either way, the result was the same: a garbage story unworthy of the budget used to bring it to the screen.

like a anonymous guy from China once said during a post screening interview (regarding TLJ): "_They must think the audience are idiots_."

Reactions: Agree 2


----------



## MartialHorror (Jun 3, 2018)

Fang said:


> Almost as funny as your terrible posts or the fact I never said TPM was good, just better than anything Disney put out.
> 
> Two Jar-Jars are worse than one.



Fang, prowler of Konoha theater, all day, every day. But I'm glad I amuse you almost as much as you amuse me.


----------



## Fang (Jun 3, 2018)

Also RJ's weird fucking fetish with red white color schemes is heinous and his shit with this "noir" crap is overblown; from the cover art to the shit on Not-Hoth with the Not-Snow speeders

"Muh salt"

Fucking everyone who thinks this is good shit has their heads collectively up their asses and are locked in some self-regulating fart-box

Sequels are dogshits; TFA is a soulless rehash of ANH and TLJ is a crappy attempt at deconstruction while making everything worse that makes it predecessors look like masterpieces despite the already low standards. Fuck this noise.


----------



## Fang (Jun 3, 2018)

MartialHorror said:


> *didn't read*



K.


----------



## MartialHorror (Jun 3, 2018)

Fang said:


> Also RJ's weird fucking fetish with red white color schemes is heinous and his shit with this "noir" crap is overblown; from the cover art to the shit on Not-Hoth with the Not-Snow speeders
> 
> "Muh salt"
> 
> ...



You really want to have hatesex with Rian Johnson, don't you?


----------



## Fang (Jun 3, 2018)

MartialHorror said:


> Gay shit literally



Don't project your gay fantasies on me, son.


----------



## MartialHorror (Jun 3, 2018)

Fang said:


> Don't project your gay fantasies on me, son.



What else can I do? All I see whenever you post is



Fang said:


> I love the prequels, but am really insecure about this, so ramp up the aggression to overcompensate. RAWR.



Edit: Wait, WHAT THE FUCK DID I JUST INSINUATE ABOUT MYSELF!? NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! lol


----------



## Fang (Jun 3, 2018)

MartialHorror said:


> What else can I do?



Stop being gay, I know its a choice you made.



> All I see whenever you post is



That's just your gay fantasies acting out. You're a triggered over the fact you've been dominated in every time you try to get one over on me. Stay mad, doggy.


----------



## MartialHorror (Jun 3, 2018)

Fang said:


> Stop being gay, I know its a choice you made.
> 
> 
> 
> That's just your gay fantasies acting out. You're a triggered over the fact you've been dominated in every time you try to get one over on me. Stay mad, doggy.



So what we can take away from all of this is...You had a mental image of you dominating me in a gay fashion? I'm flattered, bro, but you're not my type.

Reactions: Old 1


----------



## MartialHorror (Jun 3, 2018)

Fang said:


> I love the prequels, but am really insecure about this, so ramp up the aggression to overcompensate. RAWR. Also, I might also be a little insecure about my sexuality.



Hey, you finally posted something a little different! Yay!

Reactions: Dislike 1


----------



## ClandestineSchemer (Jun 3, 2018)

You guys should get a room.


----------



## MartialHorror (Jun 3, 2018)

ClandestineSchemer said:


> You guys should get a room.



*Whispers* You can tell he likes me because he responds to everything I say. Fang is clearly...a tsundere.

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## Fang (Jun 3, 2018)

Keeping tell yourself that, cupcake.


----------



## MartialHorror (Jun 3, 2018)

Fang said:


> Keeping tell yourself that, B-Baka!.



lol, desperate for the last word, eh?

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## ~Gesy~ (Jun 3, 2018)

ClandestineSchemer said:


> You guys should get a room.


Still a better couple than Rey and Kylo.


----------



## Fang (Jun 3, 2018)

~Gesy~ said:


> Still a better couple than Rey and Kylo.



Even dogshit and a doggie pile is a better couple than those two.


----------



## MartialHorror (Jun 4, 2018)

Fang said:


> Even dogshit and a doggie pile is a better couple than those two.



So...MHxFang > ReyxKylo...


----------



## RAGING BONER (Jun 4, 2018)

Fang said:


> Even dogshit and a doggie pile is a better couple than those two.





