Poll of the Day > Do you support kathleen kennedy getting a 3 yr extension?

Topic List	Page List: 1, 2
GanglyKhan 10/01/18 2:33:15 PM #52:	I didn't watch Solo simply because of the fact that whoever they cast for the titular role has an extremely punchable face and I didn't feel like looking at it the entire time. Should have honestly just done Lando or Fett or some other character. <cite>GanglyKhan posted [p:909773392] in Do you sup... [t:77052521]...</cite> <quote>I didn't watch Solo simply because of the fact that whoever they cast for the titular role has an extremely punchable face and I didn't feel like looking at it the entire time. Should have honestly just done Lando or Fett or some other character.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
darkknight109 10/01/18 2:40:41 PM #53:	ParanoidObsessive posted... Disney spent $4 billion on a franchise they were hoping to milk for decades to come, and signs of fatigue are starting to set in within 6 years (technically only 3 years, if you only count the time since Episode VII and not pre-release prep-time). That is going to start scaring the shit out of some people. The real evidence is going to be Episode IX - if it claws the audience back Solo will be dismissed as an outlier and business will continue as usual. But if that puts up lower numbers from perceived backlash to Last Jedi (and Solo), Disney's going to start chopping heads. Just to point something out here: Average MCU box office = $875 million Average Disney-era Star Wars box office = $1.2 billion I don't think Disney is all that worried about the state of the franchise at the moment. Yeah, Solo was a flop, but Bob Iger himself took responsibility for that. It was a mess, production-wise, and had to reshoot huge chunks of the movie. Moreover, Solo's major failing was absolutely horrible marketing (which Kennedy doesn't have much control over; Disney's big release at the time was Infinity War and they didn't want to have two of their studios trying to upstage each other) and the movie released more than six months earlier than Kennedy and the production team wanted (they were pushing for a December release instead of the May release we got). It's kind of hard to take claims about Star Wars dying seriously when TFA, RO, and TLJ are, respectively, the 3rd, 27th (formerly 20th), and 11th (formerly 9th) highest grossing movies of all time. ParanoidObsessive posted... It's also worth noting that Disney didn't choose Kathleen Kennedy at all - she was part of Lucasfilm before the sale and came across as part of the deal. Disney may not be happy with her being there, but lack contractual grounds to fire her. Even if they didn't have contractual grounds to fire her, if they didn't want her around they could simply allow her contract to expire and not renew it. There is, to the best of my knowledge, no protection against that kind of a move since it doesn't technically count as firing someone. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! <cite>darkknight109 posted [p:909773816] in Do you sup... [t:77052521]...</cite> <quote><cite>ParanoidObsessive posted...</cite> <quote>Disney spent $4 billion on a franchise they were hoping to milk for decades to come, and signs of fatigue are starting to set in within 6 years (technically only 3 years, if you only count the time since Episode VII and not pre-release prep-time). That is going to start scaring the shit out of some people. The real evidence is going to be Episode IX - if it claws the audience back Solo will be dismissed as an outlier and business will continue as usual. But if that puts up lower numbers from perceived backlash to Last Jedi (and Solo), Disney's going to start chopping heads. </quote> Just to point something out here: Average MCU box office = $875 million Average Disney-era Star Wars box office = $1.2 billion I don't think Disney is all that worried about the state of the franchise at the moment. Yeah, Solo was a flop, but Bob Iger himself took responsibility for that. It was a mess, production-wise, and had to reshoot huge chunks of the movie. Moreover, Solo's major failing was absolutely horrible marketing (which Kennedy doesn't have much control over; Disney's big release at the time was Infinity War and they didn't want to have two of their studios trying to upstage each other) and the movie released more than six months earlier than Kennedy and the production team wanted (they were pushing for a December release instead of the May release we got). It's kind of hard to take claims about Star Wars dying seriously when TFA, RO, and TLJ are, respectively, the 3rd, 27th (formerly 20th), and 11th (formerly 9th) highest grossing movies of all time. <cite>ParanoidObsessive posted...</cite> <quote>It's also worth noting that Disney didn't choose Kathleen Kennedy at all - she was part of Lucasfilm before the sale and came across as part of the deal. Disney may not be happy with her being there, but lack contractual grounds to fire her.</quote> Even if they didn't have contractual grounds to fire her, if they didn't want her around they could simply allow her contract to expire and not renew it. There is, to the best of my knowledge, no protection against that kind of a move since it doesn't technically count as firing someone.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Blighboy 10/01/18 2:44:20 PM #54:	GanglyKhan posted... I didn't watch Solo simply because of the fact that whoever they cast for the titular role has an extremely punchable face and I didn't feel like looking at it the entire time. Should have honestly just done Lando or Fett or some other character. It was a fine but uninspired movie. I think spinoff character film (whether it be Fett or Kenobi or Windu or what have you) would have been equally so, though people might not have cared so much because they don't consider those characters father figures. While I think it's a bit sad Solo did as badly as it did, I won't miss the slew of character backstory films that would have followed. I'm glad Fett and Kenobi probably won't see the light of day, as I'm pretty sure they'd just have grown worse over time. --- https://i.imgtc.com/IoWAUSb.jpg <cite>Blighboy posted [p:909774028] in Do you sup... [t:77052521]...</cite> <quote><cite>GanglyKhan posted...</cite> <quote>I didn't watch Solo simply because of the fact that whoever they cast for the titular role has an extremely punchable face and I didn't feel like looking at it the entire time. Should have honestly just done Lando or Fett or some other character.</quote> It was a fine but uninspired movie. I think spinoff character film (whether it be Fett or Kenobi or Windu or what have you) would have been equally so, though people might not have cared so much because they don't consider those characters father figures. While I think it's a bit sad Solo did as badly as it did, I won't miss the slew of character backstory films that would have followed. I'm glad Fett and Kenobi probably won't see the light of day, as I'm pretty sure they'd just have grown worse over time.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Nade Duck 10/01/18 3:00:36 PM #55:	part of me still wants kenobi, but the world is probably better off. Blighboy posted... It was a fine but uninspired movie. and this would be why. as much as i enjoy some of the movies, that seems to be the best disney has done with either the marvel or star wars properties. i know the only thing they give a shit about is money, but it'd be nice if they could at least wait a little bit between the films to allow some inspiration to sink in and have something different happen ever. --- https://imgur.com/ElACjJD "Most of the time, I have a whole lot more sperm inside me than most women do." - adjl <cite>Nade Duck posted [p:909774867] in Do you sup... [t:77052521]...