OTHER SCIENCE FICTION SERIES

Star Wars Prequels good, or bad?

POSTED BY: OPPYH
UPDATED: Wednesday, December 2, 2009 06:01
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 2544
PAGE 1 of 2

Sunday, November 29, 2009 8:45 PM

OPPYH


I have seen episodes 1-3 (Star Wars Prequels) and I can tell you with an honest heart...They ruined the far superior original trilogy form me.


No matter how hard I try, whenever I see Darth Vader in the originals I picture Hayden BLEEPING Christianson. The mystery, and allure of Darth Vader is lost and I thank the prequels for this. Three of my favorite sci-fi/fantasy films have been tainted, all because I trusted George Lucas to satisfy my Star Wars needs. However, he betrayed and murdered those feelings with the unbelievably bad episode 2.

Episode 3 had neat bits in it, but overall(like the other prequels) felt rushed and an undeniable lack of feeling and emotion.

Episode 1 was just kiddy stuff, that wasn't no frikking Star Wars film.

What do ya'll think?


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, November 29, 2009 10:32 PM

SHINYGOODGUY


2 things ruined Episode 1 for me - Jar Jar and the kid who was to become Darth. Also Lucas lost his sense of humor in the prequels. Gone was the tongue-in-cheek humor that made the originals enjoyable.

The one saving grace for Episode 1 was Liam Neeson's character Qui-Gon Jinn. Neeson was awesome as the older Jedi; Ewan McGregor, not so much. He didn't have the gravitas needed to carry the role of the most famous of Jedi's - Obi Wan.
The name alone for me is what Star Wars is all about - "Help me, Obi-Wan Kenobi. You're my only hope."

Episode 2 was a "Twilight" mess, with hokey dialogue and even hokier plot (hokier - is that even a word?). The less said about Episode 2 the better. The only cool thing in this installment was the battle between Count Dooku and Yoda.

Episode 3 for me did not stand out even though it was full of action but very little suspense. Well maybe a little towards the end just as Obi-Wan and Anakin begin their epic battle. The thing that spoiled it for me was Darth Vader screaming "Nooooooooo" near the end of the movie when Padme dies. It was memorable, but for the wrong reason.

Still nothing tops the original three, except of course Serenity. Well, maybe even!

SGG

Tawabawho?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, November 29, 2009 11:09 PM

JRNYFAN


There were prequels? Who authorized that? The George Lucas I know would never do such a thing, sounds like a cash grab to me and any good Star Wars fan knows that he would never, EVER do that. He would be more apt to release the original trilogy on a defunct media platform like Laser Disc just to get people to buy the entire system and then on VHS and then clean them up and re-release them on VHS again and then on DVD and then in a box set with added commentary so that in the end you have 5 different sets of the same damns movies BEFORE he would ever think of doing prequels.

*shakes head* I'm a sucker for the Original Trilogy...

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, November 29, 2009 11:18 PM

RIVERDANCER


LOL, jrnyfan, that was awesome


And oh yes, I can't abide the prequels. Didn't watch any of them all the way through. Sigh.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 30, 2009 1:34 AM

PEULSAR5

We sniff the air, we don't kiss the dirt.


oops

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 30, 2009 1:34 AM

PEULSAR5

We sniff the air, we don't kiss the dirt.


Quote:

Originally posted by jrnyfan:
There were prequels? Who authorized that? The George Lucas I know would never do such a thing, sounds like a cash grab to me and any good Star Wars fan knows that he would never, EVER do that. He would be more apt to release the original trilogy on a defunct media platform like Laser Disc just to get people to buy the entire system and then on VHS and then clean them up and re-release them on VHS again and then on DVD and then in a box set with added commentary so that in the end you have 5 different sets of the same damns movies BEFORE he would ever think of doing prequels.

*shakes head* I'm a sucker for the Original Trilogy...



Lets not forget making special editions of the movies with added special effects that enhanced them in some areas and hindered then in others (Han fired first, gorramnit!!), then release them on VHS in both fullscreen then later in letterbox, then put the original versions on the latest editions of the DVD but only in 2.0 sound.

Suckers. Aren't we all.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 30, 2009 3:06 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

Suckers. Aren't we all.



To one degree or another, no doubt. I saw the "prequels" at the theatre, and I have no real idea why. Sure, I can make the excuse for the first of them, since it WAS a "Star Wars" movie, after all, and would just HAVE TO BE awesomeness writ large. But then I kept going back to see the others, even when I knew full-well that they were going to be tripe.

Thankfully, though, I've never bought any of the movies on tape or disk of any kind.

And yes, Oppyh, the prequels really did taint the originals for me.



Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 30, 2009 4:43 AM

CYBERSNARK


There are only three good things to come out of the prequels:

Genndy Tartakovsky's Clone Wars cartoon.
The CGI The Clone Wars cartoon.
Karen Traviss' Republic Commando novels (Hard Contact, Triple Zero, True Colors, Order 66, and Imperial Commando: 501st).

Everything else is just bad fanfic.

My overall opinion of the prequels is well-known: http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.asp?b=8&t=16704
(I really ought to revise that one of these days, in light of the RC novels.)

Quote:

For those wondering why I rewrote most of RotS (aside from the fact that I just didn't like it), it's because of Lucas' main failure in his script, the one that proves he has no idea what makes the OT work, and even manages to retroactively ruin the three good SW movies (leaving the Ewok movies as the filmic high point of the franchise ).

