>"It doesn't belong to you anymore!"
Do you agree with what Kyle said here?
yes when an "artist" has finished his art and put it out for the world to see he cannot influence or control it anymore. The world can interpret it and look at it however it wants.
>>84446165
well now he legally doesn't, he sold those rights to the mouse and the mouse is treating it better than he could.
No.
Sequels and remasters don't delete the "pure" versions, and if people are retarded enough to pony up the cash, Lucas has every right to make the money.
What's happened with Star Wars was pretty disrespectful towards the masterful puppetry of the late Jim Henson but that's why I won't buy a remaster.
Trey and Matt were putting their nostalgiafaggotry before their individualist ideals, and it made for a weak argument.
>>84446282
that's Star Wars
To an extent. Once an artistic work is complete, the author or creator doesn't really have control over it any more. People will interpret it and see it how they see it. They can do more with it, they can make a sequel or continue it in a fashion if they please and no one can tell them otherwise, but it'll be the same story. Once they release that vision, it's again no longer theirs to control. Only when they are originally working on the piece can they say it's theirs alone.
>>84446165
No. Just because someone watched a particular version of a movie and has fond memories of it, they aren't entitled to anything more than their original experience. For every Star Wars there's a Kingdom of Heaven that substantially IMPROVES a film by changing content. It's the risk you take when engaging with art.
>>84446331
Disney got Indiana Jones as well. It's all under LucasFilm.
>>84446165
It belongs to him just as much as it belongs to anyone else. People make fanwork and fanedits all the time, it's just that his get a big release.
>>84446282
>the mouse is treating it better than he could.
Except they're not. He actually cared about star wars. They only care about how much money it'll make. The only people who give any excellence to Star Wars today are the people who value and try to maintain Lucas' vision.
>>84446165
No, as shitty as the special editions were, he was allowed to do whatever he wanted.
The same goes for Blade Runner.
Being a butthurt crying nerd doesn't mean they owe you anything.
>>84446316
This
/thread
>>84446316
Except Lucas refused to make available any version of the movie that WAS pure. That's the whole problem. If he wants to change the movie around and do all his stupid shit, fine. But as it is we have no option to see the original movie.
If every other movie is able to have both the theatrical and Director's Cut versions on their DVD, there's no reason for Star Wars not to.
>>84446419
>He actually cared about star wars.
Basically it's the same as any other kind of debate
blah blah yes you should have the rights to your own shit, but because i disagree with your decision, i insinuate that someone else has actually pushed their will on you, so it's okay for me to push MY will on you because i'm only pushing you back to what you would have wanted in the first place
like any argument it's justified as long as it's right, but if it's wrong it's the most reprehensible thing ever
>>84446419
Bullshit. Everything in the prequels is there to sell toys, not because it makes the movies better. George's "vision" has always been to make loads of money.
>>84446653
"always" nah, but for a very long time now
>hurr movies r art and you can't change it
I agree that once something has been put out you should leave it alone but let the fucker do what he wants.
>>84446419
>he actually cared about Star Wars
He really didn't.
Well he did, but not like society cares about it. In interviews he's pretty stated that he felt "obligated" to make the prequels. So his heart and action and creative banter reeling him in didn't exactly go over there. By the end, he was just beaten down and wanted a fresh start.
That's why he sold it.
He wasn't held at gun point in some grand conspiracy. He was just done with it.
He never expected it to take off like it did and he was just a man who got really fucking lucky building a world everyone else wanted to force him to make.
>>84446719
Gary Kurtz points to 1981 as the year Lucas stopped giving a shit.
>>84446316
The issue is that they do try to destroy the originals, copies of the original film itself, it's entirely up to self supported fan archivers to acquire and preserve the originals for posterity. Young George Lucas talked about this and how terrible it is that directors would do this, before he was betrayed and murdered.
>>84446824
This. They even make an argument about how stupid it would be if someone updated other works of art, like the Mona Lisa, or the Roman Colisseum.
Yes, the original creator has a right to do that, but t attack and destroy any presence of the originals is petty dickery.
>>84446419
>Lucas' vision
The OT was a collaboration of people telling Lucas no when he was an idiot, which as a mortal human being was often. The dick sucking sycophants were as much responsible for the shitshow that came after as Lucas. As for Disney..... HERETICS
>>84446824
Except Lucas didn't. The only physical copy of any movie Lucas has tried to destroy was the Star Wars Christmas special, and considering how bad it is, i can understand why.
Any "destroying" of physical film reels of his other works is simply libelous rumors butthurt fanboys have spread.
He just didn't rerelease the original prints for a while. You can buy them now, and the edited versions, sometimes bundled together.
>>84446282
What a load of shit. George is a flawed creator but at least he's not a focus group
>>84446515
Go to any thrift store and pick up one of the three billion vhs copies of the original trilogy.
>>84446515
THIS
The original films are often held hostage rather than archived and preserved.
quite simply "That belongs in a museum"
The fans decide which version goes in the museum, not the creator.
>>84446810
Is that when he got divorced?
>>84446984
shove it George, go swim in your cash pile.
>>84447003
Or hell, torrent it and burn it onto a DVD.
>>84447028
>my favorite part of star wars is the fanfiction
t. Millennial
>>84447019
his wife really was the secret sauce to the original trilogies success, George's original cut to ep4 was awful with no tension at the end, she was already an award wining film editor and reworked it to the theatrical version that started everything.
>>84446316
Normally you'd be right but Lucas has explicitly said that he wants the original editions to be erased.
>>84446948
I posses a set of the DVDs with the unedited OT (cost a pretty penny since they go out of their way not to release them) however it's a fraction of the entire resolution, it doesn't possess the full quality of the actual physical film it was recorded on, the actual literal films are being held hostage.
>>84446165
his problem was never ownership, his problem was his addiction to yes men. Film is such a hugely collaborative effort it's kinda crazy to deflect and refuse all input from others.
Don't get me wrong a strong vision from a director/producer/writer is great the best part of most films ends up on the cutting room floor, but there is a balance and Lucas is only interested in his own ideas.
he could have remastered them and did a great job, if he had just tempered his ideas a bit with common sense and input and experience from the people who work for him.
>>84447084
It's fucked that people blame him for the originals not coming out, considering that at least two different companies split the distribution rights even before he sold his rights to Disney (Fox owns A New Hope but none of the others)
>>84447013
Seriously, you can buy the original versions. Stop acting like you can't.
>>84447059
>loves jar jar
>calling others millennial
wew lad.
>>84447111
Hmm, maybe thats because the film originally looked like shit, and was touched up later for the vhs release, and people are blinded by nostalgia.
I own the original 90's remastered releases, and those are the versions people are often talking about and linking to when they talk about the original trilogy, completely unaware that they are talking about a version that was also edited and touched up for rerelease (the 90's set corresponded with the 90's rerelease of the original films in theaters, and Lucas wanted them to be up to date with modern film and screen quality, which is why they were edited).
