~ESSAY CONTEST WINNER: "TWO AUDIENCES, TWO SPIRITS"~

I'm going to be simple and straight to the point: everyone is entitled to their own opinon.

 

and now I've got a few people calling me names as the only responses.

Not really, DBrennan, but even if that were so, all I could say is: what goes around comes around.

You have some valid points in your essay, even if I disagree with your overall opinion.

 

The issue in my posts is not the subject of whether or not people are allowed to have personal opinions, as that is a given right of people (though the replies I've received seem to suggest I'm an idiot for having differing personal viewpoint). My critique of this essay was that the author was completely close-minded to ideas and factors that failed to serve his personal agenda. Sure, you can write an essay, but if you saturate it with personal bias without examining contrary factors, it's not going to be a very good essay. Objectivity is a fundamental part of mature, professional writing. And while DBrennan3333 may have the hypothetical rationale down, he's completely missed the mark when it comes to proper unbiased analyzation.

 

Look, the box office figures, as stated very clearly in the essay, are adjusted for inflation. I know that it's kind of a tough reality to accept, but AOTC didn't really make more money that ESB and ROTJ. Sorry.

If you like my thesis, why not expound on it instead of nit-picking and misinterpreting arcane little asides that were stated in essay? Everybody keeps saying things like, "I agree with the thesis but-----" and then they spend two paragraphs talking about petty stuff.

I think that (a) the essay was right and (b) there's something kind of....bigger in the idea behind it. That nowadays you have artists pandering to niche markets instead of trying to unify or to express something substantive. Like the mindset behind the new trilogy is representative of the endless fracturing of society into little identities and sub-groups.

Hey, I'm not saying that that's a bad thing, but I think that that's an interesting idea and instead of worrying about whether AOTC was a total disaster or a semi-disaster, why not, ya know, talk about the IDEAS?

 

"If you like my thesis, why not expound on it instead of nit-picking and misinterpreting arcane little asides that were stated in essay? Everybody keeps saying things like, "I agree with the thesis but-----" and then they spend two paragraphs talking about petty stuff."

It seems to me that you just admitted that besides the thesis, the rest of your essay was simply "petty." The comments raised in this thread are far from petty and are trying to discuss the way in which you tried to prove your thesis. Don't just push it aside as being trivial.

Agreeing with the thesis does not mean that you agree with the actual argument. For example, I agreed with President Bush that we should enter Iraq, I disagree with how he went into Iraq. This is a similar example, I would argue with him about his methods of going in, while I agree with the overall idea of it. This is the exact same thing in my eyes, people agree with the idea stated in the thesis but they disagree with how you prove the thesis or how you argue in favor of it.

Where did you get those inflation figures? Is there a source?

-Seldon

 

1977, Star Wars: 1.2 bil

1980, The Empire Strikes Back: 603 mil(

So Dbrennan - let's be honest here, if AotC was a "disaster" of ANY sorts according to its boxoffice total - then what do you call Empire barely making half of it's predecessor?

 

I went to boxofficemojo the site that was used by the essay writer.

