|
|
Post by smittysgelato on Jun 18, 2021 19:36:37 GMT
CryogenicPerhaps the simplest way to put it is that Lucas' ideas are flexible, or versatile. Double agent Anakin def survives in ROTS in a different form, because both the Jedi and Palpatine are asking him to spy on the other team. As you said, Anakin is just much more conflicted.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cryogenic on Jun 18, 2021 20:48:03 GMT
The books are awesome, If you don't mind having the curtain pulled back a bit on the story. It has been my experieince that some Lucas fans (Lucas Loyalists) don't like what's in the books because they feel it backs up the "anti-Lucas" crowds constant whining that Lucas never had the whole trilogy planned out. The easy argument against that bullshit, is that Lucas has never said he had everything planned out to it most minute detail. As I said earlier though. Multiple things can be true at once. Fans wanting to hold him to those statements, as if in a court of law, are being rather petty, in my opinion. Now that is not quite fair, or being honest actually.. You have no problem drudging up 40 year old quoteS and statements in order to establish Lucas's thoughts and mindsets in order to prop up your argument (as if in a court of law). By doing this you are holding Lucas to those statements as being truthful and exact, no different than anyone else. Are you being petty? Edit: And I am not trying to be combative here Cryo. Just pointing out the double standard in your comment. I'm a tad confused here. "Multiple things can be true at once" -- which you've said twice now. But then, when I allude to some people wanting to bind Lucas to things he has said in the past (and give my personal opinion on that), I'm not being fair or honest (even though these intransigent mentalities, which you yourself recognise are around, do exist). So what's the meaning behind this closing remark, then? I like the quote.. "You are entitled to your own opinion, not, your own facts"  If you're not being combative, why did your close this earlier post by smugly winking at what I said -- even when I was agreeing with you? What are you trying to accomplish here, exactly? |
|
|
|
Post by mikeximus on Jun 18, 2021 21:11:23 GMT
The books are awesome, If you don't mind having the curtain pulled back a bit on the story. It has been my experieince that some Lucas fans (Lucas Loyalists) don't like what's in the books because they feel it backs up the "anti-Lucas" crowds constant whining that Lucas never had the whole trilogy planned out. The easy argument against that bullshit, is that Lucas has never said he had everything planned out to it most minute detail. As I said earlier though. Multiple things can be true at once. Now that is not quite fair, or being honest actually.. You have no problem drudging up 40 year old quoteS and statements in order to establish Lucas's thoughts and mindsets in order to prop up your argument (as if in a court of law). By doing this you are holding Lucas to those statements as being truthful and exact, no different than anyone else. Are you being petty? Edit: And I am not trying to be combative here Cryo. Just pointing out the double standard in your comment. I'm a tad confused here. "Multiple things can be true at once" -- which you've said twice now. But then, when I allude to some people wanting to bind Lucas to things he has said in the past (and give my personal opinion on that), I'm not being fair or honest (even though these intransigent mentalities, which you yourself recognise are around, do exist). So what's the meaning behind this closing remark, then? Saying that people are petty for doing exactly what you do, that is using quotes and statements from Lucas to back up their arguments, is not being fair or honest. That is the whole point of any of us using quotes and statements from Lucas.. to bind that information to him to support are opinions and arguments. The issue of calling others petty for doing that is not good form. I mean who gets to decide what the cutoff is for petty and not petty? If I use 40 year old information from Lucas to make my point and support my argument, and than you use a 25 year old quote.. What makes either of us petty or not petty? It's a smiley face with a wink.... Seriously? You are going to be offended by a smiley face with a wink that I made in jest? In jest that I used a quote that conflicts with yours...seriously cryo.. your offended over a winking smily face emoji? emojipedia.org/winking-face/NO evil or nefarious intent cryo. No boogey man. I was having a little fun, by closing with a quote (like you did with your post) that played on and playfully contradicted with yours.. thus the winking smily face... |
|
|
|
Post by Cryogenic on Jun 18, 2021 21:53:46 GMT
