Page 2 of 2
PostPosted:Tue Nov 09, 2004 12:10 pm
by Zeus
<div style='font: 9pt ; text-align: left; '>You mean like all those artists who do exactly what others want them to do?</div>
PostPosted:Tue Nov 09, 2004 12:15 pm
by Zeus
<div style='font: 9pt ; text-align: left; '>That's because you were what, 6 when Jedi came out? If you look at your history a bit you'll see that there was a HUGE outcry over the Ewoks just like there was over Jar Jar. It's all simply a matter of how old you were</div>
PostPosted:Tue Nov 09, 2004 12:18 pm
by Zeus
<div style='font: 9pt ; text-align: left; '>Excellent? Why, because of Garden State? Please, she was great in Leon and as of yet hasn't shown any ability beyond that. Once I see Garden State maybe I'll agree. But the rest of the stuff she's done she's been cardboard. Hayden was apparently good in Shattered Glass, but I haven't seen it</div>
They've never bothered me either and I didn't see Jedi until I was 10 or 11. I agree with Kupek here...
PostPosted:Tue Nov 09, 2004 12:36 pm
by Lox
<div style='font: bold 9pt ; text-align: left; '>the Ewoks, while possibly in there for some comedic purpose, were never as annoying to me as Jar-Jar. That whole thing where he got his face numbed was retarded. Stuff like that didn't really happen to the Ewoks. That's why Jar-Jar annoys me.</div>
PostPosted:Tue Nov 09, 2004 2:41 pm
by Kupek
<div style='font: 10pt verdana; text-align: left; padding: 0% 10% 0% 10%; '>Again, I think the slapstick humor thing is different, but I can't really disassociate myself from my own perceptions, so whatever.</div>
PostPosted:Tue Nov 09, 2004 2:43 pm
by Kupek
<div style='font: 10pt verdana; text-align: left; padding: 0% 10% 0% 10%; '>Yes, Leon (The Professional for the American release - Lox, go and see this movie) and Garden State. I've seen parts of smaller movies she's been in, and she's been good.</div>
PostPosted:Tue Nov 09, 2004 2:44 pm
by Kupek
<div style='font: 10pt verdana; text-align: left; padding: 0% 10% 0% 10%; '>Also, exhibit C is Samuel L. Jackson, who I don't buy in Episode I or II.</div>
PostPosted:Tue Nov 09, 2004 2:48 pm
by Kupek
<div style='font: 10pt verdana; text-align: left; padding: 0% 10% 0% 10%; '>That's a red herring; some of the most famous masterpieces were commissions. Even while doing work for hire, you can mantain artistic integrity. But it's a red herring because Luca is free to do whatever he wants; the practice of other artists has no impact on him.</div>
PostPosted:Tue Nov 09, 2004 5:24 pm
by Julius Seeker
<div style='font: 12pt ; text-align: left; '>I guess it's all a matter of what speaks louder at the end of the day, 10,000 angry starwars fans or $925,000,000.00 + an additional $650,000,000.00 at the box office for his last two movies respectively?</div>
PostPosted:Tue Nov 09, 2004 5:37 pm
by Kupek
<div style='font: 10pt verdana; text-align: left; padding: 0% 10% 0% 10%; '>I don't see either of those are his motivator; he's wealthy enough that more profits from the movie aren't that big of a deal. He's doing them how he wants to do them - the only problem is he's not good at executing what he wants to do.</div>
Actually, I do agree that Jar-Jar was more annoying than the Ewoks...but, at the same time, I still think you're rationalizing...