>>84447113
He did. They were the versions released in theaters in the 90's. But people tend to forget that.
>>84446653
and there's nothing wrong with that. because a good story sells toys better than a bad one.
>>84446316
Wrong. Lucas has tried his damnedest to make sure the original cuts are unavailable
>>84447144
He's no worse than the Ewoks. Star Wars has always had weird and kiddy elements.
>>84447003
It's a poor quality copy that lacks the resolution of the original film, access to the literal original film (you know the actual shinny ribbon used before digital bullshit) so complete copies in full resolution can be distributed is restricted. The bluerays use the full resolution from the films but have parts clipped out and the bullshit added in, Archivers have stitched together pieces from the low resolution copies back into the blueray but it's a patchwork, an imperfect copy, and that's the best we have.
>>84447126
i mean you couldn't for a long time and that was part of what this South Park episode was complaining about
Lucas was seemingly trying to replace the original version of his fill completely but making recuts and refusing to put out original versions
>>84447213
You're a dummy.
There's many thousands of movies shot on film from the 70s and 80s, and many thousands more much older that have been released on Blu-ray and look excellent. A new scan of the original film elements would blow the quality of the special editions out the water because of how many leaps and bounds scanning tech has improved by in the last 20 years.
The re-edited ones are the 1997 Special Editions, and everyone knows there's CGI and dumb changes on them. The early 90s "faces" (the ones that are actually sought after) laserdisc and VHS versions are more or less the original theatrical editions minus the title card change to A New Hope. And that's the one that's the source for the crappy resolution version that's shoved on a bonus disc on the standalone DVD releases. It would look way better if they did a proper restoration, heck there's fanmade scans of secondhand theatrical prints that look better
>>84447081
and the "for luck" kiss was her idea, IIRC
>>84447289
MUH QUALITY
I thought you fags loved low quality shit like puppets and vinyl
>>84446515
What's sad is he did insert one great scene into the OT for his anniversary versions: Luke talking with Biggs. And all the "Revisited" remastered versions people have put out leave it out when it'd be super-fucking easy to put it in.
>>84447359
Did she leave George for her brother?
>>84447289
so you want to force someone to make a more faithful remaster?
That's obnoxious.
>>84447230
>shitty CGI Jabba scene that wasn't necessary to the story in any way
>Greedo shooting first because he changed his mind about what kind of character Han should be
>that entire musical number in Jabba's palace
>random little droids and shit everywhere
Something tells me people were already afraid to say "George, that's not a good idea"
>>84447450
>Greedo shooting first because he changed his mind about what kind of character Han should be
That wasn't in the 90s re-release. That was more recent.
>>84447213
The DVDs are better quality than the VHS but aren't the same level as the fully restored Blueray, which was partially done, we just want it done in it's entirety, the exact sort of work an archivist in a museum would do, and Lucas is doing everything he can to avert that. He's trying to delete a part of human history, taking something that belongs in a museum to the grave with him.
>>84447468
>The change was made for the 1997 Special Edition re-release of Star Wars, and has since been altered twice more. The phrase "Han shot first" is meant to express that "Han shot first and last", and is a colloquial retort to series creator George Lucas's explicit cinematic assertion that Greedo shot first.
Not according to Wikipedia it wasn't
>>84447468
>That wasn't in the 90s re-release
Nah, it was, that was the big change in the 97 theatrical release that got people really upset.
>>84447389
this post is too dumb for words
>>84447426
I hardly think it's too much to ask when Manos: The Hands of Fate (which is so terrible it hardly qualifies as a film) can get a lovingly restored Blu-ray and Disney who have virtually unlimited money owns these movies now. I'm sure they'll get to it, they'll just strategically release it whenever they feel they can make the most profit from it
>>84447258
To be fair, hardly anyone likes the ewoks either
>>84447490
It'll be about six years for the current trilogy to get wrapped up, and they'll put out a huge box set.
Maybe you'll have a kiddo to share the magic with by then.
>>84447311
I understand the sentiment of the South Park episode, but it falls apart when you remember that Lucas had released a nearly identical remaster of the originals which were released several years before the episode.
The original negatives of the film looked like crap, and did get stored properly, and Lucas didn't want to release a 20 year old grainy mess to cinemas. The films got a complete remaster job, and were released on VHS ("one...last...time... " as the tagline went). These versions of the film are what most people assume to be the originals, because it was the only copy of the film to look any good so lots of people bought it.
The cinematic rereleases of these sets are what the episode is referring to, which added bits of cgi here and there and filled in a few places (cloud city's walls, for example) which Lucas couldn't do in the original release because they literally ran out of money.
Considering both versions were available at the time, it does come off like Tray and Matt being salty fanboys over the whole thing.
(had the episode come out a few years later, with the second rerelease with the cgi jabba, well...)
>>84447389
Fucking plebe, would you take a picture of the Mona Lisa and hang it up in the Louvre for posterity and call it good enough? This is about preserving history.
>>84446165
>If we claim art stops being ours when we put it out, no one can call us out for saying global warming doesn't exist and everyone who thinks it does is retarded
>>84447480
He doesn't own the rights anymore. Talk to Disney about that.
When he did own them he was completely within his rights to not release something he wasn't happy with. It was his film.
>>84447549
Considering that, a few years later, Matt and Trey did an episode where they likened a shitty Indiana Jones sequel to actual rape, I'm pretty sure they'd still come off as salty fanboys.
I mean, I don't care for the special editions or prequels or Crystal Skull, either, but they need to calm down.
>>84447549
CGI Jabba was in the 1997 version, and at the time they made the episode Lucas had very publicly said that he had no plans of ever releasing the originals on DVD or generally ever again.
Also the negatives looking like crap is all Lucas' talk, the Blu-rays look pretty dang good (minus the CG) and they come from 20 year old scans produced at 1080p. Assuming the film has been stored properly and not further degraded since new ones would look even better, 4K scanning is standard practice now and the restoration process has advanced a ton
>>84447573
>history
Star Wars is the equivalent of me making a movie inspired by Independence Day and Armageddon
>>84447573
Da Vinci didn't put it there. He just had it lying around for a while, died, and it was found and put in museums by other people.
>>84447482
>>84447483
Shit, I guess you're right. How did I not know this? I don't remember it ever being brought up before the most recent release when it became a huge deal to everyone.
>>84447676
I was talking about the 1995 version. It's was the best looking copy we have of the original trilogy (not anymore, of course, due to film deterioration).
>>84447703
Because the 1997 version was the one they Tray and Matt were talking about. It's weird of them because the originals had been rereleased in 1995, only 2 years earlier. So there was no reason for Tray and Matt to have not had access to the originals.
>>84447814
It's not like they threw away those prints after they were done making a video transfer, they definitely made sure they got properly locked up in a vault somewhere afterwards meaning they shouldn't be in any worse state, you can stop film from deteriorating if you take care of it. And the footage the special edition was sourced from had to come from somewhere, too.