Note that the first sum of money is the one adjusted for inflation.
1 Gone with the Wind MGM $1,262,778,900 $198,676,459 1939^
2 Star Wars Fox $1,113,247,500 $460,998,007 1977^
3 The Sound of Music Fox $890,096,100 $158,671,368 1965
4 E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial Uni. $886,589,600 $435,110,554 1982^
5 The Ten Commandments Par. $818,750,000 $65,500,000 1956
6 Titanic Par. $802,161,800 $600,788,188 1997
7 Jaws Uni. $800,492,600 $260,000,000 1975
8 Doctor Zhivago MGM $775,846,600 $111,721,910 1965
9 The Exorcist WB $691,054,200 $232,671,011 1973^
10 Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs Dis. $681,250,000 $184,925,486 1937^
11 101 Dalmatians Dis. $624,482,800 $144,880,014 1961^
12 The Empire Strikes Back Fox $613,629,000 $290,475,067 1980^
13 Ben-Hur MGM $612,500,000 $74,000,000 1959
14 Return of the Jedi Fox $587,871,300 $309,306,177 1983^
15 The Sting Uni. $557,142,900 $156,000,000 1973
16 Raiders of the Lost Ark Par. $550,886,600 $242,374,454 1981^
17 Jurassic Park Uni. $538,786,500 $357,067,947 1993
18 The Graduate AVCO $534,468,200 $104,642,560 1967
19 Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace Fox $530,138,300 $431,088,301 1999
20 Fantasia Dis. $519,021,700 $76,408,097 1941^
21 The Godfather Par. $493,266,000 $134,966,411 1972^
22 Forrest Gump Par. $490,910,100 $329,694,499 1994
23 Mary Poppins Dis. $488,636,400 $102,272,727 1964^
24 The Lion King BV $482,698,700 $328,541,776 1994^
25 Grease Par. $480,761,000 $188,389,888 1978^
26 Thunderball UA $467,500,000 $63,595,658 1965
27 The Jungle Book Dis. $460,499,500 $141,843,612 1967^
28 Sleeping Beauty Dis. $454,225,400 $51,600,000 1959^
29 Ghostbusters Col. $442,066,300 $238,632,124 1984^
30 Shrek 2 DW $441,226,300 $441,226,247 2004
31 Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid Fox $440,986,600 $102,308,889 1969
32 Bambi Dis. $440,056,300 $102,797,150 1942^
33 Love Story Par. $437,488,400 $106,397,186 1970
34 Spider-Man Sony $434,279,700 $403,706,375 2002
35 Independence Day Fox $432,931,700 $306,169,268 1996
36 Home Alone Fox $423,338,700 $285,761,243 1990
37 Pinocchio Dis. $421,270,800 $84,254,167 1940^
38 Cleopatra Fox $419,896,600 $57,777,778 1963
39 Beverly Hills Cop Par. $419,687,600 $234,760,478 1984
40 Goldfinger UA $414,375,000 $51,081,062 1964
41 Airport Uni. $413,195,500 $100,489,151 1970
42 American Graffiti Uni. $410,714,300 $115,000,000 1973
43 The Robe Fox $409,090,900 $36,000,000 1953
44 Around the World in 80 Days UA $403,846,200 $42,000,000 1956
45 Blazing Saddles WB $395,172,000 $119,500,000 1974
46 Batman WB $393,466,400 $251,188,924 1989
47 The Bells of St. Mary's RKO $392,156,900 $21,333,333 1945
48 The Towering Inferno Fox $383,597,900 $116,000,000 1974
49 The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King NL $383,290,600 $377,027,325 2003
50 My Fair Lady WB $375,000,000 $72,000,000 1964
51 The Greatest Show on Earth Par. $375,000,000 $36,000,000 1952
52 National Lampoon's Animal House Uni. $374,314,200 $141,600,000 1978^
53 Spider-Man 2 Sony $373,585,800 $373,585,825 2004
54 The Passion of the Christ NM $370,274,600 $370,274,604 2004
55 Back to the Future Uni. $369,066,600 $210,609,762 1985
56 The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers NL $360,190,100 $341,786,758 2002^
57 The Sixth Sense BV $359,869,500 $293,506,292 1999
58 Superman WB $358,488,300 $134,218,018 1978
59 Tootsie Col. $355,649,600 $177,200,000 1982
60 Smokey and the Bandit Uni. $355,205,800 $126,737,428 1977
61 Finding Nemo BV $352,109,200 $339,714,978 2003
62 West Side Story MGM $349,814,300 $43,656,822 1961
63 Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone WB $349,456,100 $317,575,550 2001
64 Lady and the Tramp Dis. $348,343,000 $93,602,326 1955^
65 Close Encounters of the Third Kind Col. $347,347,200 $132,088,635 1977^
66 Lawrence of Arabia Col. $346,147,200 $44,824,144 1962^
67 The Rocky Horror Picture Show Fox $344,183,900 $112,892,319 1975
68 Rocky UA $343,999,800 $117,235,147 1976
69 The Best Years of Our L

 

Darth Seldon:

First off, inflation is constantly in flux, so the numbers are going to change ALL the time. Sure, you weren't taught that and you can't figure it out for yourself, but try to remember it in the future.

