Is the Star Wars saga better with Episodes I to III or worse?

[Bishop76]

Actually, he is - if you use the commonly understood definition of "failed filmmaker" that was in effect until, say, yesterday.



Which doesn't make him any less of a failed filmmaker:

I know you're just baiting/trolling me at this point, but really - how has he failed? By whose standards?

He is neither baiting nor trolling. What's your definition of a filmmaker? Maybe then we can clarify things. Doing a (successful/failed) review about a movie doesn't turn you into a (successful/failed) filmmaker.

Again, as I mentioned several posts ago, RLM has made several web series and a few films in addition to his reviews (which are actually stylized documentary films, but I'm guessing neither of you would understand that).

 

[Set Harth]

If you're going to redefine the word "filmmaker" to mean PT mudslinger, you might as well redefine the words "baiting" and "trolling" to mean disagreeing with you.
If words mean whatever you want them to, why not?

(which are actually stylized documentary films, but I'm guessing neither of you would understand that).

Pathetic personal attacks on our comprehension abilities notwithstanding, we are all too aware that you believe these should be considered worthy of legitimate "filmmaker" status. I quote: Doing a (successful/failed) review about a movie doesn't turn you into a (successful/failed) filmmaker.

 

[Bishop76]

Well, if you're reading comprehension is up to the point that you can quote my posts, then please, tell me exactly how he's a failure and by whose standards?

 

[Set Harth]

Well, if you're reading comprehension

Case closed.

 

[Bishop76]

Yeah, I'm typing from a phone, ass clown - autocorrect will do that sometimes.

AGAIN, how is he a failure?

 

[Alex1939]

Yeah, 1.3 million views is super disappointing...

Which wasn't the actual point I was making. But as for your new point you're making: it's Youtube. A video about Sarah Palin's breath gets about 1.3 million views. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p9kfcEga0lk

You know the guy also has the video's up on his own website. So maybe judging his "popularity" by Youtube video view count isn't exactly accurate or fair?

 

[Set Harth]

Yeah, I'm typing from a phone, ass clown - autocorrect will do that sometimes.

Right. So will not getting that "you're" means "you are".

AGAIN, how is he a failure?

Are you reading this thread or a different one? Should I just quote myself and others once more? "Bitching about the PT is not a way to claim success in one's chosen field, when that success does not in fact exist."

AGAIN!!!! AGAIN!!!!

 

[Bishop76]

It's like talking to rain man - thanks for the lack of any real points there - I'm done with you. You're not worth the power to piss on

 

[ichab]

Better. I would have preffered as others posted that 1 and 2 be combined and more time spent with the clone wars, but I like them. The whole point was to show the rise and fall of Anakin.

I am curious as to what makes people think that the dialogue was better in the original trilogy? Unless anyone thinks that "scruffy looking nerf herder" is shakespearean I'd say the poor dialogue is something that was always there in these movies.

 

[Alex1939]

I am curious as to what makes people think that the dialogue was better in the original trilogy?

A lot of the joking dialogue between Luke and Han is funny in a "ribbing" each other kind of way. It works.

Any attempts at comedy or this kind of joking around between Anakin and Obi Wan was a complete failure, imo.

 

[Alex1939]

It's like talking to rain man - thanks for the lack of any real points there - I'm done with you. You're not worth the power to piss on

I was amazed to read the last few pages and see how many panties are wadded up because of RLM

Seriously, the guy put some work into those video's with editing and his own character in Harry Plinkett. Whether or not that technically makes someone a "filmmaker" I don't know or even really care. It's a humorous poke at the TNG films, Avatar, and the Star Wars prequel. And of course a funny (but I wouldn't go as good as any of the negative reviews) positive review for Star Trek 2009.

Either laugh at it or ignore it, but I can't believe the people that act bent out of shape about it lol.

 

[I Grok Spock]

Many people started talking trash about the prequels only after talking trash about them became fashionable and cool.

May 19th, 1999?

I believe that to a person who truly loves Star Wars, no prequel, sequel, cartoon, comic or novel can take away its original value and allure.

Yep.

This from someone who hates the prequels. And loves the prequels. And loves to hate the prequels, and hates to love them. Its a sickness, you see.

 

[Mach5]

Many people started talking trash about the prequels only after talking trash about them became fashionable and cool.

May 19th, 1999?

Oh snap

Yep.

This from someone who hates the prequels. And loves the prequels. And loves to hate the prequels, and hates to love them. Its a sickness, you see.

So the Prequels are... "Precious" to you?

 

[Neroon]

Forget this. Thread closed while I figure out who deserves the infractions.

Yeah, I'm typing from a phone, ass clown - autocorrect will do that sometimes.

AGAIN, how is he a failure?

Infraction for flaming

Well, if you're reading comprehension

Case closed.

Yeah, I'm typing from a phone, ass clown - autocorrect will do that sometimes.

Right. So will not getting that "you're" means "you are".

AGAIN, how is he a failure?

Are you reading this thread or a different one? Should I just quote myself and others once more? "Bitching about the PT is not a way to claim success in one's chosen field, when that success does not in fact exist."

AGAIN!!!! AGAIN!!!!

Infraction for trolling.

Comments to PM for the both of you


I suggest BOTH of you use the Ignore feature if this is what your exchange are leading you to.

 

[Expo67]

I liked the prequels and I did not have a problem with them.

They're just films. George Lucas owns them and he can do whatever he wants to do with them. That's all there is to it.

Nuff said.

 

[suarezguy]

Intense attachment is what was criticized, to where you wouldn't accept a natural death, would create more evil to try to prevent an evil or would just be too unobjective in a matter, such as when Anakin preferred helping Padme over pursuing Dooku.

So caring about a person "naturally" dying at a very young age is somehow bad?

The Jedi generally take a positive view of nature and natural processes, not surprising as the Force was created "by all living things."

It probably comes from Anakin starting his training much later than usual and knowing his potential "Chosen One" status, which deprives the character of much agency and responsibility, but that's the intention as the 10 years between TPM and AotC were largely skipped over.

You're explaining why the writing was bad, but explaining it doesn't make it less bad.

It may be bad, but it explains why more Jedi don't leave or become corrupt.

They supported democracy and considered it, and upholding it, to be a part of justice.

Why are they attached to democracy and justice? Is it okay to be attached to abstract concepts but not to people? Why?

It's better than the alternatives, suffering that comes frequent conflicts decided by violence and/or an oppressive government that people can't participate in and thus can become more and more extreme.