>>84447861
The episode aired in 2002, the controversy was probably mostly about them not being released on DVD.
>>84447644
This goes back to the issue of property, at some point it doesn't belong to a person (or corporate legal person), it belongs to mankind collectively, that is to say, it belongs in a museum. This rests not upon man's law but upon natural law, no judge, act of congress, or presidential decree can revoke truthful legitimacy of whom this belongs to, and to weigh against it only undermines their own legitimacy as if commanding the tide to recede. As it stands it's theft, pure and simple, and they have enough power to hold truth at bay, but they all risk that very power by resisting against truth. Does this force their hand, no, but it does make them self evident villains.
>>84447490
Lucas only agreed to sell the rights if Disney agreed not to remaster the OT.
Search your heart, you know it to be true.
>>84447501
This, screw those furry fucks
Anybody watched the Revisited or Despecialized editions? Any idea if they're worth downloading?
>>84448033
The newest Despecialized are all really good, quite impressive really. Just copped em on MySpleen, they're full Blu-rays with menus and a bunch of extras and shit
>>84448089
>MySpleen
...invite?
>>84448135
email?
>>84447677
Shakespeare was just crass entertainment done between bear baiting and cock fighting, doesn't change cultural impact. Hell, the book of Mormon is just bad Jesus fanfiction but it doesn't change it's impact and thus it's historical importance.
>>84448210
sent ;)
>>84446653
I'll take selling toys with originality over selling toys with a remake of Episode IV any day.
>>84446515
>>84447003
>>84447394
DVDs of the original unaltered trilogy were released in 2006. However, they were Laserdisc rips rather than remastered.
>>84447900
Well then that's even pettier. They made an entire episode because they couldn't buy a movie on DVD.
>>84448354
it's really not just "a movie"
and either way it's not like they haven't done episodes on much dumber topics
>>84448304
thanks dude!
>>84448340
I'll take a competently made film over three bad ones.
>>84447947
Nigga, say what you want about inalienable truth and shit, but none of that's real. The only laws and truths are the ones we make for ourselves. And by law, Lucas own his film, and could do what he wanted with it. All that is truly yours is the experiences and feeling you have while watching his film, nothing more. Once he's dad, or Disney law finally allows anything into the public domain, then it truly belongs to the people, and you can do whatever you want with Star Wars.
The originals still exist, this is fact. Lucas never destroyed them, he never said he would, he just decided not to release a product he wasn't happy with. Also, the films are already set up to be placed in the library of congress (if they haven't already), which is as close as a film can get to being in a museum.
>>84448520
>none of that's real
>>84448495
>The prequels
>Bad
>>84448190
Shakespeare's plays got shipped around and mangled by other people after he died. Heck, they did while he was still alive, as he didn't own the rights to any of them.
>>84448520
Actually the Library of Congress had a fight with Lucas because they tried to archive it and he sent them a print of the 97 edition
>>84448414
Yeah, I know they have. Doesn't make it any better.
And yes, at the end of the day, Star Wars is "just a movie", no matter how many people say it isn't.
>>84448574
>>84448601
>just a movie
Okay so you're saying that Lucas is being a petty cunt for not releasing it then.
>>84448574
thats hilariously terrible
>>84448540
An artist can make a work with his own meaning and intentions behind it. You may view it and interpret it in your own way based on your own biases. Everyone may come and view it and bring their own views into how they see it.
It doesn't make the views and meaning of the creator any less important because you feel differently about it.
Doesn't mean you can't still enjoy it in your own way, but you can tell an artist to make their work according to your feelings.
If an artist owns a piece which they made, they can hide it away from the world if they so please.
Take it from their house after they die and now you own it.
>>84446193
I can interpret your post as a potato.
>>84448653
He can be, it was his movie.
>>84448881
Darnit.... almost got it.
>>84448908
But people can still call him out for being a petty cunt over it.
That's what Trey and Matt were doing with that episode.
>>84446165
>That house you designed and built is so good that squatters have moved in and started altering it in their image because it doesn't belong to just you anymore
>>84448859
I'm gonna be honest here man, I just wanted to make the Bo Burnham reference.
>>84446282
You didn't see TFA, did you?
>>84449285
TFA was nowhere near as terrible as 4chan hoped it would be. It was pretty much a note-for-note reboot for a new generation of fans, and worked pretty well, except Rey's development as a Jedi was lazy and the Starkiller or whatever was too easily beaten and the destruction of the Republic barely registered. I enjoyed it at the time, felt no need to see it again, and am confident future movies will experiment more.
Plus Rogue One looks fucking great.
So what's the closet I can get to watching the original-version of the OT, in the highest quality I can? Is it the 1995 VHS, the Despecialized edition, or some third thing?
>>84449285
Are we still pretending that TFA wasn't better than episodes 1, 2 or 3?
>>84449134
But their point was that it wasn't his movie, it was everyone's movie. Specifically, it was now their movie. How dare he mess with their movie!
>>84449456
It had a girl in it and she won a fight so yes. It was the worst thing ever.
>>84449456
People were pretending?
>>84449456
Prequel fans are still butthurt that everything isn't about them anymore.
>>84449219
But that analogy doesn't work here. It would have to be more like "The people who live in the house you built, that you built and said anyone could live in at any time, don't think the house needs a room dedicated to Jar-Jar Jinks."
Not the best rebuttal, but you see where I'm going.
>>84449418
Some old laser disc print I think is technically the 'purest' Lucas purged every other version to conform to his retareded extra cgi insertions.
>>84449134
I'd agree if it weren't for the moralizing speech at the end about how the film "isn't his anymore".
Call out, make fun of, parody, whatever. But act like a moralfag and muh feels about it, and you just sound like a whiner.
>>84449456
1 and 2 definitely, I can see how one could argue 3 was better simply because it's the end of the prequels and thus had the most payoff and crazy shit happening.
>>84449514
It also had a black man in it. Don't you see that white culture is being threatened?
>>84449561
>3 was better simply because it's the end of the prequels and thus had the most payoff and crazy shit happening
That doesn't make any sense.
>>84446653
That's not true at all. Lucas has always been smart with taking advantage of merchandising because it does make a lot of money but you have to remember he financed everything Star Wars after IV out of his own pocket. Every single time. The merch is what allowed this.
There is a lot wrong with the prequels, overall they are not good movies, but if you actually read interviews with George you can totally see where he was coming from and why he did what he did, even in the awful mistakes. His biggest sin is being a bad actor director and not retaining people to rein him.
Please stop repeating things you hear in meme reviews whose only purpose is to entertain with cheap jokes.
>>84449561
3 was just less-terrible, but still REALLY bad in hindsight. The crazy shit has zero urgency until the very end of the movie, they throw a bunch of connection shit to the OT in during the last 10 minutes, and Padme dies of Being Sad (you can claim this is some master life-drain created by Palpatine, but that's not implied strongly enough in the film to make it a good movie).
