| | Re: Another one of those 'what's wrong with TPM' posts
|
|
"Bryan Hodges" <bhodges@SPAMBLOCKco...ntweb.net> wrote in message news:FvFzy8.JDv@lugnet.com... (...) way (...) trilogy (...) is. (...) story, (...) matter (...) the (...) sales (...) I was going to post my opinion, but I see that it already has. (...) (24 years ago, 31-May-00, to lugnet.starwars)
|
|
| | Re: Another one of those 'what's wrong with TPM' posts
|
|
(...) what (...) and (...) But how can you make those notes and/or reflect on anything if you didn't pay attention to the plot to begin with? I can't tell you how many times I've asked people to explain their opinion and they can't tell me why they (...) (24 years ago, 31-May-00, to lugnet.starwars)
|
|
| | Re: Another one of those 'what's wrong with TPM' posts
|
|
(...) Very true. It is intended to show the fall of the Old Republic, the skillful connivings of a little known senator from Naboo, and how one boy can have such a dramatic effect on the fate of the universe. (...) Me, if it's one of the Kevin J. (...) (24 years ago, 31-May-00, to lugnet.starwars)
|
|
| | Re: Another one of those 'what's wrong with TPM' posts
|
|
Scott: (...) I wasn't aware of that the book had come from the screenplay, but you raise another good point, bordering on meta-criticism; any film is a re-invention of its screenplay to some degree, and a book is likewise a re-invention of the film (...) (24 years ago, 31-May-00, to lugnet.starwars)
|
|
| | Re: Another one of those 'what's wrong with TPM' posts
|
|
(...) George Lucas, most notably. (...) At the same time, one cannot ignore the actual problems with the plot, whether or not someone else decides to "pay attention" or not. Further, "paying attention" to the plot doesn't simply mean carefully (...) (24 years ago, 31-May-00, to lugnet.starwars)
|