PostPosted:Tue Nov 09, 2004 10:16 pm
by Gentz
<div style='font: 11pt arial; text-align: left; '>As Zeus mentioned, the same argument you use against Jar-Jar can and was raised against the Ewoks. You've just had some time to grow accustomed to the Ewoks presence in the SW universe, so they seem less like the cheesy attempts at comic-relief that they were.</div>
PostPosted:Tue Nov 09, 2004 10:17 pm
by Gentz
<div style='font: 11pt arial; text-align: left; '>Yeah, what Kupek said. Anyway, I've been enjoying the prequels myself, but if I were Lucas I never would have made them.</div>
PostPosted:Tue Nov 09, 2004 10:20 pm
by Gentz
<div style='font: 11pt arial; text-align: left; '>Why not? It's not like he's got "Bad Motherfucker" engraved on his lightsaber or anything. He makes a good Jedi!</div>
PostPosted:Tue Nov 09, 2004 11:10 pm
by Eric
<div style='font: 11pt ; text-align: left; '>"Mr. Windu, do you beleieve the Jedi Knights guilty of these crimes deserve to die?" "Yes they deserve to die, and I hope they burn in HELL!"</div>
PostPosted:Wed Nov 10, 2004 1:00 am
by Ishamael
<div style='font: 14pt "Sans Serif"; text-align: justify; padding: 0% 15% 0% 15%; '>They're missing the little things. The equivalens of Luke staring in the sunset after his aunt and uncle are killed with the Williams' score in the background....Luke hanging upside down from Cloud City after having his hand cut off after hearing the worst news of his life...tons of stuff like that</div>
PostPosted:Wed Nov 10, 2004 1:05 am
by Ishamael
<div style='font: 14pt "Sans Serif"; text-align: justify; padding: 0% 15% 0% 15%; '>The Ewoks had their annoying moments, but Jar Jar was the Ewoks x 10,000.</div>
PostPosted:Wed Nov 10, 2004 1:07 am
by Ishamael
<div style='font: 14pt "Sans Serif"; text-align: justify; padding: 0% 15% 0% 15%; '>Joseph Cambell is the cause of Lucas not writing any good female roles? That's the first I've heard of that. What's the connection. And what's the source of him not writing any good male roles? :)</div>
PostPosted:Wed Nov 10, 2004 7:47 am
by SineSwiper
<div style='font: 10pt "EngraversGothic BT", "Copperplate Gothic Light", "Century Gothic"; text-align: left; '>I completely agree. I actually didn't have a problem with the Ewoks. <Hudsucker>You know...for the kids!</Hudsucker></div>
PostPosted:Wed Nov 10, 2004 7:53 am
by SineSwiper
<div style='font: 10pt "EngraversGothic BT", "Copperplate Gothic Light", "Century Gothic"; text-align: left; '>"And you will know my name is the Lord when I lay my vengeance upon thee..."</div>
PostPosted:Wed Nov 10, 2004 8:02 am
by Julius Seeker
<div style='font: 12pt ; text-align: left; '>I would first have Windu quote the bible; only I think Song of Songs would be more fun to quote and expand upon than Ezekiel; I still laugh when I hear people talking about pomagranites.</div>
PostPosted:Wed Nov 10, 2004 9:41 am
by Kupek
<div style='font: 10pt verdana; text-align: left; padding: 0% 10% 0% 10%; '>He SHOULD make a good Jedi, but I was not impressed with his performance. And this is coming from someone who thinks he should have gotten an Oscar for Pulp Fiction.</div>
PostPosted:Wed Nov 10, 2004 1:43 pm
by Zeus
<div style='font: 9pt ; text-align: left; '>But that depends on the spectator. I've now shown the old and new films to 2 people who hadn't seen the old before the new and they said they were the same thing.</div>
PostPosted:Wed Nov 10, 2004 1:45 pm
by Zeus
<div style='font: 9pt ; text-align: left; '>So, if Michaelangelo had created another portrait of another woman with the same quality and depth as the Mona Lisa, it wouldn't be as good? I can guarantee you that to a lot of fans of the original, it wouldn't be, especially those who grew up reverring the Mona Lisa</div>
PostPosted:Wed Nov 10, 2004 1:46 pm
by Zeus
<div style='font: 9pt ; text-align: left; '>But that's what I'm trying to get at, that it's not the films that have changed, it's the spectators that have</div>
PostPosted:Wed Nov 10, 2004 1:48 pm
by Zeus
<div style='font: 9pt ; text-align: left; '>Other than Leon, I thought she was just there, the same person over and over again. You can make a good living off of that (see Bruce Willis or Keanu Reeves), but that doesn't make you a good actor</div>
PostPosted:Wed Nov 10, 2004 1:49 pm
by Zeus
<div style='font: 9pt ; text-align: left; '>But Jimy Smits was fine? Too picky....</div>
PostPosted:Wed Nov 10, 2004 2:26 pm
by Kupek
<div style='font: 10pt verdana; text-align: left; padding: 0% 10% 0% 10%; '>What? Where do you get that from? I had to look him up to even know who you're talking about. I don't remember his performance. The performances I remember from I and II that worked were Liam Neeson, Ewan McGregor, and Christopher Lee.</div>
PostPosted:Wed Nov 10, 2004 2:29 pm
by Kupek
<div style='font: 10pt verdana; text-align: left; padding: 0% 10% 0% 10%; '>You're assuming what we're debating - that the old and new are of the same quality. (And Da Vinci did the Mona Lisa. Or was that part of the analogy?)</div>
PostPosted:Wed Nov 10, 2004 3:39 pm
by Eric
<div style='font: 11pt ; text-align: left; '>Dissin Bruce Willis will get you hunted down and manslaughtered!</div>
Because Campbell is a Jungian, and Jung (like most psycholosophers of his day and most societies throughout history) tended to treat the male as the central, default image of "human" and the female as a secondary offshoot of the male (think Eve
PostPosted:Wed Nov 10, 2004 4:27 pm
by Gentz
<div style='font: 11pt arial; text-align: left; '>After all, it's the <I>Hero's</i> Journey, not the Heroine's Journey. And it isn't possible to simply replace the male hero with a female without doing away with all the psychological underpinnings of the cycle. The Meeting With the Goddess, the Atonement With the Father, and especially the Apotheosis (which is the lynchpin of the whole Journey) would be rendered meaningless in the context of a female hero.
It follows that Lucas who has been so faithful to the Campbellian nature of the SW universe would have trouble introducing fully-developed female characters. I'm not calling him a sexist or anything like that, of course (Leia is a far cry from Barbarella, after all), there just isn't much place for females in a universe where males are the god-like centers of all Creation and females are simply tributary reflections of the true "male" nature of mankind.
Just for an example: Try naming 15 major male characters in the five existing SW films. Pretty easy. Now try naming 5 major female characters. Uhhh...</div>
PostPosted:Wed Nov 10, 2004 4:30 pm
by Gentz
<div style='font: 11pt arial; text-align: left; '>Yeah, I'm just saying that you can't act like Ep 1 was "selling out" with Jar-Jar, but the Ewoks were perfectly natural and reasonable additions to RotJ</div>
Because Campbell is a Jungian, and Jung (like most psycholosophers of his day and most societies throughout history) tended to treat the male as the central, default image of "human" and the female as a secondary offshoot of the male (think Eve
PostPosted:Wed Nov 10, 2004 4:32 pm
by Gentz
<div style='font: 11pt arial; text-align: left; '>After all, it's the <I>Hero's</i> Journey, not the Heroine's Journey. And it isn't possible to simply replace the male hero with a female without doing away with all the psychological underpinnings of the cycle. The Meeting With the Goddess, the Atonement With the Father, and especially the Apotheosis (which is the lynchpin of the whole Journey) would be rendered meaningless in the context of a female hero.
It follows that Lucas who has been so faithful to the Campbellian nature of the SW universe would have trouble introducing fully-developed female characters. I'm not calling him a sexist or anything like that, of course (Leia is totally hard-core Women's Lib, after all - no doubt Jabba had to personally pin her down and shave her pits after taking her in), there just isn't much place for females in a universe where males are the god-like centers of all Creation and females are simply tributary reflections of the true "male" nature of mankind.
Just for an example: Try naming 15 major male characters in the five existing SW films. Pretty easy. Now try naming 5 major female characters. Uhhh...</div>
PostPosted:Wed Nov 10, 2004 4:58 pm
by Kupek
<div style='font: 10pt verdana; text-align: left; padding: 0% 10% 0% 10%; '>Bravo. That was a comment esoteric enough for The Onion. :)</div>
PostPosted:Wed Nov 10, 2004 5:22 pm
by Lox
<div style='font: bold 9pt ; text-align: left; '>I don't Lucas sold out with Jar-Jar. I think he actually thought Jar-Jar's parts would add some comedic breaks between his "intense" story. I just think he failed miserably. :)</div>
PostPosted:Wed Nov 10, 2004 5:25 pm
by Gentz
<div style='font: 11pt arial; text-align: left; '>Heh. Well, he asked for it : )</div>
PostPosted:Wed Nov 10, 2004 11:51 pm
by Ishamael
<div style='font: 14pt "Sans Serif"; text-align: justify; padding: 0% 15% 0% 15%; '>People confuse diminished talent with selling out. ;)</div>
PostPosted:Thu Nov 11, 2004 12:16 am
by Ishamael
<div style='font: 14pt "Sans Serif"; text-align: justify; padding: 0% 15% 0% 15%; '>No argument from me on that one. :)</div>
PostPosted:Thu Nov 11, 2004 12:19 am
by Ishamael
<div style='font: 14pt "Sans Serif"; text-align: justify; padding: 0% 15% 0% 15%; '>...................................WOW. I guess nearly every hero author, poet, bard, or oratory narrator in the history of humankind was indirectly influenced by Campbell, therefore making them Jungian and they didn't even know it! :) That's an interesting take on it though...</div>
PostPosted:Thu Nov 11, 2004 9:04 am
by Zeus
<div style='font: 9pt ; text-align: left; '>Yes, I was wrong, Da Vinci did it. And yes, I do think that the major problem with the new trilogy is that it's the same as the old trilogy but the movie industry and the fans of the series have all matured</div>
PostPosted:Thu Nov 11, 2004 9:05 am
by Zeus
<div style='font: 9pt ; text-align: left; '>Except that they were supposed to be Wookies</div>
PostPosted:Thu Nov 11, 2004 9:08 am
by Zeus
<div style='font: 9pt ; text-align: left; '>Not the best analogy, but what I was trying to get at is just 'cause Jackson was out of his "element" (most people recognize him as the guy from Pulp Fiction or similar roles) and didn't have the strongest role (Windu as a character is just there), doesn't mean it was the actor's fault.</div>
PostPosted:Thu Nov 11, 2004 9:19 am
by Kupek
<div style='font: 10pt verdana; text-align: left; padding: 0% 10% 0% 10%; '>I think you're missing my point completely. My point is that it's NOT the actor's fault; I blame Lucas' writing and directing for poor performances from good actors.</div>
PostPosted:Thu Nov 11, 2004 10:07 am
by Zeus
<div style='font: 9pt ; text-align: left; '>I agree, in a way. I think that good actors can overcome anything, but poor director hurts the weak or medoicre actors. Jackson, to me, is a pretty decent actor who does certain roles quite well. In his case, I think it was more the weak character than his acting, though</div>
PostPosted:Thu Nov 11, 2004 11:28 am
by Lox
<div style='font: bold 9pt ; text-align: left; '>I forget what his reason was for changing to Ewoks.</div>
PostPosted:Thu Nov 11, 2004 1:23 pm
by Zeus
<div style='font: 9pt ; text-align: left; '>Can't remember from the DVD set, but I think it had something to do with trying to appeal more to kids. Watch Empire of Dreams, they tell you in that (spectacular documentary, BTW)</div>
PostPosted:Thu Nov 11, 2004 6:11 pm
by Gentz
<div style='font: 11pt arial; text-align: left; '>How is every author influenced by Campbell?</div>
PostPosted:Thu Nov 11, 2004 8:47 pm
by Torgo
<div style='font: 9pt Arial; text-align: left; '>Don't worry if you don't remember his "performance"? The guy had a non-speaking role and was only on screen for like five seconds.</div>
PostPosted:Thu Nov 11, 2004 8:47 pm
by Torgo
<div style='font: 9pt Arial; text-align: left; '>Don't worry if you don't remember his "performance". The guy had a non-speaking role and was only on screen for like five seconds.</div>