</cite> <quote>part of me still wants kenobi, but the world is probably better off. <cite>Blighboy posted...</cite> <quote>It was a fine but uninspired movie.</quote> and this would be why. as much as i enjoy some of the movies, that seems to be the best disney has done with either the marvel or star wars properties. i know the only thing they give a shit about is money, but it'd be nice if they could at least wait a little bit between the films to allow some inspiration to sink in and have something different happen ever.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Zeus 10/01/18 3:24:24 PM #56:	darkknight109 posted... Yes, if only because the news of the extension has made a bunch of really shitty people absolutely lose their minds. The shittier people are the ones defending it -- many of whom are admittedly not even fans -- just to troll everybody else. BADoglick posted... -that lady with the pink hair could have saved a lot of trouble for everyone by just being a little more forthcoming idk, watching Holdo be a dick to Poe was absolutely hilarious. While she was arguably incompetent (because ~~the convoy could have just split up~~ and seemed to be pulling rank mostly just to troll Poe) --- or inarguably incompetent, as PO might say -- I kinda liked her character. And that's not even counting that she was involved in ~~that really cool trick at the end where she hyperspace-kamikazed the ship to take out a star destroyer~~ ParanoidObsessive posted... Considering the results of Solo and Rebels, the answer might be the random people. Disney spent $4 billion on a franchise they were hoping to milk for decades to come, and signs of fatigue are starting to set in within 6 years (technically only 3 years, if you only count the time since Episode VII and not pre-release prep-time). That is going to start scaring the shit out of some people. The real evidence is going to be Episode IX - if it claws the audience back Solo will be dismissed as an outlier and business will continue as usual. But if that puts up lower numbers from perceived backlash to Last Jedi (and Solo), Disney's going to start chopping heads. Yeah, the SW franchise literally prints money. The fact that the returns aren't anywhere near where they should be is a pretty clear referendum on the direction (or lack thereof) --- (\/)(\/)\|-\| There are precious few at ease / With moral ambiguities / So we act as though they don't exist. <cite>Zeus posted [p:909776102] in Do you sup... [t:77052521]...</cite> <quote><cite>darkknight109 posted...</cite> <quote>Yes, if only because the news of the extension has made a bunch of really shitty people absolutely lose their minds.</quote> The shittier people are the ones defending it -- many of whom are admittedly not even fans -- just to troll everybody else. <cite>BADoglick posted...</cite> <quote>-that lady with the pink hair could have saved a lot of trouble for everyone by just being a little more forthcoming</quote> idk, watching Holdo be a dick to Poe was absolutely hilarious. While she was arguably incompetent (because the convoy could have just split up and seemed to be pulling rank mostly just to troll Poe) --- or inarguably incompetent, as PO might say -- I kinda liked her character. And that's not even counting that she was involved in that really cool trick at the end where she hyperspace-kamikazed the ship to take out a star destroyer <cite>ParanoidObsessive posted...</cite> <quote> Considering the results of Solo and Rebels, the answer might be the random people. Disney spent $4 billion on a franchise they were hoping to milk for decades to come, and signs of fatigue are starting to set in within 6 years (technically only 3 years, if you only count the time since Episode VII and not pre-release prep-time). That is going to start scaring the shit out of some people. The real evidence is going to be Episode IX - if it claws the audience back Solo will be dismissed as an outlier and business will continue as usual. But if that puts up lower numbers from perceived backlash to Last Jedi (and Solo), Disney's going to start chopping heads.</quote> Yeah, the SW franchise literally prints money. The fact that the returns aren't anywhere near where they should be is a pretty clear referendum on the direction (or lack thereof)</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Mead 10/01/18 3:27:00 PM #57:	Just a reminder that Zeus has repeatedly expressed that he believes actresses deserve to be harassed online and receive death threats if they accept roles that he does not like --- If they drag you through the mud, it doesnt change whats in your blood <cite>Mead posted [p:909776227] in Do you sup... [t:77052521]...</cite> <quote>Just a reminder that Zeus has repeatedly expressed that he believes actresses deserve to be harassed online and receive death threats if they accept roles that he does not like</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Zeus 10/01/18 3:45:26 PM #58:	Mead posted... Just a reminder that Zeus has repeatedly expressed that he believes actresses deserve to be harassed online and receive death threats if they accept roles that he does not like Just a reminder that Mead makes up bullshit claims and misrepresents everything Zeus says while denying that Zeus has received multiple death threats and suggestions of violence. And that while Mead may get outraged over criticisms and harassment of celebrities, he's perfectly fine with harassing people on the boards. --- (\/)(\/)\|-\| There are precious few at ease / With moral ambiguities / So we act as though they don't exist. <cite>Zeus posted [p:909777166] in Do you sup... [t:77052521]...</cite> <quote><cite>Mead posted...</cite> <quote>Just a reminder that Zeus has repeatedly expressed that he believes actresses deserve to be harassed online and receive death threats if they accept roles that he does not like</quote> Just a reminder that Mead makes up bullshit claims and misrepresents everything Zeus says while denying that Zeus has received multiple death threats and suggestions of violence. And that while Mead may get outraged over criticisms and harassment of celebrities, he's perfectly fine with harassing people on the boards.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Mead 10/01/18 4:03:31 PM #59:	Zeus posted... Mead posted... Just a reminder that Zeus has repeatedly expressed that he believes actresses deserve to be harassed online and receive death threats if they accept roles that he does not like Just a reminder that Mead makes up bullshit claims and misrepresents everything Zeus says while denying that Zeus has received multiple death threats and suggestions of violence. And that while Mead may get outraged over criticisms and harassment of celebrities, he's perfectly fine with harassing people on the boards. Do you want me to pull up the posts? --- If they drag you through the mud, it doesnt change whats in your blood <cite>Mead posted [p:909778108] in Do you sup... [t:77052521]...</cite> <quote><cite>Zeus posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Mead posted...</cite> <quote>Just a reminder that Zeus has repeatedly expressed that he believes actresses deserve to be harassed online and receive death threats if they accept roles that he does not like</quote> Just a reminder that Mead makes up bullshit claims and misrepresents everything Zeus says while denying that Zeus has received multiple death threats and suggestions of violence. And that while Mead may get outraged over criticisms and harassment of celebrities, he's perfectly fine with harassing people on the boards.