See, the original movies draw all of their emotional force from three revelations, each of which has to hit the audience like a giant spear through the chest (to paraphrase a certain other movie). To wit:

(1) Darth Vader was Obi-Wan's apprentice, and is responsible for the death of Luke's father.
(2) Vader is Luke's father.
(3) Leia is Luke's sister.

There's a reason why That Scene in ESB is one of the most famous scenes in all of film-making, and it isn't the acting or effects. Vader's revelation has to both come completely out of left-field, and yet be utterly obvious in hindsight.

Lucas' [prequel] script spells out that Anakin Skywalker is now Darth Vader, and that he has two children, Luke, and Leia (Organa). You can't watch all 6 movies chronologically, or the originals will degenerate into a showcase of bad acting and merely half-decent writing.




-----
We applied the cortical electrodes but were unable to get a neural reaction from either patient.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 30, 2009 5:31 AM

BYTEMITE


I actually liked Ewan McGreggor as the younger Obi-Wan. As an apprentice, okay, not so much, he was pretty stifled there. But he did manage to bring warmth and occasional humour to the role, in movies that otherwise were completely devoid of the warmth of the original Trilogy.

Episode one was pretty much irredeemable.

Episode two had like one good line in it. Otherwise, yeah, the plot was all over the place.

Episode three was the better of the three new ones because it at least had some interesting, if heavy-handed commentary about government corruption, and if I can say one positive thing about the first three movies, it's that Palpatine's overtaking the Republic was masterful in it's execution. Unfortunately, it's the only believable part about the whole damn thing, and probably only because it wasn't laid out before you.

The romance - horrible. The acting, when it counted, was not great.

Select to view spoiler:


I mean, Samuel L. Jackson died screaming like a little girl. Something is WRONG there.

Dialogue wasn't nearly as snappy as it was in the first trilogy. But I think the most egregious error is that Padme and Anakin were sorely miscast. Natalie Portman is an okay actor, though sometimes her delivery comes across flat, and that was very much the case here. And Hayden Christiansen... Yeah, no.

Seriously, what happened here? Carrie Fisher as Princess Leia was a spitfire, Harrison Ford as Han Solo was roguishly snarky. Even goody two shoes Luke, if sometimes whiny, had a sweetness about him, and at least he got cool later.

Episode 1-3 didn't ruin 4-6 for me, but it was a near thing.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 30, 2009 6:50 AM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by jrnyfan:
There were prequels? Who authorized that?

It's like an urban legend or something.
Episodes 4, 5 & 6 are cool no matter what.
Any mythical "prequels" would just be a waste of time.


The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 30, 2009 8:02 AM

STORYMARK


I think the prequels are decent. They have some really good stuff, and some amazingly bad, but overall I find them pretty entertaining (with Phantom Menace barely crossing the "watchable" line).

Sure, they're not as good as the originals, but it's hard to capture lightning in a bottle twice. And, most of us are comparing the prequels to the originals through the lens of nostalgia. Much of what's bad in the prequels exists in the other films to varying degrees - especially in Jedi. But we were kids when we saw it, so those things worked for us then, and we grew up loving them so they seem fine now. Kids who grew up on the prequels will still love them in 20 years.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 30, 2009 8:26 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

ByteMite wrote:

Episode three was the better of the three new ones because it at least had some interesting, if heavy-handed commentary about government corruption, and if I can say one positive thing about the first three movies, it's that Palpatine's overtaking the Republic was masterful in it's execution. Unfortunately, it's the only believable part about the whole damn thing, and probably only because it wasn't laid out before you.




Yuppers, you nailed it. The politics involved was fantastic - if only you knew going into the damned thing that you were going to see a parable about the decline of the Greek and Roman Empires... Many nods made to the old ways and the epic stories, which in its own way IS fairly masterful. But it just wasn't very exciting to watch, and at the time it felt like a bad sendup of the Dubya Bush years, which I go to things like Star Wars movies to ESCAPE, not to embrace. :)

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 30, 2009 9:06 AM

CYBERSNARK


See, I thought RotS was the weakest of the three --not just the worst Star Wars movie, but the worst movie I've ever seen that didn't involve Pauly Shore.

I think it's mainly because, given the sorts of things I tend to be a fan of, I've given a fair amount of thought to the whole "turning Evil" thing. It's an inherently interesting storytelling device --what is it that separates the monsters from those who fight them? Where exactly is the line where a man's justifications become rationalizations, and how far should one go in pursuit of "the greater good?" We have so much of our worldviews wrapped up in the declaration that "Evil People" are not like "Us" --We are the Good Guys, could never be anything like Them, and so We can't possibly be expected to sympathize or understand Them; They are too different, too wrong.

What if that's not the case? What happens when we are forced to consider the uncomfortable possibility that we have the potential to be as monstrous as any villain? What happens if we have to understand the monster?

And Lucas. . . reduces this ethical and philosophical quandry to the time it takes to flip a light switch.

After more than ten years of struggle finding his place, establishing a new family, coming to accept his responsibilities. . . Anakin simply changes his mind.

It's not that he wouldn't be driven to save Padme, but there's a WIDE gulf between "I'll learn the ways of the Sith in order to save the woman I love" and "I'm willing to murder a room full of schoolchildren." The moment Sidious dangles that hint of saving Padme, it's as though Anakin swallows Dr. Jekkyl's potion and effectively becomes a completely different person. All the characterization he (should have) picked up over the trilogy just got thrown out the window.