~Gesy~ said:


> Still a better couple than Rey and Kylo.



good god; and when _those_ few scenes were probably the most compelling in the whole movie...


ffs this was a goddam train wreck from beginning to end. 
TLJ is the only movie I've had to watch twice just to make sure I wasn't trapped in some sort of waking nightmare.


----------



## Fang (Jun 4, 2018)

RAGING BONER said:


> good god; and when _those_ few scenes were probably the most compelling in the whole movie...
> 
> 
> ffs this was a goddam train wreck from beginning to end.
> TLJ is the only movie I've had to watch twice just to make sure I wasn't trapped in some sort of waking nightmare.



Remember, Luke Skywalker died because of Rose preventing Finn from doing something memorable and this was to save 10 hobo Resistance fighters and Leia. Rian really subverted expectations there.

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## RAGING BONER (Jun 4, 2018)

Fang said:


> Remember, Luke Skywalker died because of Rose preventing Finn from doing something memorable and this was to save 10 hobo Resistance fighters and Leia. Rian really subverted expectations there.


B-but you're missing the point!

she was fighting for what she_ loved _(the space janitor she met the day before); you can't blame her for wanting to sacrifice everyone in order to teach him that lesson. DUH.


----------



## Fang (Jun 4, 2018)

RAGING BONER said:


> B-but you're missing the point!
> 
> she was fighting for what she_ loved _(the space janitor she met the day before); you can't blame her for wanting to sacrifice everyone in order to teach him that lesson. DUH.



I still don't get how Finn managed to drag her bloated self like 300 meters across open flat territory where everyone in the FO could've blown them out. Also don't forget Jar-Jar #3, Hux in the entirety of TLJ being an object of slapstick humor.


----------



## Aeternus (Jun 4, 2018)

Fang said:


> Remember, Luke Skywalker died because of Rose preventing Finn from doing something memorable and this was to save 10 hobo Resistance fighters and Leia. Rian really subverted expectations there.


Man, Rose stopping Finn felt so anticlimactic. Finn was finally about to have him moment since he didn't really do anything else noteworthy in the movie but no, Rose had to stop him. Not to mention that again that really accomplish anything.


----------



## ClandestineSchemer (Jun 4, 2018)

Finn really had no purpose in this film.
It was painfully obvious they just put in there the bare minimum for him to do.
His casino subplot was forced as fuck.

Hell, his main motivation is to leave and live in peace somewhere.
Its his penis, that is keeping him among the rebels due to Rey.

I think he would be happiest chilling with Luke on that planet, just minding his own business.


----------



## Shiba D. Inu (Jun 4, 2018)

Reylo ftw !


----------



## Ghost_of_Gashir (Jun 4, 2018)

Based on how he treated all the POC in the movie, I can't come to any other conclusion than the fact Rian Johnson is a racist.


----------



## Aeternus (Jun 4, 2018)

Shiba D. Inu said:


> Reylo ftw !


I just don't see it.


----------



## Shiba D. Inu (Jun 4, 2018)

Eternal Dreamer said:


> I just don't see it.


abs

chest


----------



## Aeternus (Jun 4, 2018)

Shiba D. Inu said:


> abs
> 
> chest


Meh.

Reactions: Friendly 1


----------



## Unlosing Ranger (Jun 4, 2018)

MartialHorror said:


> If making a $200,000,000 grossing blockbuster makes you a nobody, then who is a somebody? That was part of why I wanted to see who you could select to direct Star Wars, as your standards are stupidely high. No wonder you have a chip on your shoulder, as apparently the only director who isn't a 'nobody' or a 'dipshit' is a guy who was driven into retirement by a fanbase that you claim to represent.


A new hope only had a budget of 11 million. With inflation around it's around 40 million.
The fact that someone wasted 200 million and came up with nothing is embarrassing even the phantom menace only had a budget of 115 million. In fact all 3 prequels roughly had that budget.
The budgets for all of the sequels are basically double and triple that and they come out as worse movies for it. That's disgusting.
The franchise has no direction or plot.


----------



## Catalyst75 (Jun 4, 2018)

Unlosing Ranger said:


> The fact that someone wasted 200 million and came up with nothing is embarrassing even the phantom menace only had a budget of 115 million. In fact all 3 prequels roughly had that budget.



You're ignoring the fact that a good portion of that budget was dedicated *to re-shooting the film* from the apparent train-wreck the original director made, and you are ignoring the changes to technology available between decades that results in more modern films having higher budgets than films from decades back with different technology.



Unlosing Ranger said:


> The franchise has no direction or plot.



