Phantom Menace is now a 'classic'

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.

There is no difference in what you're saying. You're still trying to establish standards so that you can rationalize a status, in this case it's "fandom," with requirements as though it were a badge of honor.

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.

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!

lol

I'm not the one creating regulations and standards to protect status; sorry, but it is not I who should take care.

I love the first Rocky movie, and thus be a Rocky fan. A fan of the notion of Rocky; and as a Rocky fan, I feel I'm able to choose not to like the subsequent Rocky films because in my opinion, they don't do justice to the original film. To me, fandom is a state of attitude.

Just as with Star Wars. I'm a Star Wars fan, and am able to think the prequels have been pathetic outings as of far.

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

They "may" become a fan? Oh, it's you who should be careful there, my friend. lol I may be saying a lot of things, but I'm not saying who can and cannot be a fan. To me, fandom is open to anyone who wants it. They don't need a badge or merits to meet requirements to get in the club.

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.

Why wouldn't I be a fan of the album? If it didn't have a song I liked, then I would have no reason to be a fan of the album; but it has one, so I have a reason to be a fan of that album.

Again. Wrong argument. I am certainly not saying a fan must like everything. Nobody did say that. You just created that argument.

But you're creating requirements people must meet so they can be a fan. In effect, it doesn't matter if you say "all" or "majority" since you're taking the power of declaration into your own hands.

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.

Uhh, okay...if you insist.

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

It doesn't matter how many songs, I'm fascinated with the notion of the Beatles. It's like Paul McCartney, I only like one of his solo songs, but I can still call myself a McCartney fan. Why? Because I like something he's done and respect him for it. For me, it's about the self and attitude, not having to "prove it" by meeting a minimum.

 

Your logic is totally flawed. If you like one song by a particular artist, you are NOT a fan of that artist, you mearly like that song.

If you like a particular car, you are NOT a car fan, you just like that particular type of car.

If you like a particular football team, you are NOT a football fan, you just like a particular football team. However, if you are a season-ticket holder of this football team and you travel all over the country watching your team in a range of competitions, you can say you are a football fan because you take a more diverse interest in your team and the competitions your team takes part in.

The same can be said of Star Wars - the fans are the one who take a diverse interest in Star Wars, encompassing everything that is Star Wars, this does not mean that they have to like everything, but liking just one or two films does not constitute a fan, just someone who likes them two films.

 

Loco_for Lucas: "There is no difference in what you're saying."

I hope you will not be offended if I called that a lie.

Here are the relevant quotes:

Me: Liking most of something is extremely important in determining whether you are a fan or not. [in so many words]

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

Me: "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."

Loco: "There is no difference in what you're saying."

So there is no difference between having to like all the parts to be a fan or liking most parts to be a fan?

Of course there is. I totally agree that you can hate Please, Please Me and be a fan of The Beatles. Of course you can. But if you dislike most of their material then your dislike outweighs your like and you cannot, by definition, be a 'fan'.

I claimed that reasoning would have it that to be a fan of something you must enjoy and like that thing quite a bit. Now surely in order to like a thing you should have to enjoy most of that thing! Simple reasoning, Loco. Don't dig that whole deeper.

Loco: "To me, fandom is open to anyone who wants it."

Loco, take a chill pill pal. There is no need to .

Anyway, what I hate the most is that when people think everything comes down to opinion when it doesn't. We cannot sit and say a word is whatever we want it to mean because it is not.

What you are saying Loco is you can dislike or even hate most of something and still be a fan of it. That is completely absurd. You can't just invent meanings to the word "fan".

Loco: "then I would have no reason to be a fan of the album; but it has one, so I have a reason to be a fan of that album."

You would be a fan of the song, Loco.

I think that its taking time but we may get there in the end.

Loco: "But you're creating requirements people must meet so they can be a fan."

I am not creating any requirements. The dictionary does that for us. It says we have to have an affection and like for something if we are to be a fan of it. If you dislike most of something then you are not a fan.

Please listen in future Loco.

 

I hate Ally McBeal.

I hate the storylines, I hate the characters, I hate the concept, I hate the style, I hate the actors, I hate the writing, I hate the stupid dream sequences, the dancing baby, and I hate Rhonda ******* Whateverhernameis, her voice and her songs.

