Board 8 > So the Star Wars fanbase is the same thing as the fanbases for...

(+) Yeah! (+)

...many popular video game series like Final Fantasy and The Elder Scrolls.

Seriously, they are never satisfied, they keep declaring the franchise ruined many times over, previously hated installments get looked back more fondly after new ones come out...

And I don't think movie studios know how to deal with it. Going to keep scapegoating us as being racist and sexist, argh.

I blame Trump.
---

All fanbases suck except JoJo.
---

Miserable Fuckers. If it's PT or NT discussion, make sure you have your flame retardant drawers on.
---

George Lucas just seemed to ignore it and just went on ahead with his trilogy. But now...
---

If people go back to the old ones, maybe, you know, just maybe
they're better?
---

Fandoms are the worst part of literally every artistic creation.
---

at what point does LMS reveal he's never watched a Star Wars movie
---

LapisLazuli posted...

All fanbases suck except JoJo.

Dude Jojo goes too far in the opposite extreme shilling the fuck out of the series to everyone and their moms without realizing how annoying they are
---

You're just learning this?
---

There's a stark difference between toxicity and enthusiasm.
---

Sure, but at least the Rick and Morty fanbase will never disappoint me.


---

nobody is looking back on the prequels fondly

sounds like this is all in your head
---

Some people look back on Revenge of the Sith fondly.

But I'd assume those people didn't hate it to begin with. Find me the Attack of the Clones and Phantom Menace fond reminiscers.
---

CoolCly posted...

nobody is looking back on the prequels fondly

It's treason then
---

Lopen posted...

Some people look back on Revenge of the Sith fondly.

But I'd assume those people didn't hate it to begin with. Find me the Attack of the Clones and Phantom Menace fond reminiscers.

can I look back fondly on a couple of scenes instead of the entire movies
---

CoolCly posted...

nobody is looking back on the prequels fondly

From my point of view, people do look back at them fondly.
---

As long as the scene doesn't involve Yoda doing flipz I'll allow it.
---

I'm sure people look back fondly at Episode 1: Racer.
---

There's a term for what prequel fandom is, i just can't remember what it is

Its when a bunch of people get together and make a joke, and then eventually some people start actually believing it, but people just think they're joking, and then the true believers finally take over

Like how certain elements took over 4chan, or genuine Trump fanatics took over the Donald
---

There are absolutely people who look fondly back on the prequels. Probably the same ones who blindly hate the new movies.
---

the only thing i see positive about the prequels is "at least george added new stuff" which isn't really looking fondly but just a criticism of the new movies. like "shit you couldn't even be better than THAT???"
---

LeonhartFour posted...

at what point does LMS reveal he's never watched a Star Wars movie

I have, but it has been a while since I last saw one. And I haven't seen any of the post-Force Awakens ones period.

Just my observation of the fandom. And yes, there are absolutely a lot of people saying they want George Lucas back and similar stuff.
---

uh yeah, if you think nobody looks at TPM and AotC fondly you don't know the star wars fanbase. they're a minority, of course, but they definitely exist.
---

There are people that think Twilight Princess is the best Zelda.

Nothing surprises me.
---

like, i remember when the mr. plinkett phantom menace videos first came out - there was actually a fair amount of people criticizing them. they were going "THESE VIDEOS ARE DUMB! HE TOTALLY MISSES THE POINT OF THE MOVIE!" the videos definitely weren't universally loved.
---

I look back fondly on the time where Studios weren't afraid to take risks, push boundaries, and do something ****ing different for once. That's why I voted for the prequels.
---

People always use that as an excuse for why they like something that sucks.
---

Mr Lasastryke posted...

like, i remember when the mr. plinkett phantom menace videos first came out - there was actually a fair amount of people criticizing them. they were going "THESE VIDEOS ARE DUMB! HE TOTALLY MISSES THE POINT OF THE MOVIE!" the videos definitely weren't universally loved.