If I hadn't been boxed into my seat, I would cheerfully have walked out of the theatre at that point.

-----
We applied the cortical electrodes but were unable to get a neural reaction from either patient.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 30, 2009 9:14 AM

STORYMARK


Quote:

Originally posted by Cybersnark:

After more than ten years of struggle finding his place, establishing a new family, coming to accept his responsibilities. . . Anakin simply changes his mind.



Now, I'll agree that the shift happened a bit too quickly - but you seem to be missing the point to part of the story. That 10 year struggle to fit in, find his new place, etc.... wasn't working out.

The change wasn't in spite of these things - it was in great deal because of them.

He didn't "change" his mind. His motivation was the same throughout. He changed allegiances, yes, from the group that wasn't fully embracing him, despite 10 years of trying, to the guy who fully accepted him and supported him from the start.

Sure, going from "save Padme" to "kill the kiddies" is a big leap, and would be out of the blue without context (though Anakin's child-killing tendancies had been established as precedent in Episode II anyway). It's making that leap of embracing the dark side which is his choice - once he does that it DOES massively change him on a fundamental level - killing the man he was, yadda yadda - all stuff which had, thematically and plot wise, been part of the story since the original trilogy.

If you see that as simplistically as a light switch, you were missing a great deal of what happened both overtly, and sub textually.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 30, 2009 9:23 AM

OPPYH


Quote:

Originally posted by Cybersnark:
"I'll learn the ways of the Sith in order to save the woman I love" and "I'm willing to murder a room full of schoolchildren."



I remember one of my friends saying "awesome" when Anakin flashed his lightsaber, leaving to the imagination the barrage of fury blazing through the younglings. I'm thinking...Oh great now Whenever I see Darth VAder in the original trilogy I will also see a coward who kills many defenseless children.
Even Darth Vader I think wouldn't be that evil.
That scene could have been skipped.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 30, 2009 9:34 AM

STORYMARK


I see why the scene makes folks uncomfortable....

But seriously - how would that be something Vader would never do? Did you expect him to just pat them on the heads and send them along?

He wouldn't be "that" evil..... This is a guy who was totally okay with obliterating an entire planet.

Somehow, I'm thinking there were more than a few kids on Alderaan.



Vader going from evil to good in Jedi struck me more as a light switch change than his turn from good to evil.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 30, 2009 10:55 AM

CYBERSNARK


Anakin did not kill "children" in AtoC. Anakin killed "animals" ("animals" that had already proven to be an ongoing threat to the safety and lives of Republic Citizens) under the influence of a rage of insanity --a vital rationalization, and one that he called himself on after the madness passed.

Condoning the destruction of Alderaan (which Vader himself didn't actually do, and which used a weapon that he wasn't in favour of anyway), was a military decision, aimed at demonstrating the consequences of open rebellion, and made during a time of active warfare in which Imperial personnel (and citizens) were being endangered by mass "terrorism."

Neither of these is on par with a conscious decision to kill a roomfull of children (many of whom were explicitly civilized, sapient beings, whom Anakin could well have known, and who couldn't possibly be rationalized away as sub-human monsters or clear-and-present threats) simply because Palpatine told him too.

Where was the after-the-fact angsting? Where was the hesitation? Where was the wondering what Padme would think if she knew? Where was the remorse? My argument is that Dark-Anakin had a totally different personality than Anakin had previously demonstrated. Turning to the Dark Side wasn't character development, it was treated as magic brainwashing.

Also. . . you're falling into the same trap I mentioned before, of assuming that The Monster is Always Totally Evil. Vader was a civilized being who imposed discipline and Order in the name of what he perceived as the greater good.

Vader never inflicted harm on anyone who didn't "deserve" it (either as an active enemy of the Empire/Emperor, or for demonstrated incompetence in wartime). Indeed, Vader is frequently demonstrated as being downright polite and considerate even to people he does not like (but who serve a valuable purpose to the Empire, like Moff Tarkin, Boba Fett, or even Lando Calrissian [until Lando's attachment to the known terrorists became evident --and even then, Vader tacitly offered Lando an "out." It was Lando who refused to take the opportunity and forced the situation to escalate]). He's certainly not friendly, but he's not a wild dog foaming at the mouth either.

The face heel turn in RotJ had been set up through two movies, largely by Luke confirming (ex cathedra) that there was still conflict (i.e., goodness) in Vader (despite both Obi-Wan and Yoda saying otherwise). Earlier in RotJ, Vader himself noted that Luke didn't understand the Power of the Dark Side --implying that Vader was being forced to serve the Emperor.

Vader was not a monster, but a man trapped by despair, who believed that there was no hope of defeating the Emperor or standing against the Darkness.

All that happened in RotJ was Vader/Anakin regaining his hope, and deciding that it was possible to defy the Darkness, even if it cost him his life. His own life had been totally ruined by that point anyway, but he was still able to preserve the good of others (his children, and all those who stood with them and would come after).

-----
We applied the cortical electrodes but were unable to get a neural reaction from either patient.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 30, 2009 11:02 AM

STORYMARK


Anakin calling them "animals" after killing them was his rationalization. They had been established a good 25 years prior as sentient creatures. Sorry to tell ya.

Your rationalization at the destruction of Alderaan still ignores the fact that he stopod and watched an entire civilization wiped out and wasn't bothered in the slightest. A military man standing by a decision to bomb a village still feels conflicted.