The new continuity is only four years old right now, so I imagine you only say this because you despise the fact Legends is no longer the "official canon" (even though _it never was_, being below both the films and the "Clone Wars" TV Show as "canon"), and probably because you cannot claim Star Wars is now an "exclusive club for _true fans_", to put it as euphemistically as I can.

Yes, two directors and writers working on the story had distinct ideas from one another on which direction the story should go, but the accusations of "no direction or plot" only come from people who are upset that _their ideas and theories _were not confirmed.


----------



## Unlosing Ranger (Jun 4, 2018)

Catalyst75 said:


> You're ignoring the fact that a good portion of that budget was dedicated *to re-shooting the film* from the apparent train-wreck the original director made, and you are ignoring the changes to technology available between decades that results in more modern films having higher budgets than films from decades back with different technology.


Yawn. It doesn't matter if they re-shoot the film. That's something that happens often enough for parts of a movie.
In addition if they hire someone incompetent that's on them. Though we'll never know if it was an actual trainwreck or not will we?


> The new continuity is only four years old right now


Yeah, and it added nothing besides what we already know in those 4 years. You're an apologist.


> _their ideas and theories _were not confirmed.


Not even that. It's that nothing happened in the last jedi. Literally, nothing.
The "subvert muh expectations" argument is incredibly shallow and apologetic.


----------



## Ghost_of_Gashir (Jun 4, 2018)

In those four years, the new Star Wars universe progressed about ten days.


----------



## Lucaniel (Jun 4, 2018)

Eternal Dreamer said:


> Man, Rose stopping Finn felt so anticlimactic. Finn was finally about to have him moment since he didn't really do anything else noteworthy in the movie but no, Rose had to stop him. Not to mention that again that really accomplish anything.


yeah, rose sucks




anyway real talk anyone who thinks the prequels are actually good movies should be shot in the head. just one man's opinion


----------



## Kansas City Kipchaks Point Guard (Jun 4, 2018)

Catalyst75 said:


> Yes, two directors and writers working on the story had distinct ideas from one another on which direction the story should go, but the accusations of "no direction or plot" only come from people who are upset that _their ideas and theories _were not confirmed.




TLJ offered no direction. Only nihilism.


----------



## Imagine (Jun 4, 2018)

The prequels are bad, so is the Nu Trilogy. The prequels being bad first doesn't excuse the Nu Trilogy and the Nu Trilogy being more competent (to a degree they're the basic white bitch of sci-fi action at this point) than the Prequels doesn't mean they should be awarded for such basic competency.

I can shit talk the Nu Trilogy without having to apologize for the Prequels and vice-versa. 

Maybe the Nu Trilogy has made some long for Lucas' writing again, especially considering the Nu movies are basically becoming MCU movies with some PC ideologies, but I'm good. Lucas needs backup and a lot of it.

Shelve the franchise tbh tbf.

Reactions: Old 1


----------



## Shiba D. Inu (Jun 4, 2018)

Imagine said:


> becoming MCU movies


lol they _wish_





MCU (phase 3) is the pinnacle

Reactions: Old 1


----------



## MartialHorror (Jun 4, 2018)

Unlosing Ranger said:


> A new hope only had a budget of 11 million. With inflation around it's around 40 million.
> The fact that someone wasted 200 million and came up with nothing is embarrassing even the phantom menace only had a budget of 115 million. In fact all 3 prequels roughly had that budget.
> The budgets for all of the sequels are basically double and triple that and they come out as worse movies for it. That's disgusting.
> The franchise has no direction or plot.



Kind of a pointless point because "Star Wars" was considered a mostly budgeted movie in its day. Now there is no disputing how impressive that is, but that is why the original is a classic, and the sequels are not...something even sequel fans will acknowledge. But either way, we're not comparing the OT to the NT. We're comparing the PT with the NT. 

And these days, what doesn't cost $200,000,000. CGI has gotten really expensive.


----------



## Ennoea (Jun 4, 2018)

Yeah most of the production budget goes in to cgi. But it's not that CGI is expensive. It's just film makers are lazy and thus everything is computer generated. So the costs soar astronomically. Look at end credits for reason. The amount of people employed by these films is nuts.


----------



## Rasendori (Jun 4, 2018)

Last Jedi is where the backlash comes from. Rogue One did fine, and there's not enough bad reviews to justify the box office failings.

