Star Wars: The Complete Saga (1977-2005)

[The Doof]

Originally Posted by AltaDef

The guy who wrote this "rebuttal" named his son Anakin. He makes some of the crazier rationalizations I've seen in this thread look like the writings of Socrates.

Ah - that beast dude's identity revealed at last. i named my kid Boss Nass.

[dookiex]

Originally Posted by The Doof

"Nerdrage rant." it is most certainly NOT nerdrage rant. that's what i was expecting, and why i never had gotten around to watching them before. you've let the style of the things prejudice you against the content. the guy basically gives a mini-master class on character and dramatic stakes when he describes the differences between the duels in each trilogy.

It's nerdrage rant. That rebuttal article for the 70 minute nerdrage rant is actually quite good and paints a very good picture of just how much of a nerdrage rant the video actually is. The whole reason why those videos are popular is due to the fact that they are nerdrage rants. People like nerdrage rants. The bulk of this board is a back and forth nerdrage rant. It's not academic, it's purely entertainment really.

[AlexSing]

Originally Posted by The Doof

"Nerdrage rant." it is most certainly NOT nerdrage rant. that's what i was expecting, and why i never had gotten around to watching them before. you've let the style of the things prejudice you against the content. the guy basically gives a mini-master class on character and dramatic stakes when he describes the differences between the duels in each trilogy.

As they say..You can lead a horse to water my friend...

[The Doof]

Originally Posted by dookiex

The older fans don't like the prequels because they just wanted more of the original trilogy. That's the problem. That's why these views on it is so skewed. They don't really want more Star Wars, they just love the idea of thinking up what if scenarios as well as filling in the many gaping holes of in the original trilogy.

No. a thousand, million, trillion times no. i swear to you, on all that is holy, all we ever wanted was "more Star Wars."

[The Doof]

Originally Posted by dookiex

It's nerdrage rant. That rebuttal article for the 70 minute nerdrage rant is actually quite good and paints a very good picture of just how much of a nerdrage rant the video actually is. The whole reason why those videos are popular is due to the fact that they are nerdrage rants. People like nerdrage rants. The bulk of this board is a back and forth nerdrage rant. It's not academic, it's purely entertainment really.

It is academic actually. or should be. it's called learning. try it sometime. if you prefer the hastily written rebuttal of an insecure fanboy grasping at straws to the well reasoned critique from a creative film fan - who clearly understands logic and dramatic structure - then i don't know what to say. We clearly have no common ground. Enjoy your life and your poodoos.

[dookiex]

Originally Posted by The Doof

THAT'S a rebuttal? I swear to God i feel like i am losing my mind on here.

That was ridiculous. He criticizes the original review for daring to suggest there is no main protagonist. then he describes how tpm has no clear protagonist. even if it is QGJ, why the hell is the main protagonist dead at the end of the movie? we're talking about a trilogy here correct? ben wasn't the main protagonist of ANH, was he? So if QGJ is the main protagonist - and he DIES - that basically negates the purpose of the first movie. doesn't it? which is what the first review says in the first place!

oh my head...

That is such a RIDICULOUS comment. Why CAN'T a protagonist get killed off at the end? There's absolutely nothing wrong with that. Not saying that QGJ was the main protagonist, but just making a point that your argument makes no sense. Hollywood likes happy endings but in reality, there is no reason why a protagonist can't die at the end of a narrative. To be perfectly honest, anybody who has half a brain would comprehend that TPM didn't really have a main character and the purpose of the film was really to set up the plot elements and establish the universe for the following films. That's what it's there for. It might not be the best there is in terms of doing such things but it's ok and mostly does the job it's meant to do. Also, yes, a film/narrative can lack a protagonist, that's perfectly fine too. There's no friggin rule that says you have to have a main protagonist nor is there a rule that says the protagonist must live for the narrative to be valid or justified. Also, you might now want to argue that if all TPM does is establish the universe, there's no point in it then, that would be true IF the film was a standalone film but Lucas obviously crafted this thing as a trilogy (prequel) so the film isn't really meant to be a standalone film.