But a joke in it once almost made me laugh, and I once saw a photo of the main actress that made her look quite good.


So would anyone object to me calling myself an Ally McBeal fan?

No. (Why would anyone care what I call myself?!)

Would anyone call me and Ally McBeal fan?

Clearly not.


A great many of the truths we cling to depend entirely on our own point of view.

 

Anyway, what I hate the most is that when people think everything comes down to opinion when it doesn't. We cannot sit and say a word is whatever we want it to mean because it is not.

Following you so far...

What you are saying Loco is you can dislike or even hate most of something and still be a fan of it. That is completely absurd. You can't just invent meanings to the word "fan".

Cool. So Clonetrooper1000, please point me to "Book of objective definitions" that states that to be a fan you need like more then you dislike.

Then can you tell me, since SW now incorperates films, music, action figures, statuettes, books, comics, computer games, confectionary goods, clothing, cartoons, and pillow cases, can someone be a SW fan if they don't like all of these things too?

I mean, there are only six films, whereas there are about ten billion different novels and comics (well, it feels like ten billion...). Does one book = one film? Whats the rate of exchange? According to your definition, could someone who dislikes everything about SW except for the films accurately call themselves a SW fan, or should such people be called "fans of the SW films"?

And lets not even mention sports fans. Do you cease to be a fan of a team if you think they have been really awful for most of their existence?

 

Scott3eyez,

Using your Ally McBeal example, it's clear to see that you're not a fan of that show.

However, I've not seen THAT kind of vitriol aimed at the PT. Nor have I heard anyone say "I hate everything about the PT". No, in many cases, we "bashers" have gone far to include the things we don't like, citing comparisons to the OT (as the standard of measurment), as well as to WHY we don't like them. The only time I've heard the term "hate" used is by the pro-PT camp in an effort to paint the PT detractors in a particularly ugly light.

To me, your argument above holds no water, insofar as my personal feelings about the PT are concerned. They are not the same thing. I find many things to praise in the PT, in partiuclar the quality of the visual fx (even if I think they're overused - they still look amazing), to the staging of action sequences (I've shared my thoughts repeatedly on this).

In closing, I don't think it's far enough along in it's life for TPM to be considered a classic. I've seen far too much detraction and derision of this film, outside of the SW fanbase, for me to think that the public at large will regard it so (or, more importantly, the film industry).

But then again, I could be completely wrong.

 

JenX: "Do you cease to be a fan of a team if you think they have been really awful for most of their existence?"

Its the affection and liking for that thing that makes you a fan.

I sense some fans becoming very panicky here, perhaps now asking themselves "Am I still a fan of the Star Wars saga?"

Anyway, I just think that to be a fan of something you must have an affection for it, simple as that. If you have an affection for 2 out of 5 films then that is not an affection for the SW saga.

 

Tadj, doing away with the basher's sanctuary doesn't mean doing away with the self proclaimed bashers. It just means they don't have a thread where negativity goes unchecked.

The basher's sanctuary is an exclusive club.

By the same token, getting rid of the TPM defense force doesn't mean getting rid of the TPM fans. It just means there isn't a thread where positivity goes unchecked.

If the basher gusher war wasn't such a hate mongering phenomenon (hate coming from both the pro and con TPM camps), I wouldn't mind the sanctuary threads.

 

In closing, I don't think it's far enough along in it's life for TPM to be considered a classic. I've seen far too much detraction and derision of this film, outside of the SW fanbase, for me to think that the public at large will regard it so (or, more importantly, the film industry).

It's not unusual for a classic to go unappreciated in its own time. However, it's my feeling that Star Wars will not be remembered as individual films but collectively as a unique saga.

 

>>>Tadj, doing away with the basher's sanctuary doesn't mean doing away with the self proclaimed bashers. It just means they don't have a thread where negativity goes unchecked.

The basher's sanctuary is an exclusive club.

Well, I've been through phases of posting more in there than anywhere else and I don't think anyone would call me a "basher", and in my experience, so long as you are willing to respect people's opinions and the intent of the thread, there's no problem. (At least, I haven't had any problems... that I know of...) So it's not really an "exclusive club" as you say- more like a bar with a particularly strict dress code...