Mike, I think we're barrelling into misunderstanding over some relatively minor things. Let's go over this and see if we can return to common ground: Saying that people are petty for doing exactly what you do, that is using quotes and statements from Lucas to back up their arguments, is not being fair or honest. That is the whole point of any of us using quotes and statements from Lucas.. to bind that information to him to support are opinions and arguments. The issue of calling others petty for doing that is not good form. I mean who gets to decide what the cutoff is for petty and not petty? If I use 40 year old information from Lucas to make my point and support my argument, and than you use a 25 year old quote.. What makes either of us petty or not petty? Well, yes, as a matter of basic/obvious fact, we are both using Lucas quotes, and we seem to enjoy backing up our arguments that way -- which is great. We obviously both see the value in referring, if you like, to "the source". My comment about some people being petty was in reference to a specific case, but one that you and I are familiar with: fans who play "gotcha!" and act like Lucas changing his mind is a capital offence, without applying any nuance whatsoever (all because they want to shoot the PT down, or flex their "objectivity" over Lucas fans, ultimately). Now, obviously, you're not amongst that cohort. Thus, the "petty" accusation was not a bullseye in your direction. Did you experience some shotgun spray? I guess you did. Did I intend that? I don't know. You weren't who I was primarily thinking of when I wrote that, 'tis all. That said, Mike, you already expressed similar sentiments yourself, so this is why I'm confused. For example, you took a pop at "Lucas Loyalists" and implied they are rigid and closeminded -- arguably, you made two pops, in fact: The books are awesome, If you don't mind having the curtain pulled back a bit on the story. It has been my experieince that some Lucas fans (Lucas Loyalists) don't like what's in the books because they feel it backs up the "anti-Lucas" crowds constant whining that Lucas never had the whole trilogy planned out. The easy argument against that bullshit, is that Lucas has never said he had everything planned out to it most minute detail. As I said earlier though. Multiple things can be true at once. So... What's going on here? Why are you castigating me for something you already did yourself? Who are you talking about? It can't be me, because I'm not like that. I come to Lucas' defence often, but I also try to approach his remarks with nuance and care -- or, at least, I hope I do. It's a smiley face with a wink.... Seriously? You are going to be offended by a smiley face with a wink that I made in jest? In jest that I used a quote that conflicts with yours...seriously cryo.. your offended over a winking smily face emoji? emojipedia.org/winking-face/I'm not sure an encyclopedia link helps in this case. Language is contextual. Meaning varies according to time, place, setting, and general use. You closed your earlier post ( Reply 96) with a snide comment. You can say you were just teasing and "jesting" me back, but it was right after delivering a diatribe where you outright said you were going to "push back" against my reading; and that my interpretation wasn't even "important" -- very obviously weighting your interpretation over mine. You implied you had a better and more factually-correct interpretation. So I took the closing remark as a snide "I'm right, you're wrong", especially as you invoked the word "facts". In fact, let me quote you directly again: I like the quote.. "You are entitled to your own opinion, not, your own facts" So... you have the "facts" and I don't? That's pretty arrogant, in my opinion. And hey, I'm only mentioning it in the first place because you have chosen to scold me -- for whatever reason -- for daring to suggest that some fans are petty. NO evil or nefarious intent cryo. No boogey man. I was having a little fun, by closing with a quote (like you did with your post) that played on and playfully contradicted with yours.. thus the winking smily face... I don't need a lecture on what a "winking" emoji means. I've highlighted words that imply a winking face can have other meanings, especially when it is placed at the end of an extensive comment where you made it clear you were trying to correct me. Pretending you are dealing in facts, and I'm dealing in mere "opinion", is pretty rude and a blatant attempt at trying to gain the "high ground" (or declaring you already have it). But I guess, for the sake of peace, I'll ignore you said it from this point. Your passion sometimes gets the better of you. So does mine. |
|
|
|
Post by mikeximus on Jun 18, 2021 21:55:52 GMT
As far as the Obi Wan Kenobi series.. I really enjoyed Mandalorian. I felt it was the best Star Wars conent since Rogue One. I have watched the first 4 or 5 episodes of Bad Batch. Very boring show, story doesn't progress, like at all (one of my complaints of Mandalorian too, but, Mando is not this bad). Characters are not very likeable. Obi Wan... I am very very concerned about the same things most people are here. The inevitable confrontation between Obi Wan and Vader. We all know Disney will not be able to resist. That is an automatic no for me. We are getting into territory that actually retcon the movies themselves. That would be a hard no for me. So color me skeptical and not optimistic about this show. Edit: Cryogenic I will pm you. No need to carry this on any further in public. |
|
|
|
Post by Ingram on Jun 18, 2021 22:07:40 GMT
They can do whatever they want with the Obi-Wan Kenobi series. To earn 'woke' points, they can explore his never-discussed homoerotic love affair between the years of Episodes III and IV. They can have him incognito as a Mandalorian for a stretch. They can have him fight Darth Maul and Darth Vader, at the same time. They can give Ewan ample screen-time to, finally, redefine the character with a serious level of method-acting that it -- the PT -- rightly deserved. They can have Ob-Wan talking to a puppet Yoda. Whatever. It doesn't matter. Nothing matters.