Originally Posted by The Doof

It is academic actually. or should be. it's called learning. try it sometime. if you prefer the hastily written rebuttal of an insecure fanboy grasping at straws to the well reasoned critique from a creative film fan - who clearly understands logic and dramatic structure - then i don't know what to say. We clearly have no common ground. Enjoy your life and your poodoos.

When did nerdrage become acceptable as being academic? Ridiculous. The "review" is so far from being a review from the point of logic and dramatic structure that it's not even funny. The original Star Wars was a great ride but that was not a friggin shining example of logic and dramatic structure. That "review" video comparing the two is ridiculous especially when you watch it and then claim that it's coming from someone that is going about it with "logic" and understanding of "dramatic structure."

[AlexSing]

Originally Posted by dookiex

It's nerdrage rant. That rebuttal article for the 70 minute nerdrage rant is actually quite good and paints a very good picture of just how much of a nerdrage rant the video actually is. The whole reason why those videos are popular is due to the fact that they are nerdrage rants. People like nerdrage rants. The bulk of this board is a back and forth nerdrage rant. It's not academic, it's purely entertainment really.

What are you talking about? you haven't even seen the reviews!!! lol

*chuckles and shakes head*

As for yor bizarre comments on what "older" Star Wars fans want or don't want...well you're moving quickly into troll territory. Either that or you just cant be taken seriously.

[The Doof]

Originally Posted by dookiex

That is such a RIDICULOUS comment. Why CAN'T a protagonist get killed off at the end? There's absolutely nothing wrong with that. Not saying that QGJ was the main protagonist, but just making a point that your argument makes no sense. Hollywood likes happy endings but in reality, there is no reason why a protagonist can't die at the end of a narrative. To be perfectly honest, anybody who has half a brain would comprehend that TPM didn't really have a main character and the purpose of the film was really to set up the plot elements and establish the universe for the following films. That's what it's there for. It might not be the best there is in terms of doing such things but it's ok and mostly does the job it's meant to do. Also, yes, a film/narrative can lack a protagonist, that's perfectly fine too. There's no friggin rule that says you have to have a main protagonist nor is there a rule that says the protagonist must live for the narrative to be valid or justified. Also, you might now want to argue that if all TPM does is establish the universe, there's no point in it then, that would be true IF the film was a standalone film but Lucas obviously crafted this thing as a trilogy (prequel) so the film isn't really meant to be a standalone film.

A protagonist.......for a trilogy.......gets killed.....at the end of the first movie? If it was just the one movie there would be no problem. Why am i even typing this? i'm glad you like the movies.

[dookiex]

Originally Posted by AlexSing

What are you talking about? you haven't even seen the reviews!!! lol

*chuckles and shakes head*

As for yor bizarre comments on what "older" Star Wars fans want or don't want...well you're moving quickly into troll territory. Either that or you just cant be taken seriously.

Actually, this is the same with any scenario when dealing with any fanatics of something. If you're not going with the flow, you must be wrong. It's fanatics logic. Like I said, I watched that nerdrage "review" earlier tonight, a good 20 or so minutes of it. Ignorance is bliss for you folks I guess. It's sad when one can not differentiate a review from nerdrage. Sad.

Bizarro comments about what "older" Star Wars fans want? It's not bizarro. I don't even need to prove myself. Go through some Star Wars blogs and forums. Read that stuff, no further proof need in regards how Star War fans at this point much enjoy creating what essentially is pretty close to what fan fiction is supposed to be.

Originally Posted by The Doof

A protagonist.......for a trilogy.......gets killed.....at the end of the first movie? If it was just the one movie there would be no problem. Why am i even typing this? i'm glad you like the movies.

Please point out where the person says that QG is the protagonist for the entire prequel trilogy. From my understanding he implied that QG was the protagonist of just the first one. I could be wrong because that rebuttal was as much as a nerdrage post as the video "review" thus I didn't go through it with a fine tooth comb. I'm pretty sure it's implied that QG was the protagonist of just TPM.

[The Doof]

Originally Posted by dookiex

Also, yes, a film/narrative can lack a protagonist, that's perfectly fine too. There's no friggin rule that says you have to have a main protagonist

It is? i know what to call films that lack a protagonist: bad.