You can't shit on a fandom and expect things to be cool. And by that I mean making Luke a shitty character - People saying it's because of progressive writing are silly. ALL of Disney is pro diversity and their Marvel movies are doing fine.


----------



## Unlosing Ranger (Jun 4, 2018)

MartialHorror said:


> Kind of a pointless point because "Star Wars" was considered a mostly budgeted movie in its day. Now there is no disputing how impressive that is, but that is why the original is a classic, and the sequels are not...something even sequel fans will acknowledge. But either way, we're not comparing the OT to the NT. We're comparing the PT with the NT.


The NT is a ripoff of the OT, so we are. That's why the costs matter. Saying "B-But cgi is expensive" Isn't a excuse to have a overly budgeted movie. The budget for a recent movie that is entirely computer animated is roughly 175- 200 million. We're talking prime pixar levels of animation the whole way though.


----------



## MartialHorror (Jun 4, 2018)

Unlosing Ranger said:


> The NT is a ripoff of the OT, so we are. That's why the costs matter. Saying "B-But cgi is expensive" Isn't a excuse to have a overly budgeted movie. The budget for a recent movie that is entirely computer animated is roughly 175- 200 million. We're talking prime pixar levels of animation the whole way though.



Oi, Fang-Jr. Read the title of this thread...read the topic we were discussing...Make the connection...

Make your own thread if you want to go off topic and see how few people will care that "A New Hope" accomplished a lot more with less money. Because with inflation, Harrison Ford alone would've cost about half as much as the entirety of "A New Hope" and this is why comparing the two is stupid.


----------



## Unlosing Ranger (Jun 4, 2018)

MartialHorror said:


> Oi, Fang-Jr. Read the title of this thread...read the topic we were discussing...Make the connection...
> 
> Make your own thread if you want to go off topic and see how few people will care that "A New Hope" accomplished a lot more with less money. Because with inflation, Harrison Ford alone would've cost about half as much as the entirety of "A New Hope" and this is why comparing the two is stupid.


Star wars is a franchise. Maybe you need to make the connection?


----------



## MartialHorror (Jun 4, 2018)

Unlosing Ranger said:


> Star wars is a franchise. Maybe you need to make the connection?



Read the Title of the thread....read the discussion...READ. THE. TITLE. OF. THE. THREAD.


----------



## Unlosing Ranger (Jun 4, 2018)

MartialHorror said:


> Read the Title of the thread....read the discussion...READ. THE. TITLE. OF. THE. THREAD.


"Has backlash against starwars vindicated the prequels."
Strange, OT isn't a part of star wars anymore? 

The OT is in the discussion. Because the ST ripped it off directly. You can't avoid this.


----------



## MartialHorror (Jun 4, 2018)

Unlosing Ranger said:


> "Has backlash against starwars vindicated the prequels."
> Strange, OT isn't a part of star wars anymore?
> 
> The OT is in the discussion. Because the ST ripped it off directly. You can't avoid this.



Is the OT suffering from any kind of backlash?


----------



## Unlosing Ranger (Jun 4, 2018)

MartialHorror said:


> Is the OT suffering from any kind of backlash?





> The OT is in the discussion. Because the ST ripped it off directly. You can't avoid this.


----------



## ClandestineSchemer (Jun 4, 2018)

Unlosing Ranger said:


> "Has backlash against starwars vindicated the prequels."
> Strange, OT isn't a part of star wars anymore?
> 
> The OT is in the discussion. Because the ST ripped it off directly. You can't avoid this.



The  title is basically a nicer alternative to writing "prequels vs. sequels".
That's way discussing what the original (main) trilogy did better is sorta off topic.


----------



## Unlosing Ranger (Jun 4, 2018)

ClandestineSchemer said:


> The  title is basically a nicer alternative to writing "prequels vs. sequels".
> That's way discussing what the original (main) trilogy did better is sorta off topic.


It isn't. It's at the core of the argument in truth. "Why wouldn't people like the ST if it's the OT with a bigger budget and better technology?" This in turns goes into the argument about the prequels. OP is pushing a narrative and doesn't like that I'm breaking it.


----------



## ClandestineSchemer (Jun 4, 2018)

Unlosing Ranger said:


> It isn't. It's at the core of the argument in truth. "Why wouldn't people like the ST if it's the OT with a bigger budget and better technology?" This in turns goes into the argument about the prequels. OP is pushing a narrative and doesn't like that I'm breaking it.



Sure, the sequels ripped them off. But the way they incorporated it effected the main result.
So it's not really the same movie, therefore they aren't equivalent.