>>84449261
>>84449580
I did not mean simply because it was the 3rd movie of a trilogy it is automatically good, rather because it was the end of the Prequels and Anakin's descent into being Darth Vader there was a lot of crazy stuff going on that make for a more entertaining movie.
Episode 3 gets the payoff of the rather shitty 1 and 2 so it had a lot of pretty good stuff with less bullshit. So if I heard someone say "Revenge of the Sith is a better movie than The Force Awakens" while I would not necessarily agree I can see how they could arrive at that conclusion.
If they said the same thing about 1 or 2 I'd probably laugh.
>>84449561
1 is the best of the prequels though. Qui-Gon, Obi-Wan, and Luke are the best characters in Star Wars.
>inb4 muh midichlorians
>inb4 people thinkin they're nanomachines that explain the force through science
>inb4 people not understanding that they reinforce the Force as a biological tether that exists within us
>inb4 people taking Qui-Gon's metaphorical explanation to a fucking child absolutely literally
>>84449611
Childbirth combined with heartbreak is just bullshit enough to work in a movie. That shit has probably happened in real life.
>>84449656
>I did not mean simply because it was the 3rd movie of a trilogy it is automatically good
I don't even know how you came to this conclusion.
>rather because it was the end of the Prequels and Anakin's descent into being Darth Vader there was a lot of crazy stuff going on that make for a more entertaining movie.
Yes, that was pretty much what you said, but repeating it doesn't really make it sensible if the crazy stuff is bad.
>>84449656
I'd argue the opposite. It had a lot more important moments, which means it was worse when it completely botched all of them.
>>84449574
Yeah, anyone who likes it is just a PCuck and absolutely pathetic.
Not like me, the guy that gets really mad on the internet about a movie .
>>84449677
People die of "broken heart" and "lose of spirit" all the time in real life. Not much recently, mind you, but even 50 years ago it wasn't that uncommon. Happened all the time in antiquity, and old fantasy stories, which fits when you consider Star Wars is just old fantasy tropes put into space.
>>84449743
>50 years ago it wasn't that uncommon
I dare you to prove this statement.
>>84449456
it was better than the prequels, but it wasn't a good film. and i had no problem with the protagonists.
The prequels get better the more you think about them and make connections to the originals.
That does not make them good movies. If a movie fails to imprint its themes on the audience in the first go-round then it's pretty safe to say that it has failed on some important levels. That's saying nothing of the terrible scripts and awful direction during scenes where anyone has more than two words to say.
However, the meme that Lucas didn't care or that the prequels are soulless needs to die.
>>84449900
>the more you think about them and make connections to the originals
In other words, you're making them better than Lucas did.
>>84449760
> see: Broken Heart Syndrome
>>84450101
Oh, you want me to prove you right? Not how that works.
>>84446165
Well he sold it as a product, so not really.
But the artist is free to release re-interpretations however much they see fit.
>>84449922
Sure. They're stupidly dense. But I base everything off of stuff that's in the movie or that Lucas himself has clarified. I don't read any books, I don't subscribe to crackpot theories. I go on what's in the movies themselves. If you watch them 1-6 like Lucas has always advocated you get a much clearer picture of what he wanted to convey. All of the "not muh Jedi" and "not muh emperor" complaints fall apart when you watch the prequels first. There is very little that actively contradicts the OT, they weren't meant to retcon anything, they were intended to connect directly to the OT and provide a greater understanding that enhances the story of the OT. Again, he failed in many ways. They are not good movies and certainly not better than the OT. But it's not because he didn't care.
However it's amusing to me that people complain about him telling too much and not showing and yet don't pay attention to the scenes where's he's showing everything and telling nothing.
>>84450173
>Sure
Thank you.
>>84450179
Thanks man, you really contributed to the discussion.
It's really annoying how people like you outright refuse to meet people like me in the middle.
>>84450211
>Thanks man
You're welcome.
>>84449456
It was better than prequels, but only by so much. It's still nothing compared to the originals.
>>84450232
Why are you so afraid of legitimate discussion? Why can't you accept that people can see these movies in shades of grey instead of black and white?
>>84450304
>Why are you so afraid of legitimate discussion?
I don't see any of these words in my posts, what are you talking about?
>>84448547
they are fucking awful
>>84450320
Well you're snidely harping on innocuous shit I've said in lieu of commenting on any of the talking points I've actually raised.
>>84450354
>snidely harping
By thanking you for agreeing with me.
>>84449672
they are cardboard cut outs with no depth.
>>84449589
A lot of the people he bounced ideas off were either out of his life, dead or the new people were literally just yes men, his entire large company was basically a bunch of people that knew eachother. That is how you used to get a job with lucasarts. Or any of the branches really. I used to work with people that worked for him and said that companies had a lot of issues because of it.
Considering TFA felt like a focus group tested shot for shot remake of ANH, I disliked it for those reasons but none of the new actors were as terrible as people wanted them to be, they're just not the ideal. When you're used to pinnacle of humanity playing these roles, seeing flawed people now it just doesn't feel the same.
>>84449900
>However, the meme that Lucas didn't care or that the prequels are soulless needs to die.
Go watch the plinkett reviews, he didn't give 2 shits.
>>84450403
Which is still a big step up from Rey
>>84450517
Rey is literally better than every Jedi in the prequels besides Obi-Wan.
>>84450373
If I've misinterpreted I apologize. Forgive me, this is a common problem I run into around here.
I use to hate the prequels with every fiber of my being. I loved the Plinkett reviews and thought they were gospel.
Now I've got a more nuanced view of them. I didn't do a 180 and suddenly think they're great movies. I don't blindly suck on the Lucas teat or whatever. I see the dude's flaws very clearly. I just realized that a lot of people including myself overreacted to certain aspects of the prequels. For every legitimate flaw and complaint there is one that is born from misunderstanding. This has made them, if nothing else, very interesting to me.
And yet any time I try to raise some interesting discussion, usually in how the good aspects are only good because of how they connect to the OT, I get shut down. Usually to cries of
>lol prequel babby watch Plinkett
Like this guy: >>84450488
It's quite frustrating.
>>84450573
>If I've misinterpreted I apologize
I forgive you.
>>84450403
>Qui-Gon
>cardboard cutout
Qui-Gon is the second most nuanced charcter in the movies. Only Obi-Wan has him beat and much of his complexity is due to his and Anakin's relationship with Qui-Gon.
Also you're not trying to pretend the OT characters weren't cardboard cutouts are you? The simple archetypal nature of them is one of the reasons people love them.
>>84446419
> He actually cared about star wars
>>84450567
Good joke
>>84446165
>south park made George Lucas look like he was a reluctant villain and Spielberg was the evil one
Biggest bullshit out of that episode
Spielberg is an amazing director. Lucas was the shit head who fucked every thing he touched up.