Let the Mickey Mao corporation carry on with Star Wars as they please.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ingram on Jun 18, 2021 22:11:46 GMT
Sorry. Guess I got a little too negative there. Not enough blue milk in my coffee. Or not enough cocaine in my blue milk.
If the show proves me wrong and turns out to be the most inspired Star Wars media since 2005: best day ever.
|
|
|
|
Post by smittysgelato on Jun 18, 2021 22:39:11 GMT
Sorry. Guess I got a little too negative there. Not enough blue milk in my coffee. Or not enough cocaine in my blue milk.
If the show proves me wrong and turns out to be the most inspired Star Wars media since 2005: best day ever.
I love Disney, but that Mickey Mao bit killed me with laughter. |
|
|
|
Post by mikeximus on Jun 18, 2021 23:10:32 GMT
Sorry. Guess I got a little too negative there. Not enough blue milk in my coffee. Or not enough cocaine in my blue milk.
If the show proves me wrong and turns out to be the most inspired Star Wars media since 2005: best day ever.
Nah, I think you were right on... I don't think Disney/LFL has given us enough to deserve any optimism out of us. |
|
|
|
Post by Samnz on Jun 19, 2021 6:45:10 GMT
I hope the series does not delve too much into Imperial territory again. We've got enough of that imagery already. And it would be idiotic for Obi-Wan to mess with the Imperials when traces of him could lead them to Luke... So please, keep that limited.
They should put focus on Obi-Wan as character, his failure, the inevitable. The ways of the Force, with or without Liam Neeson. I don't want to see Yoda in it, though. Didn't like Yoda in TLJ either.
Given Ewan's recent crying, however, I fear we're going to see him on the Death Star - the real Death Star - with puppet Yoda walking by his side. His childhood dream come true. Finally.
|
|
|
|
Post by Seeker of the Whills on Jun 19, 2021 7:33:01 GMT
Lucas' ideas evolved along the way, I'd say. He had a pretty clear idea of the big picture though, as illustrated by these comments about the ST from the 80's:
Much more ethereal? Sounds just like the Whills that were going to be a big focus in Lucas' ST.
But the details evolved, like Maul coming back and being the villain of the ST. He once said this about Maul's original death:
|
|
|
|
Post by stampidhd280pro on Jun 19, 2021 10:07:30 GMT
I'm not sure, but I think the rumor about Maul being Lucas's original villain for the ST is unconfirmed. It does have the ring of truth though.