And that room of children he killed was a room full of future enemies, so if you want to apply military logic to Alderaan, it could be applied here as well.

Asking for after the fact angsting is again missing the point - he had crossed the line already. You might not like the idea of the monster being the monster - but that has been the entire POINT of warnings about the Dark Side all along - it will change you if you indulge. It didn't come out of nowhere.

The "he only hurt people who deserved it" defense is nonsensical, since you base it on anyone who's an enemy of the Emperor. One - that includes pretty much anyone who won't do exactly as told, and two - the younglings fit that definition.

His turn in Jedi you could defend as set up over ONE movie (not two, as even Lucas has admitted he wasn't sure Vader was Anakin at the time he made 1, and so did not incorporate any such foreshadowing). His turn to the dark side, however, was foreshadowed in 2 whole movies.



"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 30, 2009 11:04 AM

ZEEK


The prequels were awful. They really make me lose some appreciation for the original trilogy.

I wanted to see a clever motivation for Anakin to turn into Vader. That was a massive fail. It didn't feel realistic and Vader wasn't in any way a sympathetic character. He was a blithering idiot who most seemed like he wouldn't graduate high school.

The fall of the jedi was awful as well. Vader was supposed to hunt down and kill the jedi. Not some stupid clones.

Just pathetic. The only redeeming quality is darth maul's fight scene.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 30, 2009 11:08 AM

BYTEMITE


Quote:

But seriously - how would that be something Vader would never do? Did you expect him to just pat them on the heads and send them along?


Storymark: I dunno man, I mean...




Yeah, first panel, whut?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 30, 2009 11:08 AM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by Zeek:

I wanted to see a clever motivation for Anakin to turn into Vader. That was a massive fail.



But that fail in no way should affect your enjoyment of the original trilogy IMO.


The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 30, 2009 11:10 AM

STORYMARK


Quote:

Originally posted by Bytemite:
Storymark: I dunno man, I mean...




Yeah, whut?



I'm discussing what's in the film. Never read that comic, don't care. It's irrelevant to the actual film.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 30, 2009 11:17 AM

BYTEMITE


Well, okay, it's in the EU, so I admit that doesn't give it that much credibility.

Funny as hell though. XD

Anyway, if the EU can be considered canon, which is maybe a stretch since Lucas tromped all over it for the first episodes, so I guess Lucas canon takes precedence... But this still kind of establishes that when Anakin was turned to the darkside, Vader sometimes would visit (evil sithspawn practically demonic) children to have TEA. Or something.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 30, 2009 1:30 PM

STORYMARK


Quote:

Originally posted by Bytemite:
Well, okay, it's in the EU, so I admit that doesn't give it that much credibility.

Funny as hell though. XD

Anyway, if the EU can be considered canon, which is maybe a stretch since Lucas tromped all over it for the first episodes, so I guess Lucas canon takes precedence... But this still kind of establishes that when Anakin was turned to the darkside, Vader sometimes would visit (evil sithspawn practically demonic) children to have TEA. Or something.



I wasn't commenting on the quality. Some of the EU stuff is very good (and some VERY not....).

My point was merely that in discussing the merits (or lack therof) of a film, I only consider the film itself. Anything else is tertiary - I wouldn't use anything from the EU to defend of attack any particular point in the films - because they're not in the film.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 30, 2009 1:46 PM

BYTEMITE


Hmm. Okay, I guess, but isn't this an issue of canon and characterization we're discussing? particularly the issue of whether Anakin suddenly becomes OOC in Episode 3?

If I were to say, for example, "I think Mal was OOC in the Serenity movie" (I don't, this is an example), then wouldn't this be a point argued from the sense of his characterization in the rest of the franchise?

I mean, if people are arguing over whether Anakin's kid killing is internally consistent within ONLY the third movie, then you could call other depictions of his character elsewhere irrelevant. Is that what's being argued here? If you're talking about characterization of a character within a franchise, that's not a valid complaint or flaw in the movie/medium in question if that characterization is contradictory?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 30, 2009 2:01 PM

BYTEMITE


I guess I should make myself clearer though. Despite posting that comic as a joke, I actually agree with you. Anakin's change over was, perhaps, fast, but not necessarily TOO fast if you consider it in the sense of him having seen Mace Windu appearing to kill Senator Palpatine in cold blood and abusing the law enforcing authority invested in the Jedi Order, which fits with the paranoid delusions Palpatine had been feeding Anakin about a Jedi Council takeover.

Remember, Anakin has been familiar with the Jedi Order for only slightly longer than he has known Palpatine, and both have been very supportive of him. He is very conflicted up to that point about his loyalty... Though Hayden freaking Christensen doesn't exactly show it very well, or maybe the dialogue doesn't, I'm not sure.

But anyway, Jedi trainees (even the young ones) and Alderaan? Threat. So Vader destroys them both.

Of course, evil has shades. In other medium in Star Wars and the EU (Shadows of the Empire, for example, and others), it's shown Vader is actively plotting against Palpatine. Whether Vader has seen Palpatine's corruption and is acting with good intentions but darkside measures to 'fix' the problem or whether this is the traditional master apprentice ritualized Sith power struggle depicted elsewhere remains to be seen.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 30, 2009 10:48 PM

OPPYH


Quote:

Originally posted by Storymark:
Vader going from evil to good in Jedi struck me more as a light switch change than his turn from good to evil.




?

Seriously?

