Phantom Menace is now a 'classic'

Oh THAT thread DR E...

I don't hate the classic trilogy, I am still very much a fan of it. It just isn't as good as the prequels so far.

 

for me, if ep3 is better then rotj then pt > ot (see info)

 

(inspired by winter_chili's post)

For me, if Episode III is better than ANH, then PT > OT.

I actually sat down and did the math on how this would work out.

Since ANH is the closest thing to a perfect movie I've ever seen, this could be difficult.

But according to Adam's scores:
If E3 > ANH, PT > OT
If E3 = ANH, PT = OT
If E3 < ANH, PT < OT

Somehow I doubt that E3 will dethrone ANH as best. film. ever.

Because how often do you come out of a movie and say "That just claimed the #1 spot as greatest film I've ever seen"?

But ya never know.



Rick McCallum loves you!

 

Loco-for-lucas: "What you're talking about is fanaticism, Durwood. Liking one STAR WARS movie makes you a fan, what you talk about is blind devotion."

No its not fanaticism. "Fanaticism" has a touch of obsessiveness about it. Why can't you people just accept simple reasoning. Liking one part of something does not make you a fan.

Let's just say a person watches all 5 Rocky films for the very first time. He says "I really enjoyed Rocky IV but I didn't like the rest of them". Are you trying to say he can now call himself a fan of the Rocky films. That defies reasoning, definition and plain old common sense.

Or Loco, if you thoroughly enjoyed While My Guitar Gently Weeps, but hated the rest of The White Album, you would NOT be a fan of that album, simple as that

Think about what you are saying before you post it guys!

 

DrE: "i think if you are going to be a fan, you should speak out when you see something you love being turned into garbage. otherwise you are just another fanatic, accepting anything with the SW stamp."

You can be a fan and equally enjoy all of the SW installments (or anything else) without being a "fanatic" in the negative sense of the term. True, a serious fan will speak out when one sees something that one does not agree with (for example, there are aspects of all the SW films I did not agree with), but that does not mean that that one person is the only true fan.

 

No its not fanaticism. "Fanaticism" has a touch of obsessiveness about it. Why can't you people just accept simple reasoning. Liking one part of something does not make you a fan.

Oh, and there isn't obsession to "needing" to like all parts to maintain a level of status? I like how the high road is attempted in being taken here.

Let's just say a person watches all 5 Rocky films for the very first time. He says "I really enjoyed Rocky IV but I didn't like the rest of them". Are you trying to say he can now call himself a fan of the Rocky films. That defies reasoning, definition and plain old common sense.

Well, if you like a Rocky movie, then you're a Rocky fan. I only like the first, and I still consider myself a fan. Just like how I like the Classic Trilogy and consider myself a Star Wars fan; I've gone through what exists, and filtered out what I percieve as the garbage of the franchise. A fan can do that too. Pick out what he likes and respect that.

Or Loco, if you thoroughly enjoyed While My Guitar Gently Weeps, but hated the rest of The White Album, you would NOT be a fan of that album, simple as that

Yes, I would still be a fan of the White Album because it contains the song that I am so fond of. Doesn't mean I have to like everything on it (luckily, it's so good, that I do ) but what I do like just happens to be there. Nice try though

btw, I'm not particularly fond of the album Please Please Me, but I still am a Beatle fan.

Think about what you are saying before you post it guys!

Practice what you preach, buddy boy.

 

Loco_for_Lucas: "Oh, and there isn't obsession to "needing" to like all parts to maintain a level of status?"

Have you missed the point of this argument? I never said you had to like them all to be a fan of something. We are talking about the majority. Surely reasoning would have it that you must have to enjoy most (a majority) of a particular thing in order to be a fan or not.

You have created a false argument there. Like earlier when you said "to where you have to like them all to be a "fan"--". Nobody is saying that. Take more care now Loco.

Loco_for_Lucas: "Well, if you like a Rocky movie, then you're a Rocky fan."

Come on Loco, you are digging a massive hole here and it is potentially embarrasing for you.
You could be a fan of that particular film if you liked it quite a bit. However if you disliked the other films you would not be a fan of the Rocky series. Simple as that!

Loco: "A fan can do that too."

A critic or person who criticises can. If this then leads to an affection for something they may become a fan. Simple as that!

Loco: "Yes, I would still be a fan of the White Album because it contains the song that I am so fond of"

But if you disliked the rest of it then you would not be a fan of it. You would be a fan of the song, not the album.

Loco: "Doesn't mean I have to like everything on it"

Again. Wrong argument. I am certainly not saying a fan must like everything. Nobody did say that. You just created that argument. However, you are saying that if you like one song on an album and hate the rest then you are a fan of that album.