Actually, there is kind of a rule. study some film theory and some good screenplays. you have to understand the rules before you can break them.

[AlexSing]

Originally Posted by dookiex

Actually, this is the same with any scenario when dealing with fanatics of something. If you're not going with the flow, you must be wrong. It's fanatics logic. Like I said, I watched that nerdrage "review" earlier tonight, a good 20 or so minutes of it. Ignorance is bliss for you folks I guess. It's sad when one can not differentiate a review from nerdrage. Sad.
.

Lost. For. Words.

I'm out, leave it with you Doof.

[The Doof]

Originally Posted by dookiex

Please point out where the person says that QG is the protagonist for the entire prequel trilogy. From my understanding he implied that QG was the protagonist of just the first one. I could be wrong because that rebuttal was as much as a nerdrage post as the video "review" thus I didn't go through it with a fine tooth comb. I'm pretty sure it's implied that QG was the protagonist of just TPM.

yes, correct. just for TPM. he doesn't say QGJ is the protagonist for the entire trilogy. i'm sorry, this is why i can no longer speak with you. everything quoted above is exactly what i am saying and exactly what i have a problem with. you do not even understand what we are arguing about. i give up.

[dookiex]

Originally Posted by The Doof

It is? i know what to call films that lack a protagonist: bad.

Actually, there is kind of a rule. study some film theory and some good screenplays. you have to understand the rules before you can break them.

Wow, so you've basically missed out on such classic films as The Thin Red Line, Dr. Strangelove, Glengarry Glen Ross, Saving Private Ryan, Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction, Magnolia, Babel, and many more actually. I'm beginning to question if you actually watch any films outside of Star Wars at this point. The films I've mentioned all do not have a main protagonist or any particular person of focus. Heck, Dr. Strangelove and Glengarry Glen Ross both do not even really have a traditional narrative structure. So yeah, I think you need to go back and study film, seems like you're at a bit of a loss there.

Originally Posted by The Doof

yes, correct. just for TPM. he doesn't say QGJ is the protagonist for the entire trilogy. i'm sorry, this is why i can no longer speak with you. everything quoted above is exactly what i am saying and exactly what i have a problem with. you do not even understand what we arguing about. i give up.

Put your money where your mouth is. You stated: "A protagonist.......for a trilogy.......gets killed.....at the end of the first movie? If it was just the one movie there would be no problem. Why am i even typing this? i'm glad you like the movies." That's you stating this, I point out how that rebuttal article does not imply nor say that QG is the protagonist for the prequel trilogy, all you have to do is prove me wrong. Sarcasm is not going to get you anywhere. Seems like your the one that is a bit confused here, you should definitely give up

[The Doof]

Originally Posted by dookiex

Wow, so you've basically missed out on such classic films as The Thin Red Line, Dr. Strangelove, Glengarry Glen Ross, Saving Private Ryan, Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction, Magnolia, Babel, and many more actually. I'm beginning to question if you actually watch any films outside of Star Wars at this point. The films I've mentioned all do not have a main protagonist or any particular person of focus.

Look again.we are now into semantics and this must end.

[nathan_393]

Originally Posted by dookiex

Wow, so you've basically missed out on such classic films as The Thin Red Line, Dr. Strangelove, Glengarry Glen Ross, Saving Private Ryan, Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction, Magnolia, Babel, and many more actually. I'm beginning to question if you actually watch any films outside of Star Wars at this point. The films I've mentioned all do not have a main protagonist or any particular person of focus.

Y'know, I'm not sure I buy your argument about these films having no protagonist - in fact, I'd argue films like Pulp Fiction have more than one. Like others have said, you have to know the rules before you can break them and Tarantino knows the rules.

One thing all the movies you've listed have in common: they're all better than TPM.

[The Doof]

Originally Posted by dookiex

Wow, so you've basically missed out on such classic films as The Thin Red Line, Dr. Strangelove, Glengarry Glen Ross, Saving Private Ryan, Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction, Magnolia, Babel, and many more actually. I'm beginning to question if you actually watch any films outside of Star Wars at this point. The films I've mentioned all do not have a main protagonist or any particular person of focus.