Vader watching his son get electrocuted...his son the only thing linking him to a human being(other than Leia). His human side takes over and he saves his son redeeming his soul before he dies.

OR:

Anakin thinks his wife might be in trouble...OK time to kill hundreds of innocents, and become an agent of evil. Weak man, seriously.


Storymark,
I see your points with the prequels but if you're suggesting that Vader's switch to the Dark side is more thematically powerful than his redemption, then I can't argue with you. It's your opinion, but seriously?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 1, 2009 5:32 AM

ZEEK


Quote:

Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:

Originally posted by Zeek:

I wanted to see a clever motivation for Anakin to turn into Vader. That was a massive fail.



But that fail in no way should affect your enjoyment of the original trilogy IMO.


It does because it makes Vader seem much more pathetic. He's no longer this cool character. He's just a pathetic tool.

To enjoy the original trilogy I really have to ignore the prequels all together.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 1, 2009 5:38 AM

CYBERSNARK


I'm not saying Anakin/Vader's rationalizations were remotely correct (that's what "rationalizations" are, in fact; lies that we tell ourselves). I'm saying that Anakin could lie to himself that the Tuskens were sub-human things (especially given that he'd grown up on Tattooine, under constant threat of the Tuskens' well-established Reaver-like behaviour). He would not have been able to so easily lie to himself about the younglings (who could well have been turned to the Dark Side, as dozens of Jedi already had been, including Anakin himself). He never even made that suggestion.

Hell, even a shot of Anakin crying as he killed them would've been something --a show of remorse or self-loathing in the face of his helplessness. Perhaps quick, almost-subliminal glimpses of Padme, as he reflects on his own child-to-be (and how he will never be able to look that child in the eye, even if this all works out).

Also, you're seeing Good/Evil as static, unchanging extremes. Vader on "Day One" of his Dark Side career is not the same as Vader 25 years later.

Put it this way:
-A high school student can drive a car.
-On my first day of grade nine, I could not drive a car. (How can this be? Am I not a high school student?)

My problem is that Anakin of RotS suddenly became Darth Vader from RotJ (blindly following the Emperor's commands with no remorse, hesitation, question, or free will of his own) within the span of one dramatic music sting. Dark-Anakin should have showed some remorse, even if Vader (from years later) would not have.

(I had a similar problem with the Force Lightning suddenly causing Palpatine to "age" [an effect it has been shown to have on no one else ever] --meaning that he doesn't age for 25 years [meanwhile, the ten year gap between TPM and AotC had been shown to do a number on him --there was also a noticeable difference between AotC Palpatine and RotS Palpatine, but it was more subtle]).

Lucas tried to show everything, which is a mistake in film (despite everything novice writers are told about "show, don't tell" --"telling" is often more effective). Imagine how much impact the Reavers would have had if the first scene of "Serenity" (the pilot, not the movie) had involved a full-fledged Reaver being brought out under a spotlight and carefully analyzed for our viewing pleasure. Lucas basically set up circumstances in RotS that must now stand almost completely unchanged for 20 years.

-----
We applied the cortical electrodes but were unable to get a neural reaction from either patient.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 1, 2009 7:51 AM

BYTEMITE


Actually I see a difference in Vader day one versus Vader 25 years later (Is it 25? I thought Luke and Leia were 18 in A New Hope). Vader day one does not question Palpatine, whereas Vader 25 years later DOES question Palpatine, taking into account EU explorations where Vader is betraying Palpatine in small ways, talking Palpatine into accepting Luke as an ally versus killing him in The Empire Strikes Back, and the big heel-face-turn in Return of the Jedi.

Quote:

(I had a similar problem with the Force Lightning suddenly causing Palpatine to "age" [an effect it has been shown to have on no one else ever] --meaning that he doesn't age for 25 years [meanwhile, the ten year gap between TPM and AotC had been shown to do a number on him --there was also a noticeable difference between AotC Palpatine and RotS Palpatine, but it was more subtle]).


This also bothered me. That and the whole strange "immaculate conception by The Force" and "the chosen one" subplot for Anakin. :/

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 1, 2009 8:00 AM

CYBERSNARK


Quote:

Originally posted by Bytemite:
(Is it 25? I thought Luke and Leia were 18 in A New Hope).

Going by the novelization, IIRC Luke was 20, Leia was 19 (Tatooine years and Alderaanian years are clearly different). ESB was about four years after Yavin, RotJ was about one year after that. 25-ish years between Anakin's fall and redemption.

-----
We applied the cortical electrodes but were unable to get a neural reaction from either patient.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 1, 2009 8:04 AM

JONGSSTRAW


Quote:

Originally posted by Bytemite:
This also bothered me. That and the whole strange "immaculate conception by The Force" and "the chosen one" subplot for Anakin.


"Chosen One"...yeah that was just silly. And then the handy catchphrase "he will bring balance to the Force"...WTF?? It was out of balance? Ooops, how'd that happen? If anything, I'd say the Sith Lord, just the one little ole Sith Lord, was sure able to "balance out" the entire Jedi force. Every Star Wars fan knew the basic story of events before New Hope. Lucas had 16+ years to figure out how he was going to tell it, and tell it in a way that would be interesting and a bit un-expected. He failed miserably. And don't even get me started on how he cheapened and whored-out The Force in the prequels.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 1, 2009 8:13 AM

STORYMARK


Quote:

Originally posted by OPPYH:


?

Seriously?

Vader watching his son get electrocuted...



The son he had already pulverized and partially dismembered himself in the prior film.