----------



## Unlosing Ranger (Jun 4, 2018)

ClandestineSchemer said:


> Sure, the sequels ripped them off. But the way they incorporated it effected the main result.
> So it's not really the same movie, therefore they aren't equivalent.


The ST literally rips off the OT near beat for beat. It's plagiarism more than a rip off.
Like I said, it's at the core of the discussion.

You can't not talk about the OT regarding people liking the prequels more later after watching the sequels. It's in the discussion by merit of being the center of it. Ignoring it is dishonest.


----------



## MartialHorror (Jun 4, 2018)

Unlosing Ranger said:


> It isn't. It's at the core of the argument in truth. "Why wouldn't people like the ST if it's the OT with a bigger budget and better technology?" This in turns goes into the argument about the prequels. OP is pushing a narrative and doesn't like that I'm breaking it.



No, not really. Sequels and remakes almost always have bigger budgets, yet don't explore too far out of their comfort zone and there is one major flaw in your logic. 

I simply don't care. "The Force Awakens" was a fun way to kill 2 hours. The original "Star Wars" is a movie I own, cherish and will continuously revisit throughout my life. My interest is whether the backlash against the New Star Wars movies vindicates the prequels. The OT doesn't really play a role in that, as no one disputes their supremacy over the rest.

But hey, if you find someone who wants to actually debate with you on that...good for you? 

Also, you don't know what plagiarism is, nor do you understand what a 'Soft Reboot' is...


----------



## Unlosing Ranger (Jun 4, 2018)

MartialHorror said:


> I simply don't care. "The Force Awakens" was a fun way to kill 2 hours. The original "Star Wars" is a movie I own, cherish and will continuously revisit throughout my life. My interest is whether the backlash against the New Star Wars movies vindicates the prequels. The OT doesn't really play a role in that, as no one disputes their supremacy over the rest.
> 
> But hey, if you find someone who wants to actually debate with you on that...good for you?
> 
> Also, you don't know what plagiarism is, nor do you understand what a 'Soft Reboot' is...


So you don't actually want a discussion about why the prequels are vindicated more by the ST. Nice to know.


----------



## MartialHorror (Jun 4, 2018)

Unlosing Ranger said:


> So you don't actually want a discussion about why the prequels are vindicated more by the ST. Nice to know.



that's not what your trying to peddle. You're trying to throw shade at the Sequels for costing so much more than the original movie, which is irrelevant to this discussion. The fact that even with inflation, they're significantly more expensive than the prequels? That's relevant. Remember that the prequels were also hated/divisive when they came out. The sequels have been hated/divisive since they came out. So it makes sense to compare them? You say that TFA is so close to ANH is why they should be compared and...you're not wrong, but it has nothing to do with comparing the PT and the ST.


----------



## ClandestineSchemer (Jun 4, 2018)

Unlosing Ranger said:


> The ST literally rips off the OT near beat for beat. It's plagiarism more than a rip off.
> Like I said, it's at the core of the discussion.
> 
> You can't not talk about the OT regarding people liking the prequels more later after watching the sequels. It's in the discussion by merit of being the center of it. Ignoring it is dishonest.



Director Gus Van Sant's psycho with Vince Vaughn is basically a shot by shot remake using better technology(it's in color for a start). One is masterpiece, the other a piece of shit. 

It's possible I'm not getting your point, but how is discussing the superiority of the originals, relevant to a versus between the prequels and sequels.
Because an inferiorly executed copy, doesn't give the same result as the originals, imo.


----------



## Unlosing Ranger (Jun 4, 2018)

ClandestineSchemer said:


> It's possible I'm not getting your point, but how is discussing the superiority of the originals, relevant to a versus between the prequels and sequels.
> Because an inferiorly executed copy, doesn't give the same result as the originals, imo.


Because it isn't a versus. It's about how people perceived the PT after watching the ST.
The ST ripped off the OT, so it's actually part of the discussion. It's not like I'm leaping off a cliff here in logic.
Also ignoring MartialHorror from here on, he's missing the point on purpose.


----------



## Imagine (Jun 4, 2018)

Shiba D. Inu said:


> lol they _wish_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


No one's talking about quality, you knob. TLJ's tone is that of a MCU movie. Why would Disney not want a marketing giant like SW to be like their other marketing giant?

There's going to be a SW movie every year with quips and constant relatable humor. Like the MCU.

You knob.