|
|
|
|
Post by jppiper on Jun 19, 2021 11:24:37 GMT
I hope the series does not delve too much into Imperial territory again. We've got enough of that imagery already. And it would be idiotic for Obi-Wan to mess with the Imperials when traces of him could lead them to Luke... So please, keep that limited. They should put focus on Obi-Wan as character, his failure, the inevitable. The ways of the Force, with or without Liam Neeson. I don't want to see Yoda in it, though. Didn't like Yoda in TLJ either. Given Ewan's recent crying, however, I fear we're going to see him on the Death Star - the real Death Star - with puppet Yoda walking by his side. His childhood dream come true. Finally. they better not retcon the duel from ANH either |
|
|
|
Post by jppiper on Jun 19, 2021 11:25:20 GMT
I'm not sure, but I think the rumor about Maul being Lucas's original villain for the ST is unconfirmed. It does have the ring of truth though. wasn't it mentioned in a book? |
|
|
|
Post by jppiper on Jun 19, 2021 11:26:46 GMT
Lucas' ideas evolved along the way, I'd say. He had a pretty clear idea of the big picture though, as illustrated by these comments about the ST from the 80's: Much more ethereal? Sounds just like the Whills that were going to be a big focus in Lucas' ST. But the details evolved, like Maul coming back and being the villain of the ST. He once said this about Maul's original death: and the fans still bitched and moaned about it |
|
|
|
Post by stampidhd280pro on Jun 19, 2021 12:06:10 GMT
I'm not sure, but I think the rumor about Maul being Lucas's original villain for the ST is unconfirmed. It does have the ring of truth though. wasn't it mentioned in a book? I don't know. I have a feeling Taika Waititi's movie or one of the other mysterious Disney projects is a Maul film. Possibly with Maul as a Loki type character in a SW action-adventure-comedy. That's just my suspicion. I was right about the sequel trilogy having a female protagonist! I suggested that days after the purchase. |
|
|
|
Post by Seeker of the Whills on Jun 19, 2021 12:33:57 GMT
I'm not sure, but I think the rumor about Maul being Lucas's original villain for the ST is unconfirmed. It does have the ring of truth though. wasn't it mentioned in a book? Yes, Lucas talks about Maul being the villain of the ST in the prequel archives book. |
|
|
|
Post by jppiper on Jun 19, 2021 12:42:34 GMT
wasn't it mentioned in a book? I don't know. I have a feeling Taika Waititi's movie or one of the other mysterious Disney projects is a Maul film. Possibly with Maul as a Loki type character in a SW action-adventure-comedy. That's just my suspicion. I was right about the sequel trilogy having a female protagonist! I suggested that days after the purchase. Maul isn't exactly a barrel of laughs |
|
|
|
Post by Cryogenic on Jun 21, 2021 10:14:56 GMT
I don't know. I have a feeling Taika Waititi's movie or one of the other mysterious Disney projects is a Maul film. Possibly with Maul as a Loki type character in a SW action-adventure-comedy. That's just my suspicion. I was right about the sequel trilogy having a female protagonist! I suggested that days after the purchase. Maul isn't exactly a barrel of laughs Nor is Ray Park the world's greatest actor. Physically? A perfect fit for the part. But heck, he still had his voice dubbed over in TPM, for the few lines that Maul actually speaks. Of course, they could have recast or gone the voice-dubbing route again in the ST. In my opinion, it made wonderful sense to bring Palpatine back for the ST, and even to keep his return a surprise and a "treat" for the last film. The problem with doing it that way, however, is that it felt like Palpatine was just being shoved in to button up the trilogy at the last minute -- which is kind of what happened. To Lucas' credit, it seems he wanted a much more consistent "crime syndicate" element to be the antagonistic glue of the ST, with Maul playing a significant role bringing the different criminal elements together. Whereas Palpatine's re-emergence in Episode IX, as much as I love it, feels detached from the main narrative of the sequels. There's like... no believable world to the sequels. They're decent movies (I still think every prequel fan should try and watch them), but they don't really feel like an authentic "third chapter", in every respect (although they have things going for them). A chief weakness here is that they fail to develop a distinct and compelling political backdrop that would set them apart as both a continuation of a larger storyline and a self-contained trilogy -- which both the OT, and especially the PT, excel at. Lucas understood what was needed. The people at Disney/LFL thought they knew better. They didn't. |
|
|
|
Post by ArchdukeOfNaboo on Jul 14, 2021 10:45:19 GMT
Edit: Cryogenic I will pm you. No need to carry this on any further in public.
Thanks, Mike. I think we're definitely straying off topic here with debates about Lucas, or what one thought of Palpatine in the sequels, or possible Taika Waitit films, or Darth Maul theories for ST. We have loads of other threads for all of this folks, no need for it here.
Let's please keep this focused on only the Obi-Wan show
|
|