I'm not saying there's NO reason for it. But to say his turning to save his wife - the one person who accepts him for who he is, is unmotivated; yet his turning to save the son he's promised to kill if he wont turn evil makes perfect sense, doesn't exactly follow.

There are lots of things to dislike in the prequels, but it irritates me when people complain about things that more or less make sense in the greater context.


Quote:

Anakin thinks his wife might be in trouble...OK time to kill hundreds of innocents, and become an agent of evil. Weak man, seriously.


A - He didn't think she MIGHT be in trouble - he was convinced she WAS going to die - an assumption that is backed by his accurate precognitive dreams in II. this is a rather significant difference.

B - You're skipping a step. He agreed to take the fall to save his wife. The killing spree was a result, but not the intended action. And again - it's been said at least since Empire that embracing the dark side does bring about such a change. You may not like it - but it's right there in the original trilogy - so complaining about them doing what they always said seems silly.


Quote:

Storymark,
I see your points with the prequels but if you're suggesting that Vader's switch to the Dark side is more thematically powerful than his redemption, then I can't argue with you. It's your opinion, but seriously?



I didn't say it was more powerful, just that it was set up earlier, and foreshadowed more (within the constraints of the individual trilogies).

I'm happy to discuss the many flaws in the prequels, and as I have said, I didn't think the turn was handled very well. But I try to debate on what's actually there, and for someone to say there was no build up at all to the turn in III, that it was a light-switch moment, requires one to ignore a great deal in order to maintain such a position.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 1, 2009 8:36 AM

STORYMARK


Quote:

Originally posted by Cybersnark:
I'm not saying Anakin/Vader's rationalizations were remotely correct (that's what "rationalizations" are, in fact; lies that we tell ourselves). I'm saying that Anakin could lie to himself that the Tuskens were sub-human things (especially given that he'd grown up on Tattooine, under constant threat of the Tuskens' well-established Reaver-like behaviour). He would not have been able to so easily lie to himself about the younglings (who could well have been turned to the Dark Side, as dozens of Jedi already had been, including Anakin himself). He never even made that suggestion.



They wouldn't have turned them to the dark side because of the rule of two. I know this is broken all over the place in the EU stuff - but again, I'm sticking to what's on the screen.

And yes, the "animals" thing is what he gives as his rationelle to Padme. This does not mean he could not have had an equally twisted internal rationelle in II, which he didn't happen to share with anyone.

Quote:

Hell, even a shot of Anakin crying as he killed them would've been something --a show of remorse or self-loathing in the face of his helplessness. Perhaps quick, almost-subliminal glimpses of Padme, as he reflects on his own child-to-be (and how he will never be able to look that child in the eye, even if this all works out).


That would have been cool. I certainly agree it could have been played better, for more emotional impact. I just don't agree it would be completely out of character.

Quote:

Also, you're seeing Good/Evil as static, unchanging extremes. Vader on "Day One" of his Dark Side career is not the same as Vader 25 years later.


No, I'm not. I'm guaging him based on a range of behaviors, many of which were very close chronologically to the events in discussion.

Sure, the character evolves over those years, but he does not become a nice guy.

Quote:

Put it this way:
-A high school student can drive a car.
-On my first day of grade nine, I could not drive a car. (How can this be? Am I not a high school student?)



That's quite a reach - I am making no such connections.

Quote:

My problem is that Anakin of RotS suddenly became Darth Vader from RotJ (blindly following the Emperor's commands with no remorse, hesitation, question, or free will of his own) within the span of one dramatic music sting. Dark-Anakin should have showed some remorse, even if Vader (from years later) would not have.


As others have pointed out, this isn't really accurate. Vader is more questioning in the originals. His blind loyalty in III makes sense, because A) Palps is the only guy (other than Padme) to show faith in Anakin B) After the fight with Obi-Wan, Palps is Anakin's sole mentor/father figure, and C) with the death of Padme, he literally has no one else.

Quote:

(I had a similar problem with the Force Lightning suddenly causing Palpatine to "age" [an effect it has been shown to have on no one else ever] --meaning that he doesn't age for 25 years [meanwhile, the ten year gap between TPM and AotC had been shown to do a number on him --there was also a noticeable difference between AotC Palpatine and RotS Palpatine, but it was more subtle]).

Lucas tried to show everything, which is a mistake in film (despite everything novice writers are told about "show, don't tell" --"telling" is often more effective). Imagine how much impact the Reavers would have had if the first scene of "Serenity" (the pilot, not the movie) had involved a full-fledged Reaver being brought out under a spotlight and carefully analyzed for our viewing pleasure. Lucas basically set up circumstances in RotS that must now stand almost completely unchanged for 20 years.



This, I totally agree with.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 1, 2009 8:45 AM

STORYMARK


Quote:

Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
Quote:

Originally posted by Bytemite:
This also bothered me. That and the whole strange "immaculate conception by The Force" and "the chosen one" subplot for Anakin.


"Chosen One"...yeah that was just silly. And then the handy catchphrase "he will bring balance to the Force"...WTF?? It was out of balance? Ooops, how'd that happen? If anything, I'd say the Sith Lord, just the one little ole Sith Lord, was sure able to "balance out" the entire Jedi force. Every Star Wars fan knew the basic story of events before New Hope. Lucas had 16+ years to figure out how he was going to tell it, and tell it in a way that would be interesting and a bit un-expected. He failed miserably. And don't even get me started on how he cheapened and whored-out The Force in the prequels.