Give us a break.

Loco: "I'm not particularly fond of the album Please Please Me, but I still am a Beatle fan."

Is that because you perhaps like there music? Lets say a majority?

Loco: "Practice what you preach, buddy boy."

Ok dude!

 

Okay, this is starting to get out of hand, and has denigrated into yet another Gusher / Basher war.

I will freely admit to my own part in this, as my posts have been fairly vehement with regards to the terms "classic" and "fan" that have been bandied about here.

What we all have to realize is that we aren't going to convince each other of anything new. The fact that we have differences of opinions in this matter is what makes for interesting discussion and debate.

I feel some terminology should be defined before going any further:

FAN: An enthusiastic follower or admirer of a team, sport, celebrity, etc; enthusiast

FANATIC: a person with extreme enthusiasm or zeal, such as in religion or politics; zealot.

SOURCE: Webster's Dictionary of American English © 1997 Random House

As you can clearly see, these terms are cousins of each other. They DO NOT mean the same thing.

CLASSIC: 1. of the first or highest quality or rank: a classic work. 2. serving as a standard; definitive: a classic method of teaching. 3. CLASSICAL (defs 1, 2). 4. of or obeying and established set of standards or methods; traditional or typical of it's kind: a classic example of fine writing. 5. Of long lasting interest, quality, or style: a classic movie. 6. an author, artist, literary work, or artistic production of long lasting quality: Students had to read the classics in college. 7. something noteworthy of it's kind and worth remembering: your funny reply was classic.

By the various definitions of the term above, I find it nearly impossible to believe that TPM signifies ANYTHING resembling "classic" status. From a filmmaking standpoint, TPM and AOTC haven't taken any risks (with the possible exception of JJB). They've not broken any new ground (with the possible exception of sheer blue and green screen work - but so what?) They certainly haven't raised the bar over the OT in terms of sheer filmmaking quality, nor have they approached said bar.

Lifeless acting against CGI backgrounds are defined as "Style" when it's mere sloppiness. The ruggedness (i.e. NOT polished) nature of the script is accepted merely because "that's the way Lucas wanted it, therefore it's great." Sorry, don't buy it. No filmmaker, Lucas included, should be forgiven for slovenly filmmaking, and that's what we have in the PT. Those moments (and I freely admit to being only moderate in my bashing stance), when the magic shines through is when Lucas concentrates on putting a good action sequence together, when he's not worried about the complexities of character development and script. Cut him loose on an action set piece and let him roll. That's where he excels. However, it makes the PT no better than Bad Boys II when all you really have are action setpieces, and a lot of boring exposition (of an admittedly interesting STORY, no less) to get you through the next two hours.

To me, this is what is tragic about the PT - Lucas has tried to do too many things by himself, and the results are backfiring on him. If I've said it once, I've said it 1000 times: FILM IS A COLLABORATIVE MEDIUM. YES, many people are working together to make the most out of the director's vision, but they work collectively, hoping for the best possible execution of every scene. This is NOT represneted by Lucas saying "do it my way or the highway" (as I understand it, The flanneled one is NOT open to suggestions on his set.) This is closemindedness of the highest order, and is even worse when the man perpetrating this is a mediocre filmmaker.

I guess what baffles me is that many people on this forum consider themselves good critics and judges of film, yet fail to see the gaping inconsistencies of quality between the two trilogies. To me, this is more of the nostalgia factor sabotaging objective thought of the "Gusher" camp as opposed to the "basher" camp somehow putting the OT on an unreachable pedastal. In other words, I personally feel that the OT (JEDI included) were excellent films, but were by no means

 

Yeah, but those are still your OPINIONS. I like what Lucas is doing. I like the new films. They are classics to ME. You are still dealing with the subjective.

 

Perhaps that makes it a "Cult"?

 

Somehow I doubt that E3 will dethrone ANH as best. film. ever.

That is because you are wise beyond your years as an icon artist, Adam.


Okay, this is starting to get out of hand, and has denigrated into yet another Gusher / Basher war.

A basher/gusher war in a movie forum? That never happens, Tadji!

 

TadjiStation:

you might think (and im sure you do) that backing up your opinion with passages from the dictionary (in bold type, no less!) validates your argument but of course it doesnt. opinion wrapped up in fact is still just opinion. TPM is a classic if i say its a classic.

"I guess what baffles me is that many people on this forum consider themselves good critics and judges of film, yet fail to see the gaping inconsistencies of quality between the two trilogies"

what baffles me is that some people in the world are incapable of accepting the fact that other people may have opinions different from their own. Because someone doesnt agree with you, are they wrong?