And the point of the essay wasn't whether ROTJ made $578 mil or $587 mil, the point was to document the embarrassing downward trajectory of the Star Wars movies.

Inflation's mlleability accounts for the differences in BoxOfficeMojo's figures over the past two months (with the possible exception of Star Wars, that might have been a typo or I might have mis-read it).

Wait, did I say "Star Wars?" My bad. I meant to say "Star Wars: Episode Four: A New Hope."

 

When you post your numbers for A New Hope is it taking into acount that it was released at least 3 times in movie theathers? If so this could explaine why it made so much more than Episode I and II.

Plus back when the first 3 Star Wars came out you did not have a "must see" movie come out the week before and the week after. Movies like Episode I and II must make there money in the first week or two after that there's some other big movie coming to take over. As for the first 3 they did not have to worry about this.

And you shoud think about who you call a "fan boy". I just turned 31 and I buy a lot of Star Wars Toys and other things. And it is no fad for me. I collected when I was a kid. And I started right back up in the fall of '95 when the first 9 figures of the Power of the Force II line was released.

 

DBrennan3333: There is NO evidence to indicate that they change their inflation figures monthly. There is no need for a personal attack on me, I am simply looking at the evidence and noticing that your figures are incorrect. Unless your provide evidence that the site changes the figures monthly or has recently changed them (there is no indication that they have) then you must admit that your figures are very wrong. Even if they by some odd chance did update them every month, there is no explanation for the drastic difference between your figures and the correct ones.

Furthermore, if they are by chance adjusted monthly, then the numbers wouldn't be going down, only up. So even if they updated it monthly, your figures are still incorrect...which makes the reader question the accuracy of all your facts.


This is what you were judged on,
Technical skill: Does the essay have correct grammar, spelling and word usage. YES YOU DO
Thesis Statement: Does the essay present a clear and well defined thesis statement? YES IT DOES
Argumentation: Are the arguments clear, logical, well presented and/or well defended. I DON'T THINK THEY ARE
Knowledge of subject: Is the author well-informed? Are there any blatant errors? NO, With incorrect facts, one cannot call him well-informed
Researchid the author do enough research for his topic? Is it logical and well presented? NO, facts were found to be incorrect
Overall essay quality: Was it enjoyable to read? Did it provoke thought? I didn't think it did this either. Reason being that many in the past have stated almost the exact same thoughts.

Basically that is how I would grade your essay at this point.

-Seldon

 

Darth,

Look, I'm really glad that you've taken such an interest in the essay, but please, don't go any further down the path that you're heading. It will definitely make me look like a jerk if I sit here and compare our essays.

 

I am simply stating that your facts are incorrect.
I am in no way saying that your essay does not deserve to win, however you should admit that the box office figures you listed are incorrect.

-Seldon

 

Ill say it then Seldon - yours was better. Its objective. It doesnt insult or divide the fan base. Its in no way inflammatory. Its consistent with your views, which his is also, but youve posted ALOT more in your time here. Most of all its an interesting topic and a fresh, unique way of enjoying the Saga from a different perspective, which is why Im suprised that his won the contest, because his just rehashs what PT bashers have been doing and saying for years in these boards, albeit polished and well written. His is like the Gettysburg Address of PT Bashing - or at least it is now because of it winning. His was good - yours was better.

 

Thank You very much severian28, however this thread is for DBrennan's essay and I really don't want to start a dispute over the proper winner. I thank you for your praise but I really don't have a problem with who won.
I am just pointing out that the facts within this essay are false (or at least some of them are.)