I thought the "balance" part worked pretty well. It was out of balance - 2 Sith, thousands of Jedi. That is, be definition, unbalanced.

It also plays into the philosophical context of the force - the strictly Dogmatic fashion in which the Jedi approached it was weakening them, because they were wholly ignoring a large aspect - that which is tied to emotion. the Sith on the other hand embrace the emotion too fully, letting it consume them at the loss of the serenity that comes from the Jedi path.

He could be viewed as settling the balance in many ways. First, at the end of the prequels, as there are then only two Sith and two Jedi left. Then, at the end of Jedi, there is only one force-adept left, Luke, who though he mostly follows the Jedi dogma, did tap into emotion to bring about his final victory, yet does not succumb to it in the way the Sith do.

he brings balance in both literal and metaphoric ways.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 1, 2009 8:54 AM

STORYMARK


Quote:

Originally posted by Cybersnark:
Quote:

Originally posted by Bytemite:
(Is it 25? I thought Luke and Leia were 18 in A New Hope).

Going by the novelization, IIRC Luke was 20, Leia was 19 (Tatooine years and Alderaanian years are clearly different). ESB was about four years after Yavin, RotJ was about one year after that. 25-ish years between Anakin's fall and redemption.

-----
We applied the cortical electrodes but were unable to get a neural reaction from either patient.



That's how it was, but the timelne has been massaged a bit since. The original novelization isn't considered "canon" anymore, due to a few inconsistencies. Leia wasn't Luke's sister at the time it was written (thus the age difference), and Owen Lars was Obi-Wan's brother, for two examples.

Now, the timeline has ANH taking place 19 years after ROTS.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 1, 2009 8:55 AM

BYTEMITE


Yeah, it's just the "chosen one" plot point is so overdone. But I do at least give props here for the fact that the prophecy was misinterpretted and the whole chosen one thing was actually kind of not so good instead of the saviour they were expecting.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 1, 2009 9:17 AM

OPPYH


I guess the motto of ROTS could be "don't lead a double life".


Another thing I have never understood. Anakin wanted to have a happily married life...fine. Give up being a Jedi and get a job as the best starpilot in the galaxy. No big deal. Why does he try to hold on to the Jedi order when he knows he's in violation of their code?

What up with the live action tv series Lucas promised us back in 2004? An hour long drama that chronicles the handful of surviving Jedi after ROTS? considering it was said to be out in 2009 at the latest, seems it is now just an empty promise.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 1, 2009 9:18 AM

STORYMARK


Quote:

Originally posted by Bytemite:
But I do at least give props here for the fact that the prophecy was misinterpretted and the whole chosen one thing was actually kind of not so good instead of the saviour they were expecting.



Yeah. Literal prophesies are dull.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 1, 2009 9:22 AM

BYTEMITE


Quote:

Another thing I have never understood. Ankain wanted to have a happily married life...fine. Give up being a Jedi and get a job as the best starpilot in the galaxy. No big deal. Why does he try to hold on to the Jedi order when he knows he's in viloation of their code?


'Cause back in those days if you were found to be in violation of the Jedi Order, you had to either go into hiding, or they mind-wiped your memories.

They were VERY concerned about Jedi being influenced, or Rogue Jedi or Sith using the powers of The Force in abusive or unacceptable ways. In that way, the Jedi ended up being somewhat draconian and running off a lot of potential allies.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 1, 2009 9:24 AM

STORYMARK


Quote:

Originally posted by OPPYH:
I guess the motto of ROTS could be "don't lead a double life".


Another thing I have never understood. Ankain wanted to have a happily married life...fine. Give up being a Jedi and get a job as the best starpilot in the galaxy. No big deal. Why does he try to hold on to the Jedi order when he knows he's in viloation of their code?

What up with the live action tv series Lucas promised us back in 2004? An hour long drama that chronicles the handful of surviving Jedi after ROTS? considering it was said to be out in 2009 at the latest, seems it is now just an empty promise.



Good question. Other than Dooku, we don't have an precedent for someone leaving the Jedi, and what that might entail.

But also, Anakin wouldn't be the first guy to try and have his cake and eat it too. Being the best pilot isn't the same as being a member of a group that has almost unquestionable authority, not to mention being the right-hand man of the leader of the galaxy.


As for the TV series - it's always been slated as coming along around 2010-2011, 2-3 years after the launch of the Clone Wars series. they hired their writing staff earlier this year, and are going to write at least the first full season before filming. I believe they are working on casting now. No one has been mentioned, other than a recent re-iteration that the kid who played Boba Fett in II might reprise his role (he'll be around 20 when they start filming).

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 1, 2009 9:24 AM

OPPYH


Quote:

Originally posted by Bytemite:


'Cause back in those days if you were found to be in violation of the Jedi Order, you had to either go into hiding, or they mind-wiped your memories.

They were VERY concerned about Jedi being influenced, or Rogue Jedi or Sith using the powers of The Force in abusive or unacceptable ways. In that way, the Jedi ended up being somewhat draconian and running off a lot of potential allies.



Oh. Didn't know that.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 1, 2009 9:27 AM

STORYMARK


Quote:

Originally posted by Bytemite:
Quote:

Another thing I have never understood. Ankain wanted to have a happily married life...fine. Give up being a Jedi and get a job as the best starpilot in the galaxy. No big deal. Why does he try to hold on to the Jedi order when he knows he's in viloation of their code?