One of my roomate's younger coworkers was at our place early this year when I was rewatching those. He was talking mad shit about the reviews and I asked when he last watched those movies.

He said when they came out. When he was 7.

So yeah, people who were tiny children when they came out and haven't seen them since are a fairly excusable bunch.
---

Dark Young Link posted...

CoolCly posted...

nobody is looking back on the prequels fondly

From my point of view, people do look back at them fondly.

THEN YOU ARE LOST!

jk the prequels are okay but I had to get that in there
---

oh god, when i saw the phantom menace in theaters as a kid i LOVED it.

even as a kid i was disappointed by how little darth maul was in it, though. i thought he was going to be the darth vader of the movie.
---

pjbasis posted...

There are people that think Twilight Princess is the best Zelda.

Nothing surprises me.

well it used to be until Breath of the Wild came out
---

Topics like this really prove the point that almost no one on board 8 has a single cognitive thought about the various film or gaming projects they enjoy and just let base gut and visceral reactions dictate their every statement.

pjbasis posted...

There are people that think Twilight Princess is the best Zelda.

Nothing surprises me.

This is about the most pointless post in this thread. Why is Twilight Princess so bad? There is a general consensus that people enjoy Twilight Princess. There are artistic differences between TP and other Zelda games that might allow for a subjective enjoyment of that title over others. So, in this post, it's clearly implied that people who prefer said game to others should be treated as if they have inferior tastes and should be ignored.

Like, quit the bullshit. Anyone who can't look at opinions and say, "Okay," without carrying such a huge chip on their shoulder about it that it infects discussions not even remotely related to said opinions needs to reexamine how they digest media.
---

That's a perfect example of what I mean.

And on an objective level, how do you liken Twilight Princess to the prequels? The prequels received mixed reviews and won Razzies, while Twilight Princess has a 95 on Metacritic and was named one of the best games of its year, or even the outright best game of its year by many publications. If anything the prequels are more comparable to - gasp - Metroid: Other M. Which also has its fair share of fans who find it incredibly over-hated (don't ask me if I belong in that group, been too long since I played it).

Anyway, one realization I had about the prequels vs. the new ones is the respective films' competition. Episode 1 had to compete with The Matrix, The Sixth Sense, and Toy Story 2. Episode 2 had to compete with Minority Report, Spider-Man, the LOTR trilogy, the early Harry Potter films, and whatever Pixar released at around that time. Episode 3 had to compete with Batman Begins, Spider-Man 2, and Harry Potter again.

By contrast, what was The Force Awakens's biggest box-office competition? Jurassic World? Age of Ultron? Rogue Nation? Deadpool? Hardly murderer's row. Meanwhile, The Last Jedi's toughest box-office competition in terms of critical acclaim...Wonder Woman? The MCU? JUMANJI? Yeah.

Plus, when the prequels were coming out, the most financially successful movies tended to receive very positive feedback from critics and audiences alike. Now, many blockbusters are met with relative indifference from critics while being slammed by fans (see: Beauty and the Beast), or are outright hated by fans and the vocal minority online (see: Transformers and Fifty Shades). Name me some hugely successful movie that came out at around the same time as the prequels that was destroyed by critics. Bad Boys 2 is the only one that comes to mind.
---

LinkMarioSamus posted...

Name me some hugely successful movie that came out at around the same time as the prequels that was destroyed by critics. Bad Boys 2 is the only one that comes to mind.

Matrix Revolutions.
---

scarletspeed7 posted...

LinkMarioSamus posted...

Name me some hugely successful movie that came out at around the same time as the prequels that was destroyed by critics. Bad Boys 2 is the only one that comes to mind.

Matrix Revolutions.

Okay, good point. Though funnily enough, Roger Ebert gave it a positive review. Also, 36% on Rotten Tomatoes is hardly what I'd call "destroyed by critics."