>>84450807
>Spielberg is an amazing director
Ehhh.. a little pushing it there
>>84450885
Dude, in his heyday, he was one of the best directors around, I mean, did you see Close Encounters of the 3rd Kind? That film had AMAZING directorial work, he was able to get kids to emote in ways that most other directors couldn't dream of.
>>84450573
That's because those movies were hot garbage.
Attack of the clones is one of the worst blockbusters ever made. Just read the script, it's fucking terrible and feels like it's written by a computer with no understanding of human emotion.
>>84450688
Qui-Gon is so 2D dimensional it's pathetic.
Lucus should, and probably is embarrassed.
Neeson hated it so much he didn't even come back for II and III as a force ghost.
>>84451105
He had a nice melody at least
>>84451105
It's ridiculous how many amazing actors were completely wasted in the prequels. Lucas somehow made Samuel L. Jackson a boring character.
>>84451147
I'd say only Obi-Wan and Sheev were used properly.
Even Lee sucked as Dooku.
>>84451070
Man you haven't seen many movies if you think that one is one of the worst. It's bad don't get me wrong but there is so much worse.
Also you have to remember it's about weird sterile space monks and the main character is basically an angsty pubescent adolescent rebelling against the system.
The romance isn't supposed to feel legitimate. It's supposed to feel awkward and forced because it is. Two idiots doomed the galaxy because they convinced themselves they were in love based on some shared high-tension experiences. This is one of Plinkett's misunderstandings, he comments on how stiff and awkward it feels when that's the whole point. I don't know how you could listen to Anakin's weird creepy obsessive ravings and think otherwise.
Who was worse, George Lucas or Walt Whitman?
>>84451434
Whoah now what's wrong with Walt Whitman?
>>84451310
no offense anon but most people just assumed that was a side effect of lucas autisming his actors.
If it was done on purpose that would at least make it palatable but to what end I am unsure. Both characters were damaged in their own way but Padme seemed to be a function adult that was just romantically inexperienced, not broken like anakin. It would explain his issues but not hers.
I think to buy that analysis, her behavior might have to be different?
>>84449677
>Medically, there is nothing wrong with her. She has lost the will to live.
Going from healthy childbirth to dying of depression in less than five minutes is an insult to mothers and to those of us who have contemplated or attempted suicide.
>>84451509
Functioning, rather*
>>84451310
No, what people mean is that the writing is forced and awkward. The two characters aren't behaving like real people. The writing is telling you they're in love, but that's not the feeling you get when looking at them on screen. Look at Han and Leia in ESB. You can immediately tell they're crazy about each other, even though they keep denying it. Leia won't accept that she's in love with a dirty smuggler, and Han won't accept he's in love with a stuck up princess. But the way they act betrays that and shows you how they really feel. This is what's missing from Anakin and Padme.
>>84451509
Honestly Padme gets the short end of the stick moreso than anyone. In the first movie she has agency but Portman can't act. In the second movie she's just the object of Anakin's fixation and basically a plot device. In the third movie she's just barefoot and pregnant and gets a contrived death cause Lucas couldn't think of a better way to wrap things up otherwise. And while it was handled terribly I kinda don't blame him, it would be even more contrived to imply that she died off-screen in between trilogies.
But the second movie throws it in your face that they aren't really supposed to be together. They have nothing in common, they disagree on everything, they argue and bicker throughout the whole movie, Padme won't give Anakin any quarter, the Jedi go on and on about Jedi and politics aren't supposed to mix, Anakin is obviously only attracted to her cause he's a stunted manchild (who could blame him) fixated on the last relics of his past life and she's the only non-monk girl he's ever known, etc. But they decide to get married because they both made it through Naboo and later Geonosis. The scene in the area and later the marriage is practically a resignation, cause they thought they were going to die. It's like she feels bad for the shit for that happened to him or something and has to follow through.
It definitely wasn't conveyed clearly and Padme is a bad character but I don't think Lucas ever meant for it to feel legitimate. It's the bizarro ESB romance.
what was this epsiode again? I want to rewatch it
>>84446165
"An Artwork is finish when it is sold to the buyer"
>>84446316
"You are technically correct. The best kind of correct"
>>84451753
The writing isn't telling you they're in love though. Anakin isn't tragic because he killed his beloved wife, he's tragic because he mistakes obsession and attachment for love.
The fact that Luke is ultimately able to reach his father through the unconditional loving bond between parent and child (keep in mind that Obi and Yoda tell him this isn't possible and expect Luke to kill him) is the lynchpin of this.
>>84446316
>Sequels and remasters don't delete the "pure" versions,
Except that's exactly what he has been doing
>>84451874
You are pulling stuff from your ass.
>>84451459
What he did to Leaves of Grass was pretty shitty.
I can't believe no one mentioned this.
It's called "Death of the Author".
Come on guys, at least try to be educated.
>>84446165
No, artists can do what they want with their art. I think Lucas should have the other versions available but it's his call.
>>84451769
I can see where you're coming from and don't think that is a bad way of seeing it but a lot of the scenes meant to convey the things people argue about are either cut for pacing or were never added from the screenplay, they have a lot more interactions than what we see which is why he grows fixated on her and not just through child eyes.
The home scenes on Naboo that were cut were much much longer but if you add too much of that, it stops feeling like a starwars movie, so they were cut.
The women looking at him in bar/chase scene in II show how easily it is for him to attract women so I don't think it is that, he needs connection and is obviously a momma's boy, she's older, sophisticated and handles herself with poise.
The novelization does a great job of conveying inner thinking that we do not get to see. Salvatore made a decent piece out of the screenplay but we're never going to see that.
I almost feel like they should have cut younger anakin completely and started with just a younger version of hayden so he had time to grow into the role and spaced out last two movies so he got to be older when he was darth vader.
What, exactly, does "belong" mean here?
Star Wars is an idea. Nobody can "own" an idea, once it gets to you, you do whatever you want with it. Ideas belong to everyone and no one.
To put this is context: how is Disney executives controlling Star Wars any better than the person who dreamt it up? How is a body of corporate suits guaranteed to make better creative decisions than an eatablished artist?
To put it another way: go ahead and try to crowdfund a Star Wars fan film that could stand right next to any of the movies in quality. See how much money you get.
Star Wars is way too fucking big and way too many people have way too much of their psyche tied to it. SOMEBODY ultimately has to make the movies. SOMEBODY ultimately has to be declared as the person or entity in charge of the canon.
You either relinquish all future Star Wars movies, or accept that Star Wars movies cost money.
>>84451895
Nah, Lucas is just shit at conveying it. He's talked about how the scene in the arena where they give in is the point of no return for them as characters. Padme gimps her career and Anakin gets a new relationship to fixate on.
But the whole movie up to that point revolves around Anakin obsessing over Padme for no good reason other than being a horny teenager and Padme quite sensibly rejecting him.