Put your money where your mouth is. You stated: "A protagonist.......for a trilogy.......gets killed.....at the end of the first movie? If it was just the one movie there would be no problem. Why am i even typing this? i'm glad you like the movies." That's you stating this, I point out how that rebuttal article does not imply nor say that QG is the protagonist for the prequel trilogy, all you have to do is prove me wrong. Sarcasm is not going to get you anywhere. Seems like your the one that is a bit confused here, you should definitely give up

You win.

[dookiex]

Originally Posted by nathan_393

Y'know, I'm not sure I buy your argument about these films having no protagonist - in fact, I'd argue films like Pulp Fiction have more than one. Like others have said, you have to know the rules before you can break them and Tarantino knows the rules.

One thing all the movies you've listed have in common: they're all better than TPM.

Yup, I am treading on a thin line with Pulp Fiction, the others I've mentioned however truly do not have a main protagonist or particular person of focus (that includes Saving Private Ryan). You definitely need to know the rules before you break them, breaking rules intelligently after all can be a great element of a film. However, the point I initially made was that there really aren't any rules in regards to narratives and films. A protagonist can die, you don't need a happy ending all the time, you don't even need a conclusive ending all of the time. I'm sure you understand what I mean.

Originally Posted by The Doof

You win.

Dude, I could've told you that :P

[nathan_393]

Originally Posted by dookiex

Yup, I am treading on a thin line with Pulp Fiction, the others I've mentioned however truly do not have a main protagonist or particular person of focus (that includes Saving Private Ryan). You definitely need to know the rules before you break them, breaking rules intelligently after all can be a great element of a film. However, the point I initially made was that there really aren't any rules in regards to narratives and films. A protagonist can die, you don't need a happy ending all the time, you don't even need a conclusive ending all of the time. I'm sure you understand what I mean.



Dude, I could've told you that :P

Except according to George Lucas, Obi-wan is the protagonist in TPM. So I don't quite know why you keep insisting the protagonist dies.

[Beast]

Man.... for people who supposedly hate these movies, you certainly can't stop talking about them. Lucas wins. You're obsessed.

I'll take the satisfaction that I don't need to sit and constantly refresh and complain in the Dark Knight thread. I have a whole 32 posts in the Dark Knight Megathread and 15 in the Scott Pilgrim thread. And those are movies I hate as much as you guys seem to hate the PT. And those posts arn't spent mocking the fans. Would be nice if people would allow those who actually want to enjoy talking about Star Wars, including the Prequels to do it. Rather than ranting constantly about how much you hate everything. Guess that everyone needs a hobby... even if it's constantly complaining about something. Sad really.

Carry on. It's just a shame that the lines of dialogue in Kevin Smith's Jay And Silent Bob Strike Back about the internet rings more true every year.

Holden: The Internet is a communication tool used the world over where people can come together to ***** about movies and share pornography with one another.

Holden: This is a site populated by militant movie buffs: sad, pathetic little bastards living in their parents' basement downloading scripts and what they think is inside information about movies and actors they claim to despise yet can't stop discussing.

Now that's not to say I consider any of you "sad, pathetic little bastard living in their parents' basements", but the part about being seemingly obsessed with talking about movies and actors you claim to despise certainly seems to ring true about the internet in general anymore.

[Colonel Kurtz]

Originally Posted by Petyr_Baelish

The godfather is a universally well-respected work of art. Not just on imdb.

Yup. I find The Godfather terribly boring and can't really stand it, but it's definitely a well made movie, no doubt about that.

[Show spoiler]Although I must say that Brando's performance with those tampons in his mouth is way over the top, unintentionally funny and almost bordering on jarjarism.

Some people really should begin to differentiate between quality and personal taste. Phantom Menace might be someone's favourite movie of all time, and all the power to them, but it's still not a good movie from a more objective standpoint.

Originally Posted by Shaft Windu

Jar Jar even looks quite a bit like Keaton: The gaunt and long face and the bulky eyes... If you watch a couple of these movies you get where Jar Jar is coming from. It's one more reference to movie history in Star Wars.

Except something like that doesn't have any place in Star Wars. Imagine a scene from the Stooges in Lord of the Rings.