</quote> Do you want me to pull up the posts?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Revelation34 10/01/18 4:12:38 PM #60:	ParanoidObsessive posted... Considering the results of Solo and Rebels, the answer might be the random people. Disney spent $4 billion on a franchise they were hoping to milk for decades to come, and signs of fatigue are starting to set in within 6 years (technically only 3 years, if you only count the time since Episode VII and not pre-release prep-time). That is going to start scaring the shit out of some people. The real evidence is going to be Episode IX - if it claws the audience back Solo will be dismissed as an outlier and business will continue as usual. But if that puts up lower numbers from perceived backlash to Last Jedi (and Solo), Disney's going to start chopping heads. It's also worth noting that Disney didn't choose Kathleen Kennedy at all - she was part of Lucasfilm before the sale and came across as part of the deal. Disney may not be happy with her being there, but lack contractual grounds to fire her. So how the franchise is being handled may not even be entirely Disney's call at this point. It won't but it doesn't matter. They could have used any of the expanded universe stories but chose to make up their own shit for no reason. darkknight109 posted... Solo was a flop Lol. --- Gamertag: Kegfarms, BF code: 2033480226, Treasure Cruise code 318,374,355, Steam: Kegfarms <cite>Revelation34 posted [p:909778621] in Do you sup... [t:77052521]...</cite> <quote><cite>ParanoidObsessive posted...</cite> <quote>Considering the results of Solo and Rebels, the answer might be the random people. Disney spent $4 billion on a franchise they were hoping to milk for decades to come, and signs of fatigue are starting to set in within 6 years (technically only 3 years, if you only count the time since Episode VII and not pre-release prep-time). That is going to start scaring the shit out of some people. The real evidence is going to be Episode IX - if it claws the audience back Solo will be dismissed as an outlier and business will continue as usual. But if that puts up lower numbers from perceived backlash to Last Jedi (and Solo), Disney's going to start chopping heads. It's also worth noting that Disney didn't choose Kathleen Kennedy at all - she was part of Lucasfilm before the sale and came across as part of the deal. Disney may not be happy with her being there, but lack contractual grounds to fire her. So how the franchise is being handled may not even be entirely Disney's call at this point.</quote> It won't but it doesn't matter. They could have used any of the expanded universe stories but chose to make up their own shit for no reason. <cite>darkknight109 posted...</cite> <quote>Solo was a flop</quote> Lol.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Zeus 10/01/18 4:49:11 PM #61:	Mead posted... Zeus posted... Mead posted... Just a reminder that Zeus has repeatedly expressed that he believes actresses deserve to be harassed online and receive death threats if they accept roles that he does not like Just a reminder that Mead makes up bullshit claims and misrepresents everything Zeus says while denying that Zeus has received multiple death threats and suggestions of violence. And that while Mead may get outraged over criticisms and harassment of celebrities, he's perfectly fine with harassing people on the boards. Do you want me to pull up the posts? You might need to look at those posts if that's your claim. I've never said that somebody deserves death threats, not about this or anything. Once again you're misrepresenting my claims to promote your agenda while, hypocritically enough, ignoring that you're guilty of many of the activities you criticize others for doing. And then when I pointed out that online threats are very common, you proceeded to victim blame me while pretending that I've never received any.... and then you made that topic literally a few weeks after NMB allegedly posted a topic asking if people wanted to kill me (and got yes votes) and then somebody made another version of that same topic afterward. --- (\/)(\/)\|-\| There are precious few at ease / With moral ambiguities / So we act as though they don't exist. <cite>Zeus posted [p:909780580] in Do you sup... [t:77052521]...</cite> <quote><cite>Mead posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Zeus posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Mead posted...</cite> <quote>Just a reminder that Zeus has repeatedly expressed that he believes actresses deserve to be harassed online and receive death threats if they accept roles that he does not like</quote> Just a reminder that Mead makes up bullshit claims and misrepresents everything Zeus says while denying that Zeus has received multiple death threats and suggestions of violence. And that while Mead may get outraged over criticisms and harassment of celebrities, he's perfectly fine with harassing people on the boards.</quote> Do you want me to pull up the posts?</quote> You might need to look at those posts if that's your claim. I've never said that somebody deserves death threats, not about this or anything. Once again you're misrepresenting my claims to promote your agenda while, hypocritically enough, ignoring that you're guilty of many of the activities you criticize others for doing. And then when I pointed out that online threats are very common, you proceeded to victim blame me while pretending that I've never received any.... and then you made that topic literally a few weeks after NMB allegedly posted a topic asking if people wanted to kill me (and got yes votes) and then somebody made another version of that same topic afterward.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
darkknight109 10/01/18 5:20:33 PM #62:	Zeus posted... The shittier people are the ones defending it -- many of whom are admittedly not even fans -- just to troll everybody else. Nah, the shittiest ones are definitely the people losing their minds over it. Not that everyone who hates Kennedy is a shitty person, but the shittiest people are Kennedy haters. Revelation34 posted... darkknight109 posted... Solo was a flop Lol. I mean, it failed to make back its budget at the box office. It probably broke even once you factor in home sales, but for a Star Wars movie? That's a flop. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! <cite>darkknight109 posted [p:909782254] in Do you sup... [t:77052521]...</cite> <quote><cite>Zeus posted...</cite> <quote>The shittier people are the ones defending it -- many of whom are admittedly not even fans -- just to troll everybody else. </quote> Nah, the shittiest ones are definitely the people losing their minds over it. Not that everyone who hates Kennedy is a shitty person, but the shittiest people are Kennedy haters. <cite>Revelation34 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>darkknight109 posted...</cite> <quote>Solo was a flop</quote> Lol.</quote> I mean, it failed to make back its budget at the box office. It probably broke even once you factor in home sales, but for a Star Wars movie? That's a flop.