Returning to topic, I don't personally think that TPM on it's own will ever stand up as a classic, because there's too much that relies on other films to have any real relevance to the story. However, I think that the Star Wars saga would be worse off without it, and will be remembered as a 6 film story, rather than the 1977 film alone, the OT, or two seperate trilogies. And I think that the most impressive feat of the prequels is the way that their addition to the Star Wars story has improved the original trilogy- which is no mean feat!

 

Clonetrooper1000, no offence, but you kind of TOTALLY side stepped almost every question I asked you. You said

You can't just invent meanings to the word "fan".

So I asked you what objective book of definitions you got your definition from.

I also asked whether someone who isn't a fan of anything SW related except the films can be a "fan" of SW according to your definition. I also asked how you measure the different parts of SW, whether disliking three SW books is the equivalent of disliking a movie.

You reply by telling me what "feelings" you are getting from some "fans", and then giving me your opinions on affection, which is all well and good, but doesn't really answer the questions.

 

According to my dictionary, a fan is a "person who is excessively enthusiatic about something."

And according to dictionary.com, an enthusiast is "One who imagines himself divinely inspired, or possessed of some special revelation; a religious madman; a fanatic."

Which sounds like both bashers AND gushers to me!



Anyway, my definition of a Star Wars fan is someone who is expecting to enjoy Episode III.

For what it's worth (which at current exchange rates is about $0.02...)

 

So I asked you what objective book of definitions you got your definition from.

I also asked whether someone who isn't a fan of anything SW related except the films can be a "fan" of SW according to your definition. I also asked how you measure the different parts of SW, whether disliking three SW books is the equivalent of disliking a movie.

You reply by telling me what "feelings" you are getting from some "fans", and then giving me your opinions on affection, which is all well and good, but doesn't really answer the questions.

Yeah, for someone who is supposedly "setting the standard" for fandom, he's certainly overlooked a whole lot.

Now my logic is starting to look good now, isn't it clone? Seeing as how Star Wars is now more than just films, it's what Jen said, clothes, music, comics, books, cartoons, mini-series, TV-Movies, video games, etc. According to your logic, you have to like a majority of all that to be a "fan." And if you aren't a fan of EU, then you aren't a fan of Star Wars, according to your logic, as EU makes up a substantial amount of the lore that helped the films last as long as they have. To only like the films and ignore most of the VAST VOLUMES OF STAR WARS EU is to say you like only one of the Rocky movies and choosing not to follow the others.

I love you, Jen.

According to my dictionary, a fan is a "person who is excessively enthusiatic about something."

And according to dictionary.com, an enthusiast is "One who imagines himself divinely inspired, or possessed of some special revelation; a religious madman; a fanatic."

Which sounds like both bashers AND gushers to me!

Oh, that is good, that is really good. Kudos on that one, Scott.

 

Whoa this threads exploded!

Clonetrooper1000
If you say I loved Episode IV and V. Then you could say you were a fan of those films or - seeing as it is 2 out of 3 - a fan of the original trilogy.

But surely being a Star Wars fan isn't something that amounts to a set of numbers, otherwise you would have to factor in other elements, like the amount of merchandise they own, or the number of years they have been enjoying Star Wars for. If somebody had been enjoying Star Wars for a good 22 years before TPM came out then why should they stop considering themselves a fan just because they havent enjoyed the output over the past 4 years?
As JenX pointed out earlier, what about the comic books, action figures, duvet covers? If somebody dislikes most of the EU then does that mean they are only allowed to call themselves a fan of the Star Wars films (as opposed to a general purpose Star Wars fan which would have to encompass everything with a Star Wars logo on it).

Dont get me wrong CT1K, I'm not out for your blood, I just dont see why its necessary to create a standard of what a 'fan' is or isn't.
If some 10 yr old kid watches AOTC and calls himself a fan of Star Wars I'm not gonna tap him on the shoulder and say "excuse me son, could you retract that last comment you made? You havent met our requirements."