Reactions: Old 1


----------



## MartialHorror (Jun 4, 2018)

I've never been so glad to be ignored. 



Imagine said:


> No one's talking about quality, you knob. TLJ's tone is that of a MCU movie. Why would Disney not want a marketing giant like SW to be like their other marketing giant?
> 
> There's going to be a SW movie every year with quips and constant relatable humor. Like the MCU.
> 
> You knob.



Um, maybe I'm missing something, but I was under the impression that he was simply mocking the new Star Wars film for failing to be like the MCU and not necessarily disagreeing with your post....


----------



## Imagine (Jun 4, 2018)

MartialHorror said:


> Um, maybe I'm missing something, but I was under the impression that he was simply mocking the new Star Wars film for failing to be like the MCU and not necessarily disagreeing with your post....


Nah, he misinterpreted my post cuz he's dumb. He's always like that.

Reactions: Old 1


----------



## Catalyst75 (Jun 5, 2018)

Unlosing Ranger said:


> The ST literally rips off the OT near beat for beat. It's plagiarism more than a rip off.



There are enough marked differences between the two trilogies to confirm that is not the case.  Any similarities are more attributable not to plagarism, but to a Chiastic Structure/Ring Composition being at play.


----------



## Fang (Jun 5, 2018)

>TFA
>Not-Darth Vader leading Not-Empire forces to Not-Tatootine for Not-Artoo to find Not-Death Star Plans 
>Leads further into Not-Luke Skywalker (female) meeting with Not-Jar-Jar (Finn) running from chasing Stormtroopers and fleeing on the Falcon while running into Han Solo (Not Obi-Wan kenobi)
>Leads to Not-Yavin 4 with Not-Yoda (Maz) which eventually cultminates with Not Battle of Yavin (Death Star battle) and mentor figure dying to Not-Vader like Obi-Wan did while Not-Han help blows up the Not-Death Star (Starkiller)

Riveting.


----------



## Ghost_of_Gashir (Jun 5, 2018)

I only watch the sequels hoping Rey gets blacked by Finn tbh.

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Shiba D. Inu (Jun 5, 2018)

Imagine said:


> No one's talking about quality,


Of course not,  you wouldnt know quality if it bit you in the ass


----------



## Fang (Jun 5, 2018)

Ironic given that's a statement coming from someone whose defending the dumpster fire abortions that are the Sequels. 



Ghost_of_Gashir said:


> I only watch the sequels hoping Rey gets blacked by Finn tbh.



Finn is getting YELLOW'd.

Reactions: Neutral 1


----------



## Unlosing Ranger (Jun 5, 2018)

Catalyst75 said:


> There are enough marked differences between the two trilogies to confirm that is not the case.  Any similarities are more attributable not to plagarism, but to a Chiastic Structure/Ring Composition being at play.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## Unlosing Ranger (Jun 5, 2018)

Catalyst75 said:


> There are enough marked differences between the two trilogies to confirm that is not the case.  Any similarities are more attributable not to plagarism, but to a Chiastic Structure/Ring Composition being at play.





Is it? Is it really? I'm seeing certain, well what do you say... blatant script tearing out in certain parts of these scenes.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## Unlosing Ranger (Jun 5, 2018)

This is what I meant when I said OT has to be talked about.
Even past the the first ST movie, they still kept doing it. You'd know this if you watched the OT at all.
ST lacks originality and character development.
You'll notice the stark difference of character in these scenes compared to one another.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## Catalyst75 (Jun 5, 2018)

Unlosing Ranger said:


> Is it? Is it really?



Chiastic Structure:

_Chiastic structure, or chiastic pattern, is a literary technique in narrative motifs and other textual passages. An example of chiastic structure would be two ideas, A and B, together with variants A' and B', being presented as A,B,B',A'. Alternative names include ring structure, because the opening and closing 'A' can be viewed as completing a circle, palistrophe, or symmetric structure. It may be regarded as chiasmus scaled up from clauses to larger units of text._

One of Lucas' approaches to the Star Wars Saga under his directive was likening the repetitions seen between the Original and Sequel Trilogy as poetry or music: “[_Star Wars_] is purposely written like a piece of music, with themes that repeat themselves in different ways, and ideas that reprise from one generation to the next"; “Instead of destroying the Death Star [like Luke], [Anakin] destroys the ship that controls the robots. It’s like poetry. Every stanza kind of rhymes with the last one.”