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Zeus 10/01/18 5:41:53 PM #63:	darkknight109 posted... Zeus posted... The shittier people are the ones defending it -- many of whom are admittedly not even fans -- just to troll everybody else. Nah, the shittiest ones are definitely the people losing their minds over it. Not that everyone who hates Kennedy is a shitty person, but the shittiest people are Kennedy haters. I'd say that's the shittiest of shitty opinions, but it's mostly just an obscenely stupid one. --- (\/)(\/)\|-\| There are precious few at ease / With moral ambiguities / So we act as though they don't exist. <cite>Zeus posted [p:909783266] in Do you sup... [t:77052521]...</cite> <quote><cite>darkknight109 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Zeus posted...</cite> <quote>The shittier people are the ones defending it -- many of whom are admittedly not even fans -- just to troll everybody else. </quote> Nah, the shittiest ones are definitely the people losing their minds over it. Not that everyone who hates Kennedy is a shitty person, but the shittiest people are Kennedy haters.</quote> I'd say that's the shittiest of shitty opinions, but it's mostly just an obscenely stupid one.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Revelation34 10/01/18 6:00:42 PM #64:	darkknight109 posted... I mean, it failed to make back its budget at the box office. It probably broke even once you factor in home sales, but for a Star Wars movie? That's a flop. They made $100 million more than their budget. --- Gamertag: Kegfarms, BF code: 2033480226, Treasure Cruise code 318,374,355, Steam: Kegfarms <cite>Revelation34 posted [p:909784145] in Do you sup... [t:77052521]...</cite> <quote><cite>darkknight109 posted...</cite> <quote>I mean, it failed to make back its budget at the box office. It probably broke even once you factor in home sales, but for a Star Wars movie? That's a flop.</quote> They made $100 million more than their budget.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Troll_Police_ 10/01/18 6:09:30 PM #65:	BADoglick posted... It's really disingenuous to assume people didn't like the new star wars because of sexism. There are several legitimate reasons why people don't like it. For instance: -the pointless diversion at that casino planet -that lady with the pink hair could have saved a lot of trouble for everyone by just being a little more forthcoming -the comic relief was very inorganic and stuck out like a sore thumb -the scene with Leia was hokey af And those are just basic, obvious issues that have nothing to do with sexism and everything to do with bad writing. how about the fact that hyperspace ramming throws a wrench in every space battle that ever has or will happen in the star wars universe? in return of the jedi why didnt one of the the half dozen or so doomed capital ships just hyperspeed ram the fucking death star before it blew them all to hell? why didnt they just send a couple of capital ships to hyperspeed ram starkiller base? why didnt they send just a single fucking cruiser to hyperspeed ram the droid control ship in attack of the clones? you mean to tell me that ms purplehair whatever her name is was the first person to think of it in the thousands and thousands of years theyve had access to hyperspace travel? its bad writing, and it took absolutely 0 of the source material into account. --- Give him what he wants then take what you want. Nobody is more vulnerable than in their moment of victory when you know whatever you do he will never let you go <cite>Troll_Police_ posted [p:909784605] in Do you sup... [t:77052521]...</cite> <quote><cite>BADoglick posted...</cite> <quote>It's really disingenuous to assume people didn't like the new star wars because of sexism. There are several legitimate reasons why people don't like it. For instance: -the pointless diversion at that casino planet -that lady with the pink hair could have saved a lot of trouble for everyone by just being a little more forthcoming -the comic relief was very inorganic and stuck out like a sore thumb -the scene with Leia was hokey af And those are just basic, obvious issues that have nothing to do with sexism and everything to do with bad writing.</quote> how about the fact that hyperspace ramming throws a wrench in every space battle that ever has or will happen in the star wars universe? in return of the jedi why didnt one of the the half dozen or so doomed capital ships just hyperspeed ram the fucking death star before it blew them all to hell? why didnt they just send a couple of capital ships to hyperspeed ram starkiller base? why didnt they send just a single fucking cruiser to hyperspeed ram the droid control ship in attack of the clones? you mean to tell me that ms purplehair whatever her name is was the first person to think of it in the thousands and thousands of years theyve had access to hyperspace travel? its bad writing, and it took absolutely 0 of the source material into account.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Zeus 10/01/18 6:18:18 PM #66:	Revelation34 posted... darkknight109 posted... I mean, it failed to make back its budget at the box office. It probably broke even once you factor in home sales, but for a Star Wars movie? That's a flop. They made $100 million more than their budget. That's production budget, which doesn't factor in advertising & marketing, among other costs. As stated numerous times, the rule of thumb is that a film has to make twice its budget to profitable. It's a little different with something like SW because there's also merchandising revenue. However, when a SW film is getting a mediocre return, that's a pretty huge red flag. Troll_Police_ posted... how about the fact that ~~hyperspace ramming~~ throws a wrench in every space battle that ever has or will happen in the star wars universe? Fair point. Troll_Police_ posted... in return of the jedi why didnt ~~one of the the half dozen or so doomed capital ships just hyperspeed ram the fucking death star before it blew them all to hell?~~ The shields were so strong that I doubt it'd do much damage. --- (\/)(\/)\|-\| There are precious few at ease / With moral ambiguities / So we act as though they don't exist. <cite>Zeus posted [p:909785021] in Do you sup... [t:77052521]...</cite> <quote><cite>Revelation34 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>darkknight109 posted...</cite> <quote>I mean, it failed to make back its budget at the box office. It probably broke even once you factor in home sales, but for a Star Wars movie? That's a flop.</quote> They made $100 million more than their budget.</quote> That's production budget, which doesn't factor in advertising & marketing, among other costs. As stated numerous times, the rule of thumb is that a film has to make twice its budget to profitable. It's a little different with something like SW because there's also merchandising revenue. However, when a SW film is getting a mediocre return, that's a pretty huge red flag. <cite>Troll_Police_ posted...</cite> <quote>how about the fact that hyperspace ramming throws a wrench in every space battle that ever has or will happen in the star wars universe?</quote> Fair point. <cite>Troll_Police_ posted...</cite> <quote>in return of the jedi why didnt one of the the half dozen or so doomed capital ships just hyperspeed ram the fucking death star before it blew them all to hell?</quote> The shields were so strong that I doubt it'd do much damage.