Another thing about the prequels is that everyone is an idiot. None of the protagonists make a single good decision at any point. It makes for bad movies but again Lucas has stated that it's intentional. They're about flawed characters who fail.
>>84452043
It's a real shame, they could have been great movies if Lucas hadn't decided to try to appeal to everybody under the sun. Instead they're Frankenstein's monsters, a mixture of good ideas and visionary thinking with awful unfocused writing and of course woefully mishandled shit like Jar-Jar.
>>84452400
His universe has touched basically the whole of humanity, when you get a fanbase that large, I'm not even sure what you could do to appease that.
No story would be good enough. I think about it a lot and I wouldn't want that kind of pressure regardless of money.
People in Africa that don't have constant access to electricty know about starwars. Then you got disney worrying more about growing the brand in China where the mythology and ideas are just fundamentally wrong. Even with eastern mysticism in starwars.
Good thing Tolkien died before people started hating euro-centrism.
>>84450488
Mike has no inside knowledge of George Lucas or his company. He makes funny jokes, but the guy has barely anything concrete to go off of but muh feels and nostalgia blindness.
Rich Evans is the true star of the show.
>>84451105
Neeson spoke very highly of his experience working on the movie. He didn't come back because he wasn't needed in 2 and 3.
>>84451216
Lee gave an excellent performance. He basically acted like Saruman but with a lightsaber.
>>84452925
He got injured or something but he was going to do more AD for the third movie as a force ghost at the end.
>>84451951
Except this author is still kicking and at the time was still making stuff.
>>84453049
Dude, at least read the wiki page of it.
It means that as soon as an author/artist publishes something, his opinion doesn't matter any more.
It's its own thing from then on.
>>84452043
Not a bad idea with Hayden, but if they waited too long, people would have gotten tired of waiting and moved on to newer movies. Some people were already annoyed it took 3 years between each movie.
>>84452162
Honestly, for all people talk about the shitty screenplays, they're really not that bad. The original films had some leaps in logic too, but the actors were able to carry it.
Lucas really needed someone who could work with the actors, that way Lucas could focus on the other things he was more interested in. If the actors had some better direction, most people would be ok with the plot.
>>84451514
I thought Anakin was sucking the life out of her with the force to keep himself alive.
>>84452974
Didn't hear about that. The guy loved Star Wars, must have sucked to not get to be in it again.
>>84453120
Before we got yearly releases, people used to have to wait a lot longer between movies, and between trilogies, which is what made starwars such an event.
History is probably going to forget that as disney runs the brand into the ground with endless yearly movies and soft fluff eu garbage they've been making.
More time would have given the entire project a better finish, more time would have helped the whole thing. Imagine amount of anger he would have for how movies were perceived and how he could use that in his character.
I think people would have waited just fine, time means nothing with an established story. The only time problem really is dealing with people aging but if you account for that, time shouldn't be an issue at all. There was script rumors a long time ago about Lucas's original ideas for a sequel trilogy and its too bad he got so burned out because that would have been the series to start working on in 90s.
>>84453255
Small car accident or injury doing something else, all I know is it kept him from being in the 3rd movie of the prequels.
The scene where obiwan/yoda learn about force ghosts and essentially immortality, he was going to be in that scene and he would have been the focus, showing them how to survive after death.
In the novelization yoda admits Quigon understood even things he did not and was a true master. Which makes his death all that more great for believing in the force no matter what. Or tragic depending on how you look at it.
>>84446165
Yes. Artists don't go back and fuck with a statue or painting they already completed more than 10 years prior to fucking with it. That's why they do plenty of exhaustive "fucking with it" when they are making it, to make sure they get it right the first time.
>>84449355
>TFA was nowhere near as terrible as 4chan hoped it would be. It was pretty much a note-for-note reboot for a new generation of fans
TFA was exactly as terrible as everyone knew it would be. It was corporate laziness projected onto a nostalgic cover. It was the artistic equivalent of microwave ramen noodles - the only way you could possible enjoy it is if you have no other options.
Also,
>The movie was amazing, but I don't want to see it again.
>>84449456
The Force Awakens was worse than the prequels.
Fight me.
>>84452516
Yeah I can imagine the hodge podge of blatant Taoist and Buddhist ideas being off-putting to the east where those religions are still widely practiced with considerably more divergence and nuance than Lucas portrayed. As a westerner that's one of my favorite parts of course.
>>84449574
>It also had a black man whose only purpose was to look funny and be whipped by some feminist monstrosity.
Fix'd.
It was never his to begin with, really.
The best viewing order is I, II, IV, V, III, VI.
You cannot prove me wrong
>>84453084
But as long as he's still around, he's aloud to do anything he wants with his work. To say he can't because "we liked it, and your opinion doesn't matter" is stupid.
The authors opinion matters, "death of the author" just means you're allowed to have you're own way of reading a text that is different from the author.
>>84449285
I did. It slightly better than the Prequels, all of which were made by George. Lucas hasn't made a "good" movie since Return of the Jedi, and hasn't directed a good movie since "Star Wars" (I refuse to call it "A New Hope" because that subtitle is fucking awful).
>>84453352
I think it rubs them wrong same way Disney tried to sell Mulan in china. They westernize their ideas and it just never sits well with them.
>>84453328
It's rather bizarre how everything probably would have been okay if Qui-Gon hadn't died but it's simultaneously kinda all his fault for picking the kid up in the first place and sort of neglecting Obi-Wan towards the end in favor of Anakin.
And of course he's the same guy who says that everything happens for a reason. The Force works in mysterious ways or some shit.
>>84449517
That's combined with the assraping Plinkett gave them, that they still throw apoplectic fits over how "great" the Prequels were.
>>84453328
Maybe there's a reason he looks so much like a Jesus.
>>84453404
I'm not saying an author cannot say anything about this work, I'm saying that an author's opinion does not necessarily matter more than anyone else's.
Consider Fahrenheit 451.
Bradbury wrote is about how TV was superceding reading. That was his intent.
But what he wrote was more effective as story about censorship.
A work of art is its own thing. Once the artist releases it, he's just another person analyzing it.
>>8445340
>you cannot prove me wrong
You are right because opinions are subjective
Personally I accept either I-II-III-IV-V-VI or IV-V-I-II-III-VI
I am curious to hear your reasoning however
>>84453403
I can beat that.
IV, V, VI
>>84446165
No, basically what >>84446362 says.
>>84453271
I disagree about more time. A better use of the time they had is what was needed. Somebody working with Lucas to direct his actors, while Lucas fiddled with his ships and explosions.
With any series, if you wait to long it can kill the hype. People are wiling to wait because they know the next installment is coming, but if the second part of a three part story isn't going to come for another 10 years, many won't see the point in getting invested.
Also, the original films only had about 3 years between each release, so he was probably trying to keep with tradition.
