Subject:
|
Re: A couple stupid SW questions...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.starwars
|
Date:
|
Fri, 16 Jun 2000 15:39:11 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1466 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.starwars, Aaron West writes:
> Same thing to me, why you chose to get huffy over movie critique escapes me.
Uh... I ain't huffy... :) My mood remains as it has been. I'm fairly relaxed
actually.
> Movie critique is a right of every fan. What would be the point of fandom if
> you are only allowed conditions like these for discussion? You can only
> discuss SW material not from movies, but discussing SW movies is wrong?! I
I didn't say that... again you're putting words in my mouth. I was merely
stating that it's pointless to complain about things you can't change. Even
in the very unlikely event that your opinion would get to Lucas, he's not
gonna change the SW movies to suit you.
> don't think so. I love SW and there is plenty of room for me to make a
> negative comment about something in a movie and still be a big 'ol fan. Tell
> me, is every SW fan happy that George filmed Luke and Biggs in their defining
> moments of friendship, but chose to leave 'em on the cutting room floor both
> times he released the film? Even though George considers them actual
> occurances to be inculded in his SW material body of history for the series?
Agreed... I would have loved to see that scene. But Lucas left it out, and
being that it's his story and his decision I support it. When I watch ANH I
don't sit there and think "Gee, I wish that scene was in this movie, it sucks
without it. Boy I sure think Chewie should've gotten medal, Lucas screwed up."
I enjoy the film. The film is how it is, and anything else that adds to it is
gravy.
> There, a negative comment from someone who loves SW that does not make me a
> non-fan and critiques a film. You sir are making a frivilous arguement and
> getting your feathers ruffled over something that is just not worth being
> upset over.
Wow... talk about getting feathers ruffled. Again, I'm not upset, and I don't
have any feathers... :) I hardly think my argument is frivilous. If you want
to complain about Star Wars, go ahead. I'm not going to stop you. I happen
to think it's fruitless - that's my opinion. So, complain about Star Wars and
I'll point out how frivilous it is to do so.
> Now you are not talking about movie critique anymore, but you have skipped out
> to generalized critique of an entire series by comparison to another series.
> If you are going to complain about a type of critique over a series, please be
> consistent with your own arguement. I don't think I have heard very many
> debates over why ST (insert movie title) is so much better than SW (insert
> movie title) exposing any person or party to be non-fans of either/or the
> other.
Uh... this is consistent. I wasn't discussing movie critiques, I was
discussing the critization of Star Wars. Just because the bulk of the "true"
Star Wars universe happens to be in movies, doesn't mean that I was limiting
myself to the movies only. And if you haven't heard any ST VS SW debates, you
must've been living under a rock...
> entitled to your own opinion. As I have said before, don't go getting excited
Arguing with you isn't quite enough to get me excited captain... <G>
> opinions as you. I believe constructive criticism (even if the comment is
> negative)of SW movies still makes me a fan of the series, and Lucas can be
> right and create his own work, I can enjoy it, and still I (as a free thinker
> of free will) disagree with a certain treatment of a certain issue or moment
> within a film. Ain't that part of the reason for having a brain? May I also
The criticism isn't really constructive if it doesn't lead to a change of
something. Since the Star Wars movies will not be changed, it's not
constructive. It's pointless complaining.
Again, I never said you weren't entitled to your opinion, nor did I say that
you are not a fan, I simply said that those who complain about Star Wars don't
seem, to me, like fans.
> due to time, money or ability. Lucas is not a god, merely a man like so many
> of us. The difference is that he got off his lazy behind and made his dreams
> come true. You and I also have that power, and still may remain fans who
> think.
Agreed, Lucas is not a god... I've said that before myself. He is only human
and he is bound to make mistakes. But when you like something you see past
the mistakes.
> Now if you want to, we can discuss something that will never happen and is
> still fan related: Who would win in a fight, the Enterprise 1701-E, a Star
> Destroyer, Earth battleship Agamemnon, or the Battlestar Gallactica?
> Apples, oranges, Star Trek and stars are also very enjoyable things:)
> Aaron
hmmm... I don't think I want to get into that argument... <G> My first
instinct would be a Star Destroyer, but I know that some of the other ships
have better technology. However, seeing that a Star Destroyer would most
likely be part of a fleet, and that it would certainly have many TIEs at it's
disposal, I think I'd still say the Star Destroyer.
But, I could be wrong, that is just my opinion after all... :)
-Bryan
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: A couple stupid SW questions...
|
| (...) Aaron (and we, in general) aren't complaining in the hope that George will re-do anything; we're complaining because George didn't do it as well as he might have, given certain differences of aesthetic sensibility. (...) I've heard lots of (...) (24 years ago, 16-Jun-00, to lugnet.starwars)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: A couple stupid SW questions...
|
| (...) your (...) Same thing to me, why you chose to get huffy over movie critique escapes me. Movie critique is a right of every fan. What would be the point of fandom if you are only allowed conditions like these for discussion? You can only (...) (24 years ago, 16-Jun-00, to lugnet.starwars)
|
82 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