 

Me: Somehow I doubt that E3 will dethrone ANH as best. film. ever.

Stryphe: That is because you are wise beyond your years as an icon artist, Adam.

Huh? ? What does my age or my icon-making have to do with it? Mesa confused!


Don't get me wrong. I don't think Episode III is going to be bad. In fact, every image I've seen from it has confirmed for me that they're doing things right so far... and of all the many tidbits, scraps of information etc. I've heard, there's only been TWO that I didn't like the idea of. (Not posting them here 'cause I think it's not okay to discuss outside of 3SA. If you reeeeally want to know, PM me.)
BUT
I think the darkness of the material is going to turn me off. Darker and more personal stories leave less time for sweeping epic grandeur and random silliness. I prefer SW when it's not taking itself too seriously.
A lot of people are saying "Episode III will be the best 'cause it's gonna be dark." Well, if that's what you want, have fun, kids.

I'm not expecting it to topple ANH and be my favorite SW movie. It would be unfair to ask it to do that.

My current expectations for SW3... if I was a betting man... third, fourth or fifth place in the saga, a grade of B+.

Care to try and beat that, George?

We shall see.


Rick McCallum loves you!

 

actually ep3 should serve well as a cesaura before diving into the bold comic book style of ANH.

 

I just saw dare devil, it was terrible and yet you dont see me going on a dare devil message board and talk about how bad it was for 4 years

can anyone explain the reasoning behind that?

 

Unchecked positivity would be boring, and unchecked negativity would be a downward spiral. That's why it is a good thing that the SW fanbase is split the way we are. It provides for constant debate material.

I am against polarized threads that are about one's affilliation with extremists from either side of the basher/gusher phenomenon.

I think having basher's and/or gusher's "clubhouse" threads keep the less desirable aspects of this kind of debate alive, when things could have mellowed out long ago. Ever since the terms "TPM bashers" and "TPM gushers" were being used, there wasn't a "gusher" I knew who liked being called a "gusher", and likewise I have yet to hear of a "basher" who didn't feel wrongfully labled as a "basher".

It might have started out with people calling them a basher or gusher, but when they hang out in a thread called the "Basher's Sanctuary" or the "TPM Defense Force", they have become those lables hook, line, and sinker.

NEWSFLASH: There are no real gusher's and there are no real bashers. We are all people with different perspectives, and none of us can be lumped with another as having the exact same opinion.

Some of you might think ANH was the only great SW movie. Some of you might think only ANH and ESB were the good ones. Still others might think ROTJ was the best of the classic trilogy but the prequels just haven't been up to snuff. A few people, probably like the prequels better than the classic trilogy.

But even if a group of people agreed on any one of these opinions, their reasons for feeling that way would vary from person to person. This diversity is a good thing, and is something that benefits us all by giving us fertile ground to debate in.

Forming sectioned off groups that stagnate with unchecked negativity or positivity ends up being detrimental to the TPM forum as a whole.

I think we should do away with the "club" threads and keep the threads about the topics, not about "fan affilliations" with extremist groups. The former bashers and gushers could all debate together in threads about the topic being discussed instead.

....um back on topic, the endless debate that TPM sparked over 4 years ago, and which shows no signs of slowing down is all the proof one needs to say TPM is already a classic.

 

I agree with everything you said, minus that last point about TPM being a classic. No film becomes a classic only four years after release, regardless of its quality.

 

Go-Mer-Tonic, I think you have made your feelings towards both the TPM Defence Force and Bashers' Sanctuary threads crystal clear on any number of occasions, but I really do wonder why you felt the need to go so spectacularly off topic on this thread.

I'm don't want to drag this thread further off topic, so I will reply to just one part of your post.

I think we should do away with the "club" threads and keep the threads about the topics, not about "fan affilliations" with extremist groups. The former bashers and gushers could all debate together in threads about the topic being discussed instead.

THAT. ALREADY. HAPPENS. In fact, it's happening on this very thread. But I'm not surprised that you failed to notice this.

 

The Blues Brothers was an instant classic...

JenX, I know you guys venture out of your clubhouse threads every once in a while to participate in other threads. That's not the point. The point is that keeping the basher gusher war alive is detrimental to the fanship as a whole. I know a lot of you guys blame Lucas for dividing the fanbase, but it is up to us whether or not we stay divided.

None of us are really gushers or bashers, so I say we stop pretending to be gushers and bashers.

EDIT: As to why I veered off topic, it started off as me trying to explain to winter_chili why it is a good thing that people who don't like TPM come to the TPM forum.

 

Just a couple of extra comments...