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Troll_Police_ 10/01/18 6:59:45 PM #67:	Zeus posted... Revelation34 posted... darkknight109 posted... I mean, it failed to make back its budget at the box office. It probably broke even once you factor in home sales, but for a Star Wars movie? That's a flop. They made $100 million more than their budget. That's production budget, which doesn't factor in advertising & marketing, among other costs. As stated numerous times, the rule of thumb is that a film has to make twice its budget to profitable. It's a little different with something like SW because there's also merchandising revenue. However, when a SW film is getting a mediocre return, that's a pretty huge red flag. Troll_Police_ posted... how about the fact that ~~hyperspace ramming~~ throws a wrench in every space battle that ever has or will happen in the star wars universe? Fair point. Troll_Police_ posted... in return of the jedi why didnt ~~one of the the half dozen or so doomed capital ships just hyperspeed ram the fucking death star before it blew them all to hell?~~ The shields were so strong that I doubt it'd do much damage. i mean, shields made no difference on ~~that death star sized capital ship she rammed.~~ and its not like the death star was known for its incredible shielding capabilities. it was known for its firepower. --- Give him what he wants then take what you want. Nobody is more vulnerable than in their moment of victory when you know whatever you do he will never let you go <cite>Troll_Police_ posted [p:909787224] in Do you sup... [t:77052521]...</cite> <quote><cite>Zeus posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Revelation34 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>darkknight109 posted...</cite> <quote>I mean, it failed to make back its budget at the box office. It probably broke even once you factor in home sales, but for a Star Wars movie? That's a flop.</quote> They made $100 million more than their budget.</quote> That's production budget, which doesn't factor in advertising & marketing, among other costs. As stated numerous times, the rule of thumb is that a film has to make twice its budget to profitable. It's a little different with something like SW because there's also merchandising revenue. However, when a SW film is getting a mediocre return, that's a pretty huge red flag. <cite>Troll_Police_ posted...</cite> <quote>how about the fact that hyperspace ramming throws a wrench in every space battle that ever has or will happen in the star wars universe?</quote> Fair point. <cite>Troll_Police_ posted...</cite> <quote>in return of the jedi why didnt one of the the half dozen or so doomed capital ships just hyperspeed ram the fucking death star before it blew them all to hell?</quote> The shields were so strong that I doubt it'd do much damage.</quote> i mean, shields made no difference on that death star sized capital ship she rammed. and its not like the death star was known for its incredible shielding capabilities. it was known for its firepower.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Mead 10/01/18 7:31:29 PM #68:	@zeus sorry for the delay man, I ended up taking a nap. Good job totally telling the truth, again --- If they drag you through the mud, it doesnt change whats in your blood <cite>Mead posted [p:909788893] in Do you sup... [t:77052521]...</cite> <quote>@zeus sorry for the delay man, I ended up taking a nap. Good job totally telling the truth, again </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Zeus 10/01/18 8:11:15 PM #69:	Troll_Police_ posted... i mean, shields made no difference on ~~that death star sized capital ship she rammed. and its not like the death star was known for its incredible shielding capabilities. it was known for its firepower.~~ It wasn't anywhere near close to the size of a ~~death star, let alone the Death Star II which was even bigger than the first one. And the DSII's shields were sufficient to stop bombardment from an entire fleet.~~ Mead posted... @zeus sorry for the delay man, I ended up taking a nap. Good job totally telling the truth, again @Mead Now when you're done trolling, maybe you can post that "evidence" you claim to have that I said she deserved death threats. Given that you've already made me wait for your nap -- the life of a NEET is oh so busy! -- I hope you don't make me wait long for it. That is, unless you were lying yet again and just trolling about this just like literally everything else. --- (\/)(\/)\|-\| There are precious few at ease / With moral ambiguities / So we act as though they don't exist. <cite>Zeus posted [p:909791199] in Do you sup... [t:77052521]...</cite> <quote><cite>Troll_Police_ posted...</cite> <quote>i mean, shields made no difference on that death star sized capital ship she rammed. and its not like the death star was known for its incredible shielding capabilities. it was known for its firepower.</quote> It wasn't anywhere near close to the size of a death star, let alone the Death Star II which was even bigger than the first one. And the DSII's shields were sufficient to stop bombardment from an entire fleet. <cite>Mead posted...</cite> <quote>@zeus sorry for the delay man, I ended up taking a nap. Good job totally telling the truth, again </quote> @Mead Now when you're done trolling, maybe you can post that "evidence" you claim to have that I said she deserved death threats. Given that you've already made me wait for your nap -- the life of a NEET is oh so busy! -- I hope you don't make me wait long for it. That is, unless you were lying yet again and just trolling about this just like literally everything else.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ParanoidObsessive 10/01/18 8:17:59 PM #70:	darkknight109 posted... Just to point something out here: Average MCU box office = $875 million Average Disney-era Star Wars box office = $1.2 billion I don't think Disney is all that worried about the state of the franchise at the moment. Like it or not, their current movie track record is basically 2-2, and the two losses are also the two most recent entries. That's potentially the start of a downward trend. The last movie lost money, the last major cartoon did so poorly they had to retroactively revive the previous cartoon to offset it, and their entire video game identity is mired in controversy because they licensed it to the literal devil. Negative PR is edging up against prequel-level hate (after a honeymoon period when most people gave Disney the benefit of the doubt that nothing they did could be as bad as the prequels, now some people are starting to wonder whether Disney might actually be worse), and what suddenly seemed like a sure-thing machine to print money endlessly forever suddenly seems to have a potential cut-off point. You can argue about whose fault any or all of those things actually is, but the end-game is that Disney is absolutely terrified that their investment might not pay the dividends they expected it to. And they will absolutely act in ways to preserve and protect that investment. Which may certainly include firing people who might not even be the direct root cause of the problem. Again, I'm not saying they SHOULD be scared. I'm not saying they should outright fire Kathleen Kennedy because that will somehow magically fix all the problems (it won't), or that they WILL do that. But I AM saying that a multi-billion dollar company does not become a multi-billion dollar company by ignoring potential problems until they become actual problems. Disney is very much aware of the state of things, and is very much going to act on them, to prevent them from becoming major problems in the long run. At this point, predicting the plot of Episode IX is very easy - they're almost certainly going to claw back some of the plot changes from The Last Jedi. They're going to lean even heavier into the nostalgia, and generally try to fan service the hell out of things in an attempt to damage control the ever-living fuck out of things. TFA and RO had definite positive responses - they want to cultivate THAT reaction, and avoid the reaction TLJ and Solo generated. And again, I'm not saying the franchise is doomed. I'm not saying they can't salvage things without firing certain people. But you're insane if you think Disney isn't already trying to fix things. darkknight109 posted... Even if they didn't have contractual grounds to fire her, if they didn't want her around they could simply allow her contract to expire and not renew it. There is, to the best of my knowledge, no protection against that kind of a move since it doesn't technically count as firing someone. It would depend on the nature of the contract they signed in the first place (which none of us have access to, so none of us really know the clauses). It's entirely possible there may be penalty clauses or requirements that she needs to retain her position until she chooses to leave on her own, or otherwise specify a set period of time she needs to be there before they can oust her. That would be a contract separate from her personal contract, and could render her actual contract more of a renegotiation of terms than a statement of intent. Again, not saying that IS the case, but it's something to consider. Especially since high-level administration and contracting in Disney can be extremely complicated and counter-intuitive (especially with multiple executives currently jockeying in place to potentially become CEO when Bob Iger steps down). --- "Wall of Text'D!" --- oldskoolplayr76 "POwned again." --- blight family <cite>ParanoidObsessive posted [p:909791535] in Do you sup... [t:77052521]...</cite> <quote><cite>darkknight109 posted...</cite> <quote>Just to point something out here: Average MCU box office = $875 million Average Disney-era Star Wars box office = $1.2 billion I don't think Disney is all that worried about the state of the franchise at the moment.</quote> Like it or not, their current movie track record is basically 2-2, and the two losses are also the two most recent entries. That's potentially the start of a downward trend. The last movie lost money, the last major cartoon did so poorly they had to retroactively revive the previous cartoon to offset it, and their entire video game identity is mired in controversy because they licensed it to the literal devil. Negative PR is edging up against prequel-level hate (after a honeymoon period when most people gave Disney the benefit of the doubt that nothing they did could be as bad as the prequels, now some people are starting to wonder whether Disney might actually be worse), and what suddenly seemed like a sure-thing machine to print money endlessly forever suddenly seems to have a potential cut-off point. You can argue about whose fault any or all of those things actually is, but the end-game is that Disney is absolutely terrified that their investment might not pay the dividends they expected it to. And they will absolutely act in ways to preserve and protect that investment. Which may certainly include firing people who might not even be the direct root cause of the problem. Again, I'm not saying they SHOULD be scared. I'm not saying they should outright fire Kathleen Kennedy because that will somehow magically fix all the problems (it won't), or that they WILL do that. But I AM saying that a multi-billion dollar company does not become a multi-billion dollar company by ignoring potential problems until they become actual problems. Disney is very much aware of the state of things, and is very much going to act on them, to prevent them from becoming major problems in the long run. At this point, predicting the plot of Episode IX is very easy - they're almost certainly going to claw back some of the plot changes from The Last Jedi. They're going to lean even heavier into the nostalgia, and generally try to fan service the hell out of things in an attempt to damage control the ever-living fuck out of things. TFA and RO had definite positive responses - they want to cultivate THAT reaction, and avoid the reaction TLJ and Solo generated. And again, I'm not saying the franchise is doomed. I'm not saying they can't salvage things without firing certain people. But you're insane if you think Disney isn't already trying to fix things. <cite>darkknight109 posted...</cite> <quote>Even if they didn't have contractual grounds to fire her, if they didn't want her around they could simply allow her contract to expire and not renew it. There is, to the best of my knowledge, no protection against that kind of a move since it doesn't technically count as firing someone.</quote> It would depend on the nature of the contract they signed in the first place (which none of us have access to, so none of us really know the clauses). It's entirely possible there may be penalty clauses or requirements that she needs to retain her position until she chooses to leave on her own, or otherwise specify a set period of time she needs to be there before they can oust her. That would be a contract separate from her personal contract, and could render her actual contract more of a renegotiation of terms than a statement of intent. Again, not saying that IS the case, but it's something to consider. Especially since high-level administration and contracting in Disney can be extremely complicated and counter-intuitive (especially with multiple executives currently jockeying in place to potentially become CEO when Bob Iger steps down). </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ParanoidObsessive 10/01/18 8:18:05 PM #71:	Revelation34 posted... It won't but it doesn't matter. They could have used any of the expanded universe stories but chose to make up their own shit for no reason. To be fair, 98% of the EU stories were pure liquid shit, and Disney was absolutely right to hose them down with fire and acid. They also get credit for clearly trying to salvage the few good ideas the EU ever had, considering Kylo is basically just Jacen and they did go out of their way to make Thrawn canon. The real problem is that when you pull ideas out of the original context and implement them poorly, they won't necessarily be as worthwhile as they originally were. Revelation34 posted... darkknight109 posted... I mean, it failed to make back its budget at the box office. It probably broke even once you factor in home sales, but for a Star Wars movie? That's a flop. They made $100 million more than their budget. Only their production budget. Once marketing is factored in, it definitely under-performed, especially considering it had one of the widest releases in the history of film. It still needed to make at least another $100 million just to be considered to have "broken even" - in Hollywood terms, it was definitely a "flop". There's a distinct chance that it could earn that back and more via home video sales, but Disney is still gong to see that as a problem. --- "Wall of Text'D!" --- oldskoolplayr76 "POwned again." --- blight family <cite>ParanoidObsessive posted [p:909791541] in Do you sup... [t:77052521]...</cite> <quote><cite>Revelation34 posted...</cite> <quote>It won't but it doesn't matter. They could have used any of the expanded universe stories but chose to make up their own shit for no reason.</quote> To be fair, 98% of the EU stories were pure liquid shit, and Disney was absolutely right to hose them down with fire and acid. They also get credit for clearly trying to salvage the few good ideas the EU ever had, considering Kylo is basically just Jacen and they did go out of their way to make Thrawn canon. The real problem is that when you pull ideas out of the original context and implement them poorly, they won't necessarily be as worthwhile as they originally were. <cite>Revelation34 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>darkknight109 posted...