'Cause back in those days if you were found to be in violation of the Jedi Order, you had to either go into hiding, or they mind-wiped your memories.

They were VERY concerned about Jedi being influenced, or Rogue Jedi or Sith using the powers of The Force in abusive or unacceptable ways. In that way, the Jedi ended up being somewhat draconian and running off a lot of potential allies.



I take it that's EU stuff?

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 1, 2009 9:30 AM

OPPYH


Quote:

Originally posted by Storymark:


As for the TV series - it's always been slated as coming along around 2010-2011, 2-3 years after the launch of the Clone Wars series. they hired their writing staff earlier this year, and are going to write at least the first full season before filming. I believe they are working on casting now. No one has been mentioned, other than a recent re-iteration that the kid who played Boba Fett in II might reprise his role (he'll be around 20 when they start filming).




That's good to know. I am looking forward to watching it. How kick would it be if Joss hopped on board as head writer? I don't want to think about that. It would be geek nirvana.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 1, 2009 9:38 AM

BYTEMITE


Quote:

I take it that's EU stuff?


Yeah, though most of what we know about the old Jedi is from the EU. The Jedi definitely sent parties out to hunt down possible Sith enclaves. Technically, they're probably more likely to kill you when they come to confront you if you refuse to modify your un-Jedi-like ways. The mind-wiping is usually only if they still need you for something and they manage to incapacitate you without killing you.

A lot of people, when the Jedi killed their spouses for reasons like this actually ended up TURNING to Sith teachings, instead of the extermination halting the spread of it.

Knights of the Old Republic probably best demonstrates this "exile or wiped/exterminated" idea.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 1, 2009 10:10 AM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by Storymark:
As for the TV series - it's always been slated as coming along around 2010-2011, 2-3 years after the launch of the Clone Wars series.

Eff that. I'm gorram sick of that era. If it's not set after ROTJ, I'm out.
I'd rather watch the Ewok movies.


The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 1, 2009 10:16 AM

STORYMARK


Quote:

Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:

Originally posted by Storymark:
As for the TV series - it's always been slated as coming along around 2010-2011, 2-3 years after the launch of the Clone Wars series.

Eff that. I'm gorram sick of that era. If it's not set after ROTJ, I'm out.
I'd rather watch the Ewok movies.


The laughing Chrisisall



Don't know why you'd expect different. They've said all along that's when the series would be set.

Though to clarify - I mean 2-3 years after the Clone Wars show debuted - not 2-3 years after the War, story-wise. It will be set, from what I understand, closer to the ANH timeframe - tracing the origins of the Rebellion and such.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 1, 2009 10:20 AM

STORYMARK


Quote:

Originally posted by Bytemite:
Quote:

I take it that's EU stuff?


Yeah, though most of what we know about the old Jedi is from the EU. The Jedi definitely sent parties out to hunt down possible Sith enclaves. Technically, they're probably more likely to kill you when they come to confront you if you refuse to modify your un-Jedi-like ways. The mind-wiping is usually only if they still need you for something and they manage to incapacitate you without killing you.

A lot of people, when the Jedi killed their spouses for reasons like this actually ended up TURNING to Sith teachings, instead of the extermination halting the spread of it.

Knights of the Old Republic probably best demonstrates this "exile or wiped/exterminated" idea.



Cool. Didn't know most of that. I used to read ALL the EU stuff back in the 90's, but eventually burned out. Have read a few here and there since, but not enough for the whole picture. I've played the first KOTOR, but it's been long enough that I don't remember many details.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 1, 2009 3:56 PM

SINGATE


Quote:

Originally posted by chrisisall:
I'm gorram sick of that era. If it's not set after ROTJ, I'm out.
I'd rather watch the Ewok movies.



I agree to an extent. I really enjoy the clone wars animated series but we don't need any more live action from that era. I would prefer to see some EU from the old republic. Dark Lords of the Sith would make for a cool animated mini series.

_________________________________________________

We live on a placid island of ignorance in the midst of black seas of infinity, and it was not meant that we should voyage far.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 1, 2009 4:18 PM

THESOMNAMBULIST


Well they don't measure up to 4,5,and 6 but then what does?

In the grand scheme of things they're all entertaining in their own way. How man epic sci-fi sagas do we all have to cheer, boo and generally chit-chat about?

And it's not over yet. The Clone Wars are right excellent! They're right back to the original serial style that Star Wars was designed around.

There's more to come.




NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Batwoman
Tue, July 14, 2020 15:55 - 17 posts
Binge-worthy?
Mon, July 13, 2020 22:14 - 45 posts
Morena In Twilight Zone
Thu, July 9, 2020 14:38 - 1 posts
Attack on Titan.
Sun, June 21, 2020 16:59 - 6 posts
Picard
Fri, May 22, 2020 17:36 - 35 posts
Upload
Thu, May 14, 2020 21:50 - 1 posts
Snowpiercer
Thu, May 14, 2020 05:47 - 13 posts
Tales from the LOOP - Amazon Prime
Mon, May 4, 2020 18:28 - 16 posts
Carnival Row - amazon prime
Sun, March 15, 2020 16:47 - 31 posts
H.P. Lovecraft and Cthulhu
Fri, March 6, 2020 23:11 - 4 posts
Resident Alien; Tudyk is on Sy-fy this summer
Wed, March 4, 2020 19:10 - 4 posts
Emergence, and Evil
Thu, February 13, 2020 16:24 - 24 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL