|
Star Wars Episode III (pg. 4)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| 000000 |
| quote: | Originally posted by kush paintings
I don't believe that you all are stupid, you are just plan ignorant. One guy puts up a link to maddox. Bitch, please. Yeah, he is funny, but you have to realize the tone of his web page. If you really are going to take his opinion seriously than you truly are stupid. |
Did you read that maddox page? If it's stimulating philosophical conversation that you're after then I don't think tossing around terms like bitch, jackoff, ignorant, stupid, etc is the best way to initiate it. Criticize the ideas, not maddox or me. You should look at the points he brings up in any of the photos on that page and explain away the plot holes afterwards.
:fondles kush paintings balls: |
|
|
| occrider |
Not that I particularly disagree with your argument (I do agree with your general mentality), however, I think the philosophical implications of any film is open to dicussion despite the fact that it may approach it in a crude manner. In other words, I'm bored and there's nobody else to argue with ... :)
| quote: | Originally posted by astroboy
You question my sources, yet you do not cite your own. I need no sources. My contention is that the structure of the film stinks of Lucas' trying to cram as much widespread appeal into the film as possible and thereby destroying any possibility of making a good film. Jarjar Binks is a typical example... it's a character designed to appeal to little kids, but simultaeneously it annoys the adult audience. If he'd just decided to stick to making a good film rather than trying to please as many different segments as possible my opinion would have been different. Meanwhile I will continue to think of him as a businessman first and a movie-maker second.
|
Eh but the first and second film (the original first and second film) incorporated elements of "cuteness" that attempted to capture the younger audience. I reference C3PO and R2D2 who had an almost juevenille relationship that could hardly be depicted as something marketed towards adults. If that doesn't do it, than I can most certainly reference the third film using the ewoks as something that is designed to appeal to little kids and "those types of people". I don't know what your own personal opinions on those chararcters are, but I think I would be hard pressed to find those who would find any of the original films at fault for such characters.
| quote: |
Ofcourse I see the parallels. But there's no subtlety or complexity to the argument. It's a simple point thrown into the film to, yet again, broaden its appeal. I see the so-called political statement (although this insults REAL political commentators everywhere)... I just think it is poorly made.
The philosophical parallels between what? (you have distinguished between the political parallels that apply to US politics and Iraq, and these philosophical parallels).
I certainly do see attempts by Lucas and the script writers at quasi-philosophy. But having been interested in and studied some philosophy, I really see very little if any real philosophical content in this film. You counter my arguments by simply claiming that there is philosophical content there - if there is why don't you point it out and tell me what the philosophical point being made is.
|
I agree with your assessment 100% with respect to star wars. But at the same time I hold similar opinions of other films that others may consider as classical political commentaries. For example let's look at the film or even the book Fahrenheit 451. I mean really, with the book, can you be any more obvious with allusions to the hitleresque book burnings and the culture of censorship as a means to depict such a society in the future? The non-complex, non-subtle allusions are almost laughable to a certain degree. In the film the added touch of Werner with the germanic accent was simply untoppable. They should have just slapped a swastika on him to eliminate all doubt. The most irritating part of all, however, was that the movie failed to capture the quintessential theme Bradbury intended to portray in his novel for the necessity of the written word as opposed to the contrived hollywood portrayal of the need for books. If you don't know than read the book and than see the movie. Yet I still value the film as a worthwile political commentary despite the fact that there are probably those a lot more critical than me who are unwilling to forgive such faults ... |
|
|
| astroboy |
| quote: | Originally posted by occrider
Not that I particularly disagree with your argument (I do agree with your general mentality), however, I think the philosophical implications of any film is open to dicussion despite the fact that it may approach it in a crude manner. In other words, I'm bored and there's nobody else to argue with ... :) |
I would normally agree if the question was raised more specifically and mentioned the philosophy. Rather than just a thread going:
"OMG THIS FILM IS SO DEEPLY PHILOSPHICAL IT CHANGED MY LIFE WHAT DO YOU THINK?"
| quote: | | Eh but the first and second film (the original first and second film) incorporated elements of "cuteness" that attempted to capture the younger audience. I reference C3PO and R2D2 who had an almost juevenille relationship that could hardly be depicted as something marketed towards adults. If that doesn't do it, than I can most certainly reference the third film using the ewoks as something that is designed to appeal to little kids and "those types of people". I don't know what your own personal opinions on those chararcters are, but I think I would be hard pressed to find those who would find any of the original films at fault for such characters. |
For some reason I didn't have an aversion to R2D2 or C3PO (although thinking about it logically I don't know why I didn't). The ewoks did piss me off... I thought they were a bad idea from the start. But even they, with their cuteness weren't one thenth as annoying as jarjar...
| quote: | | I agree with your assessment 100% with respect to star wars. But at the same time I hold similar opinions of other films that others may consider as classical political commentaries. For example let's look at the film or even the book Fahrenheit 451. I mean really, with the book, can you be any more obvious with allusions to the hitleresque book burnings and the culture of censorship as a means to depict such a society in the future? The non-complex, non-subtle allusions are almost laughable to a certain degree. In the film the added touch of Werner with the germanic accent was simply untoppable. They should have just slapped a swastika on him to eliminate all doubt. The most irritating part of all, however, was that the movie failed to capture the quintessential theme Bradbury intended to portray in his novel for the necessity of the written word as opposed to the contrived hollywood portrayal of the need for books. If you don't know than read the book and than see the movie. Yet I still value the film as a worthwile political commentary despite the fact that there are probably those a lot more critical than me who are unwilling to forgive such faults ... |
I agree with you completely both re movie and book. But at least they set out with the primary aim of making political commentary. If they had thrown in a couple of porn scenes, some Barney-the-dinosaur-like-character, a few cyborg cops, and a romantic relationship between two characters played by Hugh Grant and Sandra Bullock I'd be far more critical. |
|
|
| djmetatron |
Maddox hates everything except Pantera, he's funny but don't look to him for you own wisdom.
The political parallels in the films are interesting and worthy of discussion. I believe someone already cited sources with quotes from Lucas. The Cannes Film Festival premiered the film, giving a nod to the film's cultural impact mostly due to the film's political statements.
The main thesus that the films explore is how a person becomes bad, and more to the point, how a Republic becomes a Dictatorship. Palpatine and the Sith form an alliance of convenience with the traders (the Trade Federation), the bankers (the Banking Clan), the unions (the Commerce Guilds), and the corporations (the Corporate Alliance) which anyone can see is a stab a the Government's close relationship with these areas of society. It's saying that with economic and political power comes corruption which then brings about evil. Pretty simple really and well integrated into the films.
| quote: | | You counter my arguments by simply claiming that there is philosophical content there - if there is why don't you point it out and tell me what the philosophical point being made is. |
The philosophical ideas in the films are pretty blatant, I don't see how you don't see them. The good and dark side of the forces for one deal with the philisophical issues of egoism versus conscience, selfishness versus compassion and other ideas in the Normative Theory. But I don't think this thread is really about that. |
|
|
| Xenocreator_PG_ |
| quote: | Originally posted by kush paintings
I started this thread and it sickens me that it was imported here without me knowing. I don't believe that you all are stupid, you are just plan ignorant. One guy puts up a link to maddox. Bitch, please. Yeah, he is funny, but you have to realize the tone of his web page. If you really are going to take his opinion seriously than you truly are stupid.
One down, one to go.
Now the jackoff who was crying about Lucas being a profit driven maniac, where do you get your information? From a bunch of friends in a haze of bong smoke? Even if you are too ignorant to see how the shift from Republic to Empire does not apply to todays politics, especially the U.S., then you truly are stupid. But what, what's that you don't see the philosophical parralels too? Well, I guess I can't expect much from you. I know it is unfair to stereotype the entire Chillout Room as a collection of idiots, so although I want to I will refrain. But you two Sallies are idiots, and from now on I'll assume all idiocy in the Chillout Room comes from you two, so as though I don't unfairly judge anyone. You have proven yourselves worthy of this task and I congratulate you.
Moderators, you do an excellent job on these forums, especially considering the number of users and different rooms. However, I must say that placing this thread hear was a mistake, as it clearly belonged in the PDD. Thank you. |
STARWARS ALSO HAS GOOD FIGHTING. I LIKED OBI WON KINOBIS SHIP. IT WENT FAST. IT WENT FASTER THAN ALL THE OTHERS. BUT IT WASNT AS GOOD AS PADMES BOOBIES. ILL SWAP MY AUTHENTIC SITH LIGHTSABER REPLICA FOR AN AUTOGRAPHED PICTURE OF PADMES TITTIES. THE DEATH STAR EXPLODES PLANETS WHICH IS TOPS. |
|
|
| djmetatron |
| quote: | Originally posted by Xenocreator_PG_
STARWARS ALSO HAS GOOD FIGHTING. I LIKED OBI WON KINOBIS SHIP. IT WENT FAST. IT WENT FASTER THAN ALL THE OTHERS. BUT IT WASNT AS GOOD AS PADMES BOOBIES. ILL SWAP MY AUTHENTIC SITH LIGHTSABER REPLICA FOR AN AUTOGRAPHED PICTURE OF PADMES TITTIES. THE DEATH STAR EXPLODES PLANETS WHICH IS TOPS. |
ing lol +1000000 padmes boobies pwn!!2!!!!111!111 |
|
|
| Blue. |
| Lame movie but oscar worthy in comparison to the 2 dumps George took before this. |
|
|
| astroboy |
| quote: | Originally posted by djmetatron
The main thesus that the films explore is how a person becomes bad,... |
Here I'd just like to point out that, bad acting aside, I found Anakin's transition to evil entirely unconvincing.
| quote: | | ...and more to the point, how a Republic becomes a Dictatorship. Palpatine and the Sith form an alliance of convenience with the traders (the Trade Federation), the bankers (the Banking Clan), the unions (the Commerce Guilds), and the corporations (the Corporate Alliance) which anyone can see is a stab a the Government's close relationship with these areas of society. It's saying that with economic and political power comes corruption which then brings about evil. Pretty simple really and well integrated into the films. |
It is pretty simple... and that's my main gripe with it. I learned nothing new from the film. It didn't make me think about anything in a different way. It didn't provoke any extra thought.
Maybe it did provoke thought for some people - namely those who until they watched the film had had no thoughts on the subject whatsoever...
| quote: | | The philosophical ideas in the films are pretty blatant, I don't see how you don't see them. The good and dark side of the forces for one deal with the philisophical issues of egoism versus conscience, selfishness versus compassion and other ideas in the Normative Theory. But I don't think this thread is really about that. |
I don't see those as being explored in teh film to any greater extent than in any other film that has heroes and villains. To me this is just like starting a discussion on the philosophical content of Indiana Jones and The Temple of Doom. Ofcourse you can find something in the vast field of philosophy that relates to any film or text, or anything for that matter. But to say that this film explores any philosophical issues or has some significant philosophical content is, to me ridiculous. |
|
|
| Blue. |
| quote: | Originally posted by astroboy
Here I'd just like to point out that, bad acting aside, I found Anakin's transition to evil entirely unconvincing.
It is pretty simple... and that's my main gripe with it. I learned nothing new from the film. It didn't make me think about anything in a different way. It didn't provoke any extra thought.
Maybe it did provoke thought for some people - namely those who until they watched the film had had no thoughts on the subject whatsoever...
I don't see those as being explored in teh film to any greater extent than in any other film that has heroes and villains. To me this is just like starting a discussion on the philosophical content of Indiana Jones and The Temple of Doom. Ofcourse you can find something in the vast field of philosophy that relates to any film or text, or anything for that matter. But to say that this film explores any philosophical issues or has some significant philosophical content is, to me ridiculous. |
His transition was aweful, and so quick to. They make it seam as if overnight he is completely corrupted and all of a sudden completely evil.
I didn't like how they tryed to fit in ever single unanswered question, or every small detail in just to prove it was a Star Wars movie. |
|
|
| djmetatron |
| quote: | Originally posted by astroboy
Here I'd just like to point out that, bad acting aside, I found Anakin's transition to evil entirely unconvincing.
|
How so? Please explain.
| quote: | Originally posted by astroboy
I don't see those as being explored in teh film to any greater extent than in any other film that has heroes and villains. To me this is just like starting a discussion on the philosophical content of Indiana Jones and The Temple of Doom. Ofcourse you can find something in the vast field of philosophy that relates to any film or text, or anything for that matter. But to say that this film explores any philosophical issues or has some significant philosophical content is, to me ridiculous. |
Well you've got a point for the most part, but I thought the discussion between Palpatine and Anakin in the theatre about the grey area of the dark side was a bit interesting. Palpatine was saying that good is point of view and that even jedi don't want to loose their power. Which shows that most bad people think that they are good people, and they are doing things for the right reasons. But yeah simple and unenlightening.
I thought the political aspects are a bit more interesting. Like the quote from Obi Wan "only the Sith deal in absolutes" which is I believe a stab at the Conservative Right wing ideology about evil and more importantly how the religious ideology has affected politics (i.e. gay rights, abortion, stem cells).
There are other interesting examples but I can't remember them. Others, please share! |
|
|
| kush paintings |
| First off, I did not start this thread as as OMG this movie changed my life, let me change yours. I am intrigued by this movies commentary about good and evil, see the PDD for a revived thread, where I will post more quotes from Lucas and hopefully if I get around to it other sources. I do know that Lucas wanted a wide appeal for the movie, because many audience members, and critics a like saw its religious appeal. Star Wars, like any major religion, draws clear moral boundries, and at the center of is moral boundries is the story of perserverence, or for that matter, what happens when one gives in to evil. Lucas is a deeply religious man, but he believed that the old religions were no longer suited for todays world. Now, I am not going to say Star Warsism should replace any religion, but there are valuable and, at least I thought, obvious lessons. The reason you have your Ewoks and Jar-Jar Binks characters is to make this a movie everyone can see and hopefully enjoy. Do you really think Lucas would sacrifice something he has given nearly half his life to in search of a few more dollars in the form of some, I'll admit, lame characters? Do you really think Lucas sat down writting the script for Episode I and was like, alright how to make more money off of this... hmmm. Oh I know Jar-Jar, this lanky rastefarian type creature. Come on. Take this to the PDD. |
|
|
|
|