 

10 year old boy: "I just saw Return of the Jedi, I LOVE Star Wars! I'm a Star Wars fan!"

Star Wars "FAN": "I'm sorry, have you read and enjoyed the Zahn series, watched the Holiday Special, Ewok Adventures, the Droids cartoon, read the Insider, respect Lucas, subscribed to Hyperspace, read Shadows of the Empire, played all the games, AND own a majority of action figures?"

10 year old boy: "Uhh, no."

Star Wars "FAN": What about the Star Wars Fan Club? Did you join it? You haven't gotten the newsletter?"

10 year old boy: "Huh?"

Star Wars "FAN": "Then I'm sorry, you cannot be a Star Wars fan. You may be a Return of the Jedi fan, but you haven't passed the minimum set of requirements to earn the status of 'Star Wars FAN.'"

 

Loco_for_Lucas

I love you, Jen.

So why don't you return my calls????

I feel so used.







Right, topic. I think TPM is like The Godfather III, a vastly inferior chapter in a larger story. Some people will think of TPM as a classic, some will think of it as one of the worst films they have ever seen.

 

So why don't you return my calls????

I feel so used.

Hey, you know I'm busy. I call when I can.

 

I respectfully submit that the debate here isn't about the meaning of "fan" but about the meaning of "Star Wars." We all agree that a "fan" is an ardent admirer of something, and enthusiast, etc., but what is the object of that admiration?

Star Wars can mean many things. It can mean the first movie, which was called Star Wars and is still known as Star Wars to the general public. It can mean the as-yet-incomplete 6 part saga. It can mean a brand name, a trademark, or everything bearing that trademark. It could mean the story of Luke Skywalker, which is what many people thought Star Wars was until 4 years ago. It could mean the story in Lucas' little black notebook. It can mean the idea of Star Wars, a western/myth/fantasy set as a space opera in which heroes and friends and villains and aliens and space ships do battle for the fate of a galaxy far, far away, all accompanied by a rousing John Williams score. Any attempt to set in stone the essence of "Star Wars," to reduce it to a mere checklist, is bound to fail.

 

nice post, Ransom.

 

Technically, this isn't really about being a SW fan, it's about how TPM is now a classic.

It isn't even a debate, we are just declaring it a classic.

We don't need you guys to agree with us, we are just letting you know that SW, the Prequels, and more specifically TPM is doing fine even without support from it's detractors.

 

but it is a debate, since FANS do not agree that TPM is a classic.

you can declare anything you want. i declare TPM is not a classic.

its not even close.

 

It isn't dependant on you. As long as enough people consider it a classic, it is.

Not everyone thought ANH was a classic either. Didn't stop that from being considered a classic. Not everyone who liked ANH thought ESB was a classic, but that didn't stop it from being considered a classic. And so on and so forth.

So disagree all you like, it doesn't change the fact that TPM is a classic.

To tell you the truth, the very fact that you can't let it go 4 years after it's release is some of the most compelling evidence of TPM's status as a "classic".

 

Go-Mer
It isn't even a debate, we are just declaring it a classic.

Well these forums are for debates, not declarations.


It isn't dependant on you. As long as enough people consider it a classic, it is.

and how many is 'enough'? And why should we take your word for it?

Not everyone thought ANH was a classic either. Didn't stop that from being considered a classic. Not everyone who liked ANH thought ESB was a classic, but that didn't stop it from being considered a classic. And so on and so forth.

Not everyone thought "Kangaroo Jack" was a classic, that don't make it a classic either!
I think you're gonna need a bit more than "not everyone thought..."
g

 

The difference between Kangaroo Jack and TPM, is you don't have a militant basher movement against Kangaroo Jack. The stronger the TPM basher movement gets, the more TPM is a classic.

The reason there is so much TPM bashing going on 4 years after the fact is because they are afraid that if they don't bash it, everyone will assume it was a classic.

Nobody worries about that with Kanagroo Jack.

 

The reason there is so much TPM bashing going on 4 years after the fact is because they are afraid that if they don't bash it, everyone will assume it was a classic.

So, Star Wars fans want nothing more than to keep a Star Wars movie down? Uhh...riiiight. lol

It's the Conspiracy Theory again, right?