>>84453429
There is no guarantee that if Anakin was raised properly that they would have stopped the Sith, banite sith would have most likely just kept hidden and fucking with the galaxy. Soon as a weakness presented itself and they were in position it was inevitable.
I think Quigon could have seen Anakin's mistakes before he made them because he isn't a robot and obiwan eventually becomes a lot like his master when he gets older, the problem is he acted like a stooge when Anakin was in his formative period.
>>84453467
I hate you.
>>84453469
>But what he wrote was more effective as story about censorship.
No it wasn't. It was effective as a story about a society forgetting how to read. The crux of the plot was that a society that gave up intellectual pursuits gave way to a totalitarian society.
The only people who believe the author is "just another person analyzing it" are people who lack the comprehension skills to understand the author's message or are so far up their own assholes they can't handle being told they're wrong.
The author's opinion is the only opinion that matters. It's their story, they're the source. Fahrenheit 451 will always and forever be a story about a society which willingly gave up intellectual pursuits, particularly reading.
You provide a perfect example of Bradbury's point, by the way.
>>84453467
He also bears an uncanny resemblance to Alan Watts
>>84453534
I don't see it.
>>84453342
Actually many do. With most paintings and sculpture, it takes years to create, with many artists going back after several years to work on the same piece again. Many even completely paint over old pieces if they are unsatisfied.
Unless the piece was a commission, in which case they usually had a time table and would never see it again after the delivered it, art is kind of all about going back and fixing/remaking things you don't like.
>>84453506
Obi-Wan and Anakin were both way too butthurt about their master dying and I think that fucked up their relationship a lot.
Obi-Wan is also a hypocritical master, he constantly chastises Anakin for being too brash but he acts basically the same way when Anakin isn't around. Gotta practice what you preach.
>>84453531
>It was effective as a story about a society forgetting how to read.
If people were just forgetting, why were books illegal?
Why did people actively burn them?
Come on man, it wasn't about dusty shelves.
It was an active elimination of books and a replacement by mass televised media
>>84453556
I don't know, even if it was unintentional I consider it an amusing coincidence.
>>84453499
I meant people would wait for starwars because people love it and argue over it more vehemently than politics or just as much.
I can see your point but even with more acting coaches to finesse it, Lucas isn't exactly Fincher grabbing a 100 shots for each scene.
Some of the stuff looks like it was grabbed on the fly and they used it later. I think time would have helped for the entire vision to come out more smoothly, we can agree to disagree on that.
I wanted hayden older so fudging a year between movies wouldn't have been the worst thing.
>>84453601
CIA?
>>84453475
Parallel development of Luke and Anakin while retaining the climatic movies for the end. It emphasizes the "pottery" that George wanted and it develops Anakin as much as possible while retaining the father twist.
>>84453619
Now THAT I see.
>>84453580
That is a good point, but Palpatine basically fills the niche that is missing from his mom and quigon being gone, hell he even marries a woman four years older than himself.
He was searching for stabilizing influences, unlucky that one of them was a galactic megalomaniac mass murderer.
>>84446282
>the mouse is treating it better than he could.
yes, remaking a movie that came out in 1977 except with added affirmative action is much better than new original stories.
>There are probably people in this thread who care about who shot first
>>84453591
>If people were just forgetting, why were books illegal?
It started with people forgetting and then not caring that anything was illegal in the first place. Read the book again. It is not 1984, it isn't some Orwellian apocalypse. Society was gradually reduced to tyranny, it neither chose it nor was ever aware of it.
>Why did people actively burn them.
Because the totalitarian state told them to. But the totalitarian state did not come first.
>It wasn't about dusty shelves
The first fucking scene in the book was all about dusty shelves.
Again, thanks for proving Bradbury's point.
http://www.laweekly.com/news/ray-bradbury-fahrenheit-451-misinterpreted-2149125
>HE SAYS THE CULPRIT in Fahrenheit 451 is not the state — it is the people. Unlike Orwell’s 1984, in which the government uses television screens to indoctrinate citizens, Bradbury envisioned television as an opiate. In the book, Bradbury refers to televisions as “walls” and its actors as “family,” a truth evident to anyone who has heard a recap of network shows in which a fan refers to the characters by first name, as if they were relatives or friends.
>>84453534
>>84453601
>>84453655
fuckn ell
The problem with episodes 1-3 was the tonal shift, mentioned by Plinkett. Look at me right now and tell me why I, or anyone else, should care about 30 minutes of boring political dialogue. Aren't these movies aimed at kids? Why do we need senate hearings and political uprisings and trade discussions? Kids do not want to be beat around the bush. They want something that will click right away.And the opening of Star Wars episode 4 was exactly how you should do it:
>>84453697
cont.
>Bradbury imagined a democratic society whose diverse population turns against books: Whites reject Uncle Tom’s Cabin and blacks disapprove of Little Black Sambo. He imagined not just political correctness, but a society so diverse that all groups were “minorities.” He wrote that at first they condensed the books, stripping out more and more offending passages until ultimately all that remained were footnotes, which hardly anyone read. Only after people stopped reading did the state employ firemen to burn books.
So fuck your "death of the author" and your retarded interpretation of Bradbury's work. He's told your lot to fuck off since the 50's.
>>84453682
It doesn't matter how "original" a movie is if it's badly made with shitty acting, poorly developed characters, and a convoluted plot about space trade disputes that no one can be bothered to give a shit about.
>>84453724
As opposed to nobody understanding anything as in TFA?
pot, kettle, bro.
>>84453730
>He imagined not just political correctness, but a society so diverse that all groups were “minorities.”
Literally SJWs (and certain types of anti-SJWs)
>>84453697
I'm not saying Bradbury didn't make the story about books being forgotten.
I know that's what he wanted.
But the story works best as a story about censorship.
It didn't matter that state banned books only after people didn't like them.
Bradbury wrote a good story, but he didn't fully understand his metaphors. Like, you write a story where books are being burned in 1953, and you don't expect people to think about the Nazis?
Jesus, man.
What I'm getting at is that metaphors and meaning can extend past intention.
You can make an honest point for how Fahrenheit 451 should be interpreted about how we should hold onto our books from an entertainment point of view, like Bradbury intended.
But you an make an equal argument for how it's about not letting the state demonize book reading.
Both are valid.
Bradbury's intent matters little. The book speaks for itself.
>>84453785
I'm not defending or attacking TFA. I'm just offering some insight.
As an example, I want you to compare these two intros.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQBV9pXleF0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yHfLyMAHrQE
Which one tells me the plot of the movie right away, without talking or dialogue or any kind of boring filler?
>>84453724
Honestly the prequels as a concept have potential. They fit the basis of the original series being the events leading up to the rise of Rome as an Empire but were bogged down by unecessary characters and bad acting. Phantom Menace also lacks the sense of scale the original trilogy had though 2 does a decent job at it and 3 does pretty well. If there were better actors for Anakin as well as better writing they would be much better as a whole. The premise is honestly fine though the politics were handled poorly and there were some cringeworthy moments as a result
>The banking clan will sign your treaty
Shit like this was inexcusable
>>84453724
There really isn't that much political dialogue, people exaggerate it. The problem is that the political stuff is so dry that it doesn't stick in your brain.