They rhyme, but they are also different.  To use the first post you cited - 

The theme: The Dark Side user takes the Light side user before their master, and the Dark Side master tempts one to kill the other.

Return of the Jedi: Luke is brought before Palpatine before the Battle of Endor.  Throughout the scene, _Luke _is continually tempted to strike down either Palpatine or Vader by the Sith Lord, while Luke continues trying to redeem Vader.  Luke refuses to fall to the Dark Side, is attacked by Palpatine, and Vader kills Palpatine to save Luke at the cost of his life, redeeming himself.

Last Jedi: Rey is tested by Snoke but is completely overwhelmed, and Snoke attempts to use her to complete _Kylo Ren's _training by having him kill Rey.  Instead, Kylo Ren uses the opportunity to kill Snoke, claims the throne of the First Order for himself, and attempts to convince Rey to join his side.  

Same theme, similar settings, *different results.  
*
Now for the second post: 

Theme: The heroes enters a cave that shows them something about themselves. 

Empire Strikes Back: Luke is instructed to enter the cave, and he takes his lightsaber with him.  When the apparition of Darth Vader appears, Luke disregards Yoda's words and draws his lightsaber.  When he strikes the apparition down, Vader's masks shatters to reveal Luke's own face, showing that Luke could become his own worst enemy and fall to the Dark Side (while also subtly showing who Vader really is - a Skywalker).

The Last Jedi: Rey enters the cave of her own volition, thinking it will give her the answers she needs.  There, she hopes to find the truth about her parents.  She sees shadows in the mirror - initially two, which slowly coalesce into one.  When the shadow behind the mirror, it is just herself, potentially showing her the truth she _truly needed _to realize, but misinterpreted as the cave showing her "nothing" - it is just herself, and her parents do not matter.

Same theme, similar settings, *different results and meanings.
*


Unlosing Ranger said:


> You'd know this if you watched the OT at all.



Except I did, which is one of the reasons why I can make the observations seen above.


----------



## RAGING BONER (Jun 5, 2018)

I just remembered reading about Lucas' idea of having Luke being haunted by an ancient Sith spirit...which would've been one of the reasons he retreated from the galaxy and was struggling with the dark side.

ofc, they tossed that simple idea that had incredible potential in favor of him simply becoming an old asshole who thought killing his troubled nephew was a good idea. _

Genius!_


----------



## Lucaniel (Jun 5, 2018)

Imagine said:


> The prequels are bad, so is the Nu Trilogy. The prequels being bad first doesn't excuse the Nu Trilogy and the Nu Trilogy being more competent (to a degree they're the basic white bitch of sci-fi action at this point) than the Prequels doesn't mean they should be awarded for such basic competency.
> 
> I can shit talk the Nu Trilogy without having to apologize for the Prequels and vice-versa.


ur talkin around urself a lot my guy can you admit the sequels are better than the prequels or not


----------



## Fang (Jun 5, 2018)

>Sequels
>not shit

Ayyyyyyyyyyyyyyy


----------



## Imagine (Jun 5, 2018)

Shiba D. Inu said:


> Of course not,  you wouldnt know quality if it bit you in the ass


Bronies have no place in this world 


Lucaniel said:


> ur talkin around urself a lot my guy can you admit the sequels are better than the prequels or not


I did just that. I wouldn't put ROTS too far off from the sequels, though.


----------



## Fang (Jun 5, 2018)

RoTS is a masterpiece compared to TLJ and TFA tho


----------



## Shiba D. Inu (Jun 5, 2018)

RotS is indeed > sequels

I even have it maybe ~on par with ROTJ 



and tbh in terms of pure entertainment factor _only_ it may be my #1 SW movie 

its also definitely my most rewatchable SW movie, followed by ANH & TESB

Reactions: Old 1


----------



## Fang (Jun 5, 2018)

>tfw you can't tell when Fluttershy is trying to be blatant or subtle with his shitposting anymore

Rian tier subversion


----------



## ATastyMuffin (Jun 5, 2018)

Nah, prequels are still horrible

I find it weird that people are somehow okay with ruining Darth Vader's character in exchange for WORLDBUILDINGG and Dexter Jettster's fucking 50s diner lmao

Are we really going to pretend Attack of the Clones isn't one of the worst movies of all time?