-Seldon

 

I think Seldon's post is fair. If DBrennan3333 is completely unable to have an intelligent discussion involving constructive critique without personally insulting people who find flaws in his work, then I find it perfectly legal to question the validity of his win to begin with. Why should I accept his VIP status if I am finding severely flawed rationale in the presentation of his work and get slammed at every turn when I verbally recognize it? What response has he given me that should garner any respect for his work or, for that matter, himself? I actually find it disturbing that the people who judged this essay didn't bother to follow through with the individual's resources and check the quoted material before considering it a successful work.

I'm going to say it flat out. This essay, despite it's valid thesis, doesn't deserve first place. He didn't deserve VIP status. And he has shown no proof to allow us to assume otherwise.


There is NO evidence to indicate that they change their inflation figures monthly. There is no need for a personal attack on me, I am simply looking at the evidence and noticing that your figures are incorrect. Unless your provide evidence that the site changes the figures monthly or has recently changed them (there is no indication that they have) then you must admit that your figures are very wrong. Even if they by some odd chance did update them every month, there is no explanation for the drastic difference between your figures and the correct ones.

Not to mention that the inflation rate based on the CPI average is often measured annually for these sorts of situations, and is in fact often overstated due to the fixed rate of the CPI despite it's varied consumer market. (In other words, it's measuring things based on the assumption that every person attends a theatre viewing of a movie, while we know that is very much not the case. The general estimated overstate value is 1.1%, but this is belived to flutuate from year to year.)

 

Flaming.

 

Somebody get some kleenax for Brennan. He's gonna cry.

 

There is no need for a petty flame war. If the figures are adjusted to inflation, then their numbers are not going to decrease (as you imply.) I have stated that your source has different numbers than you have. Your reply was that inflation is in constant flux (no disagreement there) however,
1. The site probably does not update things monthly as you argue.
2. Even if they were to be updated every month, the numbers would not decrease.

-Seldon

 

Lucas makes, and has always made, Star Wars for 12 year olds and for himself. His attitude towards his vision may have changed in a few instances, but the vision remains the same.
With that view in mind, I see no point in actually reading the entire essay, since it is based on false presumptions.

BTW: Who cares about B.O. records? That's no measure of what I think of the movies.

 

I agree that the box office is a lousy way to judge something. I know that the New York Times BestSeller List is not always the top novels to read, it is often rubbish. I guess he used it to prove his point that Star Wars is in a decline, however it has been stated before that that way of doing it (even if the figures were correct, which their not) is a faulty way of doing it because of other variables in play.

-Seldon

 

Yes indeed. One factor that must be taken into account is the fact that Star Wars isn't a fresh concept anymore. The new episodes follow the formula of the old, so if you want something new and modern, that's not where you'll look.

 

Another important thing to note (when looking at the box office records) is that the esteemed Lord of the Rings trilogy made much less money than each of the Star Wars films (with the exception of AOTC.) All five Star Wars movies are part of the 80 highest grossing movies of all time (with inflation.) To call that decay is sort of a strong word. If I were making movies that were grossing that amount of money, I would not be calling it decay at all.

-Seldon

 

He started it Seldon. Dull and retarded? This guy has to get a grip. His essay WAS well written. But you know as well as I how dime a dozen it was. Not an original thought in the entire thing. Box-office Mojo.?! Seldon, honestly, how many times have you seen someone invoke that site to illustrate the exact same thing as Brennan does in his essay? Im not even disputing his numbers. Im saying its been done ad-nauseum and as far as I can see the only reason he won was grammer and spelling.

 

Consider this your last warning. The next user who uses anything that could be remotely interpreted as a flame or bait will regret it. Please discuss the essay and not the users.

 

Sorry. No problem. There is bias at every turn of said essay. The essay, and I mean this, its NOT flaming, should have been titled " I Think The PT Sucks ". Its disinformation at its worst and not even the numbers, which are correct, but the arrogant use of terms like common man and fan boy, which are attempts to divide the fan base into: a. Your cool and smart and morally correct if you adhere to the OT only and b. Your an obnoxious, spending little brat with a limited attention span if you like the PT. Everybody is incorrectly railing at the numbers and not concentrating on what makes his essay propaganda for the too-cool-for-you-type-of-people.