I, for one, despise the "Gusher" label. I don't mind being called a prequel fan or a PT fan, but the very word "Gusher" is an insult, and not a subtle one at that. It makes PT fans sound like mindless screaming, screeching girls at a pop concert. It's a direct slap in the face.

My personal problem with the Basher movement/crusade is that I have a personal dislike for anything based in negativitity. I was somewhat dissapointed with Daredevil myself, and I've read the comic for 30 years, so my angle on the DD movie is somewhat similar to that of PT Bashers-but I don't go to Superherohype.com and blast it every day, and there's no way on God's Green Earth I would ever whine about it almost daily for 4 years. That's mad.

I personally do think a movie can be a classic as soon as it comes out. ANH was. Citizen Kane was. There's a reason for the term "Instant Classic". And that's how I personally regard TPM. It's not perfect-there's probably been less than 5 movies that could make that claim-but it was still great. Down to every last Mesa and Yippee.

 

evil dead 2 was an instant classic. heh heh.

my favorite movies right now are 'my dinner with andre', 'you can count on me', 'gangs of new york', 'faces' + 'attack of the clones'. all CLASSICS!!

 

Well-said, Go-Mer and appleseed!

 

Im not questioning if its a good or bad thing that there are people here who dislike the movie, i just dont understand the motive behind it

 

First_Stage_Lensman

Yeah, but those are still your OPINIONS. I like what Lucas is doing. I like the new films. They are classics to ME. You are still dealing with the subjective.

I thought I was taking a risk with the comment regarding the failure of some to see the inconsistencies in the two trilogies, so I apologize if I stepped on anybody's toes.

That said, I do believe I was quite clear in my last post that I was speaking in terms of opinion, hence the inclusion of the phrase "to me".

jariten

TadjiStation:

you might think (and im sure you do) that backing up your opinion with passages from the dictionary (in bold type, no less!) validates your argument but of course it doesnt. opinion wrapped up in fact is still just opinion. TPM is a classic if i say its a classic.

The boldface was used to separate the word from the definition, nothing more. I included passages from the dictionary (particularly with the terms "fan" and "fanatic") to demonstrate the FACT that they do not mean the same thing, nothing more.

As to the term "classic", I simply wanted to provide a series of textbook definitions of the term, as a means to set up my personal argument why I believe TPM (and AOTC) fail to live up to the definition of the word. I used personalized speech (the repetition of the phrase "to me") to indicate that I was dealing with my opinion. The FACT that I stated my opinions after the textbook definitions was not about validation. It was about continuity.

As to your insinuation "and I'm sure you do": I don't particularly appreciate the implication or tone, and find it tantamount to flame baiting. Please don't do it again.

TadjiStation

"I guess what baffles me is that many people on this forum consider themselves good critics and judges of film, yet fail to see the gaping inconsistencies of quality between the two trilogies"

jariten

what baffles me is that some people in the world are incapable of accepting the fact that other people may have opinions different from their own. Because someone doesnt agree with you, are they wrong?

As I said before, I took a chance with this statement, and very clearly went overboard. For that, I humbly apologize.

This statment is bred out of a long discussion that happened some time ago with regards to the objective and subjective aspects of film criticism. Many people on this forum believe that the quality of a film is purely subjective. That their response to a given film is a sign of the film's quality. I, and others, argued quite vehemently a differing viewpoint, citing the process of filmmaking - the idea of going to film school to learn the craft so as to provide a vehicle for the art to grow, was essential in helping determine the objective merits of filmmaking. We went round and round, much to EVERYONE'S frustration, without making progress on either front. I see the same thing occurring again in this thread, hence my statement (which lacked proper context, and was abrupt to boot).

I'm not interested in fueling a war, nor seeing the differences of opinion eliminated from these boards. Those that are calling for the elimination of "negative" viewpoints (particularly the Basher's Sanctuary) are calling for the creation of a member's only club, one that excludes all but their own opinions.

This sandbox is big enough for all involved, ladies and gentlemen. Let's try to play nice.

Again, I'm sorry if I offended anyone with my last post. That was not my intention.

Best,

Tadji

 

I think everyone gotta chill. all of you. Being a fan of something is STRICTLY opinionated in itself. I do fall in the category of if I like MOST of them, or all of them, I'm a fan, but personally I don't care how the rest of you deal with it. I'm sorry, but this is a pointless topic to argue. No one will win. If you like the movie, good for you. If you dislike it, thats ok. Remember the burns or scars. Thats ok! Lets argue on something worth arguing, like why am I not a fan if I don't know the name of the Twi'lek Jedi in episode 2. Yeah, I was once told that I'm not a true fan of star wars cuz I don't know her name. NOW THAT'S worth arguing.