Anyway I agree that IV's opening absolutely trumps I. But you know what? IV also slows to a crawl after the Tantive battle. I tried introducing a youngun through IV recently and as soon as it switches focus to the droids bumbling around on Tatooine he had already lost interest and was back to his phone. So it depends on perspective.
>>84453823
you're making a comparison and trying to make one side of the issue out of bounds. That isn't how comparing and contrasting works.
TFA is nonsensical and need supplemental material to be understood and when I watched the prequels when I was much younger than I am now, I didn't find any of it boring, it felt like it was setting the mood and felt a little uncertain as if I didn't know what was going to happen next. I was never confused about the story.
You cannot say that about TFA.
>>84453811
>But the story works best as a story about censorship.
No it doesn't. It has nothing to do with censorship. Go back and read it again.
>Like, you write a story where books are being burned in 1953, and you don't expect people to think about the Nazis?
Yes, that's a reasonable expectation, especially since he CLEARLY AND POIGNANTLY EXPLAINS THE ENTIRE PROCESS OF HOW BOOKS FELL OUT OF FAVOR.
>But you an make an equal argument for how it's about not letting the state demonize book reading.
The state never demonized book reading, you colossal fuckwit! It was a democratic society that demonized book reading, the state was only reflecting the will of the people!
No, both are not valid. Your interpretation is flatly wrong, as the first ten fucking pages of the book carefully explain away every point you've so far made.
Shut the fuck up and read a book.
>>84453880
>when I watched the prequels when I was much younger than I am now, I didn't find any of it boring
The moment they sit in the room and start drinking tea, I just began to tune out.
>>84453372
Finn was pretty cool, though. We don't often have a protagonist who doesn't want to get involved in this shit.
However, he and Poe were both far more interesting than Rey. That's not a good thing if Rey is really our protagonist.
Episodes 8 and 9 would be vastly better if it focused on the two, and left Ms. Sue in the background.
>>84453783
Well to be fair the trade dispute isn't the sole thing you're supposed to focus on. The overall plot is Naboo being caught between the oppressive federation and the uncaring Republic. The ins and outs of the dispute don't matter, it's simplified for children. The political stuff is there for the adults.
It's a great example of how unfocused the plot is.
>>84453971
I never said it was for everyone, but people making blanket statements as if there isn't people in this very thread that disagree with previous statements is just disingenuous at best.
I've found kids that can be bored at just about anything including constant explosions so dictating how you're going to make your movie on that or some fat asshat from wisconsin making funnies out of it doesn't seem a reason to deviate from your vision, if people agree with it or not.
>>84453994
>Poe
Literally who?
>>84453880
What about TFA was confusing? The specifics of the relationship between the Empire, First Order, and Resistance? I agree they could have clarified more of it in the movie, but it doesn't make the story difficult to understand.
>>84453928
> It has nothing to do with censorship
>burning books has nothing to do with censorship
Wow.
What can I say?
It's like saying "eugenics has nothing to do with Nazis".
It's fundamentally intertwined now.
I have no more rebuttal for this. If you can't see it, you never will.
>The state never demonized book reading,
They burned books and the property of people who owned books. They arrested those who had them.
How the fuck is that not "demonization"?
You seem totally locked in on seeing things only on a literal level.
>The in-universe explanation says that the people chose this, therefore it has nothing to do with censorship by the state
The Nazis were voted in "democratically" too, by the way. So, by your logic, nothing they did could be counted as authoritarian?
Good lord man, look from a meta-textual point of view.
I cannot help you if you cannot look it from that point of view.
![ku-xlarge[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/auuiwXR.jpg "ku-xlarge[1].jpg")
>>84454081
>I cannot help you if you cannot look it from that point of view.
>>84454041
They had to release an EU map so people could figure out shit in their movie. That isn't good. None of it was clear in relation to the story beyond two factions fighting it out. The entire cosmology of the story was oblique and one of the reasons for that is trying to mirror the first movie of a universe that started it all without explaining anything because you're nostaglia baiting is a little hard to handle even by a blockbuster guy like JJ which is problem with their entire strategy and while it might not confuse you, I had to explain to people that saw the movie before I even did why two similar groups were fighting after the war was over and darth vader was dead.
If random normies are like wtf, that's all I need to know and while that is anomalous sampling, my argument relies on the fact that you think talking heads and exposition dumps = bad
well to tell a story, sometimes you got to exposition dump. Lucas wanted to do that in beginning and get it out of the way. Maybe you'd prefer transformers. I don't know. Michael bay will never lack for explosions.
To understand what is going on in their new remake, you would need to read badly written fluff books and check out other eu materials to figure out half of the shit in their movie, that isn't even good business strategy. market synergy relies on impetus of driving ordinarily disconnected or lightly connected products towards different demographics and trying to pull in more customers. They just scatter-shotted a bunch of shit out there hoping they plugged all the gaps.
>>84454081
>It's like saying "eugenics has nothing to do with Nazis".
Holy shit, what the fuck are you even on about. The book was about totalitarian culture, not totalitarian governments. Your Nazi analogy is just more grasping from someone who clearly doesn't read.
>They burned books and the property of people who owned books. They arrested those who had them. How the fuck is that not "demonization"?
Now you're backtracking. You said the message of the book was to be wary of the state demonizing books. The book explains, again within the first fucking chapter, that the state had nothing to do with the demonization of books.
>You seem totally locked in on seeing things only on a literal level.
Don't try to lecture me with your vlogbrothers literary analysis. You're the one airing out your ignorance here, not me.
>The Nazis were voted in "democratically" too, by the way.
Apples. To. Oranges. You can't even hold up a single line of logic.
>Meta-textuality
Oh this will be rich.
Go on, give me your meta-textual analysis of Fahrenheit 451.
>>84454384
>Apples. To. Oranges.
How?
>>84454428
The Nazis also called for a seizure of personal firearms.
Guess the Australians, French, British, Norwegian, and Spanish are Nazis, huh?
Oh, and the Nazis also passed laws to fight inflationary spending policies. Guess any government that tries to do the same are Nazis too, eh?
Listen to yourself you great idiot. The book is not about Nazis. It isn't about eugenics. It isn't about totalitarian states. The book is about a fractious society of permanent "victims" lobbying to remove materials offensive to their sensibilities from the public sphere. The society Bradbury describes was incredibly diverse - the Nazi analogy just doesn't add up.
Be honest with me. Have you read the book? At all?
>>84454559
There is subtly of trolling and you passed it.
Now you just look silly.
>>84454589
>Not reading his argument
>Accusing me of trolling
There's stupid and then there's you, anon. Shine on you crazy diamond.
