Star Wars

MTG_Maro said:
That would be the other guy.

No the other guy is the guy you quoted. Numbersname is numbersname.

I actually don't know who he was replying to, I just thought it was funny you were referring to numbers as "the other guy" while quoting a post from "theotherguy".
 
lol, good point. Mabey I should specify the other person next time.
 
theotherguy said:
I wholheartedly diagree with everything, and I mean everythign that the guy in that article says.

Yes, the senate is bloated an ineffective, yes the jedi's are aristocratic. But that is the whole point of the freaking story!

Somehow he thinks its good that palpatine becomes a dictator? This is repeated constantly in history, thats the point of the whole story. There is a democracy, there is a crisis, someone rises into power and gets "emergency" powers, and then keeps them.

Caesar
Hitler
Stalin
Bush

It doens't matter if the dictator is "benevolent", the point is that dictatorships are inherently bad, because even if you have a benevolent dictator, the next is likely to be worse. I don't really like the Jedi, but the republic and the rebels were sure as hell better than a massive, corrupt dictatorship.

I thought at first that Star Wars was an allegory for the american revolution, but soon learned that it was an allegory for the rise of rome, and then a story about the american revolution.

Even if the Jedi do suck, the republic still stands for what counts: democracy and self rule.

Yeah, I know about the errors in my writing. I don't believe that palpatine was right, unless he achieved mass economic miracles or something. :p
 
The rebels go through 'heroic' ventures and finally defeats the Empire in a battle in space. The Rebels win, just as predicted. Somehow, the rebels have star cruisers and ion cannons in the movies, when in the real world, they would be lucky to have a RPG launcher.

Because the Mon Calimari are Rebel supporters, and they arn't exactly poor. Shit, they even have the best ships.
 
They don't have ALL the best ships. Star Destroyers are still better than Mon-Calamari cruisers. But most of the ships cancel eachother out EX: Tie Intercepter > X-wing, A-wing > Tie Fighter, Tie Bomber < X-wing, ect.
 
Yeah, but like the royalty of alderaan etc (bail organa) and the mon calamaris, the rebels have very wealthy supporters. They didn't just appear out of nowhere with a few home made guns, the rebels are "the good guys" around the galaxy, those who still hold the ideals of the past and dislike the empire enough to oppose them. I'd guess during and after EP3 the empire only prioritised killing all the jedis, and later in the OT it would be much easier to avoid attention as long as you're not a jedi.
 
Mechagodzilla said:
THX is rather great. Definitely under-rated in my opinion.
After that, though, it's a quick, steep drop downhill.

The one thing I hate the most in a movie is wasted potential.

There's a website out in the vastness of the internet (http://www.stardestroyer.net - see the Episode Reaction sections) that spends page upon page upon page explaining why the prequels actually do make sense.

Reading it over, the criticism of the sequels shouldn't be that they're full of plot holes. The actual story is pretty solid with the plausibility.

The problem comes from the fact that whoever wrote the story didn't understand it enough to make a movie out of it. If we're to believe that Lucas wrote the prequels, then we also have to believe that he didn't comprehend his own themes and intentions.

There comes a point when looking over that site where you realize that this one obsessed fan making up excuses is a more competent storyteller than the entire cast and crew of the movie. (That's not saying much, mind you.)

Really, the entire story relies critically on Vader and whatsherface being two emotionally messed-up kids in a dysfunctional relationship.
For the movie to have worked, the one fundamental thing was to make them realistically and compellingly flawed, yet still remotely likeable.

What we got in the movies, however, was a vader with three settings: "slap-happy jackass", "emo", and "suddenly genocidal".
Meanwhile Portman had one emotion: "I am standing here vaguely confused."

Their entire dialogue was stuff like "I am in love with you. I love being in love with your love." so instead of getting nuanced characters, we have a retard and a mannequin standing still in a room yelling "LOVE" at eachother.

The acting in the old trilogy wasn't great either, but at least the actors didn't need much subtlety.
Because the entire plot didn't rely on two characters making a series of terrible decisions without looking stupid in the process.

Those are some very very wise words by the way
 
theotherguy said:
It doens't matter if the dictator is "benevolent", the point is that dictatorships are inherently bad, because even if you have a benevolent dictator, the next is likely to be worse. I don't really like the Jedi, but the republic and the rebels were sure as hell better than a massive, corrupt dictatorship.
Personally, it seemed to me that in IV the Empire had been benevolent but was at the point of turning into a true Empire of Evil. They'd just abolished the senate and they were building (and test-firing) a weapon that could kill entire planets. Pre IV it was probably not that bad - at least the trains ran on time.
 
Sulkdodds said:
Personally, it seemed to me that in IV the Empire had been benevolent but was at the point of turning into a true Empire of Evil. They'd just abolished the senate and they were building (and test-firing) a weapon that could kill entire planets. Pre IV it was probably not that bad - at least the trains ran on time.
Same impression I got. Very similar to so many ruling bodies that slowly take away individual liberties and get you to believe that what they are doing is right through lies and decption....
 
Back
Top