Also it wasn't destroyed as badly as, say, Transformers or Fifty Shades.
---

It's definitely destruction in comparison to what came before.

There are probably others. I seem to remember Pearl Harbor being lambasted pretty hard.
---

I love TPM and AotC. They are definitely the bottom two Star Wars movies, but they are fun to watch.
---

scarletspeed7 posted...

It's definitely destruction in comparison to what came before.

There are probably others. I seem to remember Pearl Harbor being lambasted pretty hard.

LOL Michael Bay, I completely forgot that one.
---

At least he's consistent.
---

lol you guys
---

LinkMarioSamus posted...

scarletspeed7 posted...

It's definitely destruction in comparison to what came before.

There are probably others. I seem to remember Pearl Harbor being lambasted pretty hard.

LOL Michael Bay, I completely forgot that one.

Michael Bay's name is flamebait in certain circles.
---

LinkMarioSamus posted...

Though funnily enough, Roger Ebert gave it a positive review.

one should never listen to roger ebert.
---

Right because a well-regarded critic who had a passion for film and spent his life in the pursuit of sharing said passion with the wider world is someone we should ignore unlike you, a middle-aged nobody on a dying gaming board.
---

scarletspeed7 posted...

Right because a well-regarded critic who had a passion for film and spent his life in the pursuit of sharing said passion with the wider world is someone we should ignore unlike you, a middle-aged nobody on a dying gaming board.

man you're needlessly aggressive about me disliking roger ebert
---

I'm needfully aggressive about this trend in society of people needlessly discounting credible sources of criticism because of their mistaken belief that simple consumption of media makes them experts on it. It's the same everywhere. Attempting to repudiate or diminish critics of quality has hurt the entire dialectic of American criticism and resulted in even the political discourse in this country converting to this pedantic, elementary narrative of simpletons boasting basic gut reactions as if they are measured, thoughtful critiques.
---

i'm sorry, i must have missed what made roger ebert this god-like entity that caused his inane ramblings on movies to be based on anything but his "simple consumption of media."
---

Basically it's like this:

If you enjoy the OT, you enjoy simple, efficient storytelling of a hero's journey through a mystical sci-fantasy world that features likeable protagonists and intimidating antagonists.

If you enjoy the PT, you enjoy the spectacle and world building of Star Wars, not so much the writing, acting, or directing.

If you enjoy the ST, you probably both enjoy the nostalgia and deconstruction of Star Wars in literally two movies that are both well acted and well directed but don't add to Star Wars.
---

Not sure I agree they were well directed but otherwise I agree with that assessment.
---

Mr Lasastryke posted...

i'm sorry, i must have missed what made roger ebert this god-like entity that caused his inane ramblings on movies to be based on anything but his "simple consumption of media."

Well, Ebert's style of intimate discussion was a pioneering style in the voice of film criticism and it changed the entire style of how reviews could be presented. Furthermore, he emphasized the content of his reviews rather than the rating, something that was so often lost on those who refused to actually read. But he was also a historian, someone who often spoke and wrote on the budding art of filmmaking as it evolved over time, and he had a true passion for what he saw as progress through the years. Ebert also internalized his reviews, giving them structure in the context of films around him. He certainly reviewed films, but he also asked audiences to process the films they saw independently and thoughtfully. In a society that is increasingly disinterested in exploring the art of something in favor of deconstructing external surroundings instead, it's an important distinction to make.

And I didn't say he was god-like. I said he was a credible critic, someone who earned a lifestyle through thoughtful writing, helping to often shape the dialogue on the art around him.
---

Lopen posted...

Not sure I agree they were well directed but otherwise I agree with that assessment.

I tie direction more to the actors performance and usually ignore whether the scripting is good or not, maybe that's not accurate.

Like people will fight forever about whether the concept and scripting of Luke was right, but I'd sure as hell say his performance was the best of his acting career. And I think that takes good directing.
---