----------



## Shiba D. Inu (Jun 5, 2018)

Fang said:


> >tfw you can't tell when Fluttershy is trying to be blatant or subtle with his shitposting anymore
> 
> Rian tier subversion

Reactions: Old 1


----------



## MartialHorror (Jun 5, 2018)

ATastyMuffin said:


> Are we really going to pretend Attack of the Clones isn't one of the worst movies of all time?



I'd argue with you on that...albeit only because it follows "The Phantom Menace".


----------



## ClandestineSchemer (Jun 5, 2018)

ATastyMuffin said:


> Nah, prequels are still horrible
> 
> I find it weird that people are somehow okay with ruining Darth Vader's character in exchange for WORLDBUILDINGG and Dexter Jettster's fucking 50s diner lmao
> 
> Are we really going to pretend Attack of the Clones isn't one of the worst movies of all time?



Never really got the hate for the dinner scene. Sure its cheesy, but its a relatively short and harmless sequence.

Also it may not be a good movie, but worst of all time?
With movies like the room existing, it just shows you haven't seen that many movies.


----------



## Fang (Jun 5, 2018)

>Sequelfags are literally triggered by retro-pastiche of 50s diner being inserted into a sci-fi/fantasy film

Hahahahahahaha


----------



## MartialHorror (Jun 5, 2018)

ClandestineSchemer said:


> Never really got the hate for the dinner scene. Sure its cheesy, but its a relatively short and harmless sequence.
> 
> Also it may not be a good movie, but worst of all time?
> With movies like the room existing, it just shows you haven't seen that many movies.



Let's also not act like its just the prequel haters who are saying they're the 'worst of all time' either. I heard all of the same shit leveled against the sequels. 

I have endured all of the Puppet Master movies, Steven Seagal movies and movies that are too shitty to even deserve a 'direct-to-video' release...So you're all spoiled to me!


----------



## MartialHorror (Jun 5, 2018)

Fang said:


> >Sequelfags are literally triggered by retro-pastiche of 50s diner being inserted into a sci-fi/fantasy film
> 
> Hahahahahahaha



Hahahahahaha, remember that time you got triggered because I criticized the acting in the prequels?


----------



## ATastyMuffin (Jun 5, 2018)

ClandestineSchemer said:


> Never really got the hate for the dinner scene. Sure its cheesy, but its a relatively short and harmless sequence.
> 
> Also it may not be a good movie, but worst of all time?
> With movies like the room existing, it just shows you haven't seen that many movies.



I didn't say worst of all time.

I said one of the worst of all time. And I've seen plenty of movies.


----------



## ClandestineSchemer (Jun 5, 2018)

ATastyMuffin said:


> I didn't say worst of all time.
> 
> I said one of the worst of all time. And I've seen plenty of movies.



It's not even close to the worst movies. 
Trust me on this.


----------



## ATastyMuffin (Jun 5, 2018)

ClandestineSchemer said:


> It's not even close to the worst movies.
> Trust me on this.



It is. Trust me on this.


----------



## MartialHorror (Jun 5, 2018)

The worst movie I've ever seen in theaters was probably "Gamer". Every quick cut and camera angle seemed designed to make me nauseous and to this day, it's the only movie I've ever had to walk out on...albeit only for a few minutes...and I had no issue with "Cloverfield", so it's not motion sickness either. 

Worst movie of all time? Well, my most hated is "Terror Toons". But objectively...maybe something like "Crazy Fat Ethel 2" or one of those stock footage reliant films like "Puppet Master X: Legacy".


----------



## Lucaniel (Jun 5, 2018)

Shiba D. Inu said:


> RotS is indeed > sequels
> 
> I even have it maybe ~on par with ROTJ
> 
> ...


you should be killed

Reactions: Neutral 1


----------



## Lucaniel (Jun 5, 2018)

ATastyMuffin said:


> I didn't say worst of all time.
> 
> I said one of the worst of all time. And I've seen plenty of movies.



feast your eyes


----------



## Fang (Jun 5, 2018)

>from the guy who thinks RLM is valid

Lmao


----------



## Imagine (Jun 5, 2018)

Still need to see Soylo

Reactions: Old 1


----------



## Fang (Jun 5, 2018)

Wait till its out of the box office


----------



## MShadows (Jun 6, 2018)

The prequels have given birth to some of the greatest memes mankind has ever witnessed.


----------



## Randomaxe (Jun 19, 2018)

The phantom Menace was where I learned, you should never go back again. It seems Solo reinforces that feeling. If your going to tell the story of how you got to your successful story, then your better start at the beginning. So the short answer is No.


----------