</cite> <quote>I mean, it failed to make back its budget at the box office. It probably broke even once you factor in home sales, but for a Star Wars movie? That's a flop.</quote> They made $100 million more than their budget.</quote> Only their production budget. Once marketing is factored in, it definitely under-performed, especially considering it had one of the widest releases in the history of film. It still needed to make at least another $100 million just to be considered to have "broken even" - in Hollywood terms, it was definitely a "flop". There's a distinct chance that it could earn that back and more via home video sales, but Disney is still gong to see that as a problem. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Mead 10/01/18 8:41:31 PM #72:	Now when you're done trolling, maybe you can post that "evidence" you claim to have that I said she deserved death threats. Or you can read your own posts and try to defend that, rather jumping to your tired old accusation of trolling instead of confronting the stupid and hateful shit that youve said --- If they drag you through the mud, it doesnt change whats in your blood <cite>Mead posted [p:909792876] in Do you sup... [t:77052521]...</cite> <quote><quote>Now when you're done trolling, maybe you can post that "evidence" you claim to have that I said she deserved death threats.</quote> Or you can read your own posts and try to defend that, rather jumping to your tired old accusation of trolling instead of confronting the stupid and hateful shit that youve said</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Blighboy 10/01/18 8:50:03 PM #73:	ParanoidObsessive posted... the last major cartoon did so poorly they had to retroactively revive the previous cartoon to offset it You know I haven't thought about it, but now that I do I can't imagine how Rebels was supposed to make money. It wasn't all that good for one, and for two it really doesn't seem that merchandisable. --- https://i.imgtc.com/IoWAUSb.jpg <cite>Blighboy posted [p:909793271] in Do you sup... [t:77052521]...</cite> <quote><cite>ParanoidObsessive posted...</cite> <quote>the last major cartoon did so poorly they had to retroactively revive the previous cartoon to offset it</quote> You know I haven't thought about it, but now that I do I can't imagine how Rebels was supposed to make money. It wasn't all that good for one, and for two it really doesn't seem that merchandisable.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
darkknight109 10/02/18 12:54:24 AM #74:	Revelation34 posted... darkknight109 posted... I mean, it failed to make back its budget at the box office. It probably broke even once you factor in home sales, but for a Star Wars movie? That's a flop. They made $100 million more than their budget. The production budget of Solo was $250 million (double what it was supposed to be, due to the production chaos it was mired in) and that doesn't factor in an estimated ~$150 million in marketing costs. The box office was $393 million worldwide. Troll_Police_ posted... how about the fact that hyperspace ramming throws a wrench in every space battle that ever has or will happen in the star wars universe? in return of the jedi why didnt one of the the half dozen or so doomed capital ships just hyperspeed ram the fucking death star before it blew them all to hell? why didnt they just send a couple of capital ships to hyperspeed ram starkiller base? This is seriously the most overblown complaint about The Last Jedi and it doesn't even make sense. The Supremacy is 13.2 km long, 60.5 km wide, and 4.0 km tall, with a roughly triangular shape. That gives us a ballpark volume of 1065 cubic kilometres. The Raddus, on the other hand, was 3.4 km long, 0.7 km wide, and 0.5 km tall with a roughly cylindrical shape, for a volume of about 3.85 cubic kilometres. We can assume roughly analogous construction, meaning pretty much identical densities, so mass is directly tied to the relative volume of each ship and we can just work with that. Now the Raddus's attack didn't actually destroy the Supremacy - it dealt crippling damage, but the ship was still eminently salvageable. Just for ease of math, let's say if we made the Raddus three times bigger it would be of sufficient size to actually destroy the Supremacy (which seems reasonable given the scope of the damage) - that means you need to have a ship with at least 1% of the volume to destroy an enemy ship in a hyperspace ram. The second Death Star has a diameter of 200 kilometres, for a volume of roughly 4,190,000 cubic kilometres (or 4.19 x 10^15 cubic metres). Starkiller Base has a diameter of 660 km, for a volume of 151,000,000 cubic kilometres (1.51 x 10^17 cubic metres). In order to destroy either of them, one cruiser wouldn't suffice, even if it was the Raddus (which was larger than anything the Rebellion could bring to the table); you would need to smash roughly 14,000 Raddus's into the Death Star II, or ~500,000 Raddus's into Starkiller Base to have the same effect. Troll_Police_ posted... why didnt they send just a single fucking cruiser to hyperspeed ram the droid control ship in attack of the clones? Because there was no droid control ship in AotC? The movie explicitly states that the Trade Federation realised it was a dumb idea after the Naboo fiasco in TPM and got rid of it in favour of giving the droids their own central processors. Or were you talking about Naboo to begin with? Because the Naboo resistance didn't have any cruisers to use. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! <cite>darkknight109 posted [p:909805299] in Do you sup... [t:77052521]...</cite> <quote><cite>Revelation34 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>darkknight109 posted...</cite> <quote>I mean, it failed to make back its budget at the box office. It probably broke even once you factor in home sales, but for a Star Wars movie? That's a flop.</quote> They made $100 million more than their budget.</quote> The production budget of Solo was $250 million (double what it was supposed to be, due to the production chaos it was mired in) and that doesn't factor in an estimated ~$150 million in marketing costs. The box office was $393 million worldwide. <cite>Troll_Police_ posted...</cite> <quote>how about the fact that hyperspace ramming throws a wrench in every space battle that ever has or will happen in the star wars universe? in return of the jedi why didnt one of the the half dozen or so doomed capital ships just hyperspeed ram the fucking death star before it blew them all to hell? why didnt they just send a couple of capital ships to hyperspeed ram starkiller base? </quote> This is seriously the most overblown complaint about The Last Jedi and it doesn't even make sense. The Supremacy is 13.2 km long, 60.5 km wide, and 4.0 km tall, with a roughly triangular shape. That gives us a ballpark volume of 1065 cubic kilometres. The Raddus, on the other hand, was 3.4 km long, 0.7 km wide, and 0.5 km tall with a roughly cylindrical shape, for a volume of about 3.85 cubic kilometres. We can assume roughly analogous construction, meaning pretty much identical densities, so mass is directly tied to the relative volume of each ship and we can just work with that. Now the Raddus's attack didn't actually destroy the Supremacy - it dealt crippling damage, but the ship was still eminently salvageable. Just for ease of math, let's say if we made the Raddus three times bigger it would be of sufficient size to actually destroy the Supremacy (which seems reasonable given the scope of the damage) - that means you need to have a ship with at least 1% of the volume to destroy an enemy ship in a hyperspace ram. The second Death Star has a diameter of 200 kilometres, for a volume of roughly 4,190,000 cubic kilometres (or 4.19 x 10^15 cubic metres). Starkiller Base has a diameter of 660 km, for a volume of 151,000,000 cubic kilometres (1.51 x 10^17 cubic metres). In order to destroy either of them, one cruiser wouldn't suffice, even if it was the Raddus (which was larger than anything the Rebellion could bring to the table); you would need to smash roughly 14,000 Raddus's into the Death Star II, or ~500,000 Raddus's into Starkiller Base to have the same effect. <cite>Troll_Police_ posted...</cite> <quote>why didnt they send just a single fucking cruiser to hyperspeed ram the droid control ship in attack of the clones? </quote> Because there was no droid control ship in AotC? The movie explicitly states that the Trade Federation realised it was a dumb idea after the Naboo fiasco in TPM and got rid of it in favour of giving the droids their own central processors. Or were you talking about Naboo to begin with? Because the Naboo resistance didn't have any cruisers to use.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
darkknight109 10/02/18 12:54:26 AM #75:	Troll_Police_ posted... you mean to tell me that ms purplehair whatever her name is was the first person to think of it in the thousands and thousands of years theyve had access to hyperspace travel? Probably not, but I can't think of too many situations where it would actually be a useful tactic. I mean, the rebellion was short on capital ships as it was. Yeah, they could sacrifice one of their cruisers to take out a Star Destroyer... but the Empire has thousands more and can win the battle of attrition far more easily than the Rebels can. By the same token, the Empire itself could use that tactic, but why would they? They enjoy military supremacy and it would be far more cost-effective to just use their warships to blow things up rather than as big rams. This is exactly why kamikaze attacks never caught on in the real world; the people desperate enough to use them don't have the resources to sustain them as a viable attack method, while the people with said resources are much more effective using their weapons of war as they were intended. Even the Japanese stopped using them by the latter half of World War II, because they discovered it left them rapidly drained of both planes and skilled pilots. ParanoidObsessive posted... Like it or not, their current movie track record is basically 2-2, and the two losses are also the two most recent entries. Umm... The Last Jedi made $1.3 billion at the box office, making it (at the time) the ninth highest grossing movie ever. It's absolutely ridiculous to try and portray that as a loss. Even at the lowest lows of the prequel years, rumours of Star Wars' death were greatly exaggerated, and even factoring in the vitriol over Solo and TLJ, the franchise's status is nowhere near as bad as it was then. On a semi-related note: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/star-wars-last-jedi-was-targeted-by-russian-trolls-study-says-1148475 Solo was a flop, no arguments there, but that was less a product of people getting tired of Star Wars and more the fact that the movie went through an awful production hell and basically had to be written and filmed twice. Solo was, by Disney's own admission, never intended to be a blockbuster; it was meant to be a smaller, more streamlined film. It was supposed to cost $125 million (and if it had stuck with that budget, it would have turned a profit at the box office); as it was, it wound up having a higher production value than The Force Awakens, which is not good economics for what is supposed to be a side-movie. Add into this the shoddy marketing and the fact that it was released right between two highly anticipated nerd-behemoths (Infinity War and Deadpool 2) and it's not surprising the film had the performance it did; honestly, the fact that it managed to actually pull in nearly $400 million under those circumstances is actually kind of impressive. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! <cite>darkknight109 posted [p:909805301] in Do you sup... [t:77052521]...</cite> <quote><cite>Troll_Police_ posted...</cite> <quote>you mean to tell me that ms purplehair whatever her name is was the first person to think of it in the thousands and thousands of years theyve had access to hyperspace travel? </quote> Probably not, but I can't think of too many situations where it would actually be a useful tactic. I mean, the rebellion was short on capital ships as it was. Yeah, they could sacrifice one of their cruisers to take out a Star Destroyer... but the Empire has thousands more and can win the battle of attrition far more easily than the Rebels can. By the same token, the Empire itself could use that tactic, but why would they? They enjoy military supremacy and it would be far more cost-effective to just use their warships to blow things up rather than as big rams. This is exactly why kamikaze attacks never caught on in the real world; the people desperate enough to use them don't have the resources to sustain them as a viable attack method, while the people with said resources are much more effective using their weapons of war as they were intended. Even the Japanese stopped using them by the latter half of World War II, because they discovered it left them rapidly drained of both planes and skilled pilots. <cite>ParanoidObsessive posted...</cite> <quote>Like it or not, their current movie track record is basically 2-2, and the two losses are also the two most recent entries.</quote> Umm... The Last Jedi made $1.3 billion at the box office, making it (at the time) the ninth highest grossing movie ever. It's absolutely ridiculous to try and portray that as a loss. Even at the lowest lows of the prequel years, rumours of Star Wars' death were greatly exaggerated, and even factoring in the vitriol over Solo and TLJ, the franchise's status is nowhere near as bad as it was then. On a semi-related note: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/star-wars-last-jedi-was-targeted-by-russian-trolls-study-says-1148475 Solo was a flop, no arguments there, but that was less a product of people getting tired of Star Wars and more the fact that the movie went through an awful production hell and basically had to be written and filmed twice. Solo was, by Disney's own admission, never intended to be a blockbuster; it was meant to be a smaller, more streamlined film. It was supposed to cost $125 million (and if it had stuck with that budget, it would have turned a profit at the box office); as it was, it wound up having a higher production value than The Force Awakens, which is not good economics for what is supposed to be a side-movie. Add into this the shoddy marketing and the fact that it was released right between two highly anticipated nerd-behemoths (Infinity War and Deadpool 2) and it's not surprising the film had the performance it did; honestly, the fact that it managed to actually pull in nearly $400 million under those circumstances is actually kind of impressive.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
WhiskeyDisk 10/02/18 1:12:10 AM #76:	If we're going to geek out on how ridiculous the starkiller was compared to the death star... Ignoring the finances required...if you can suck up an entire star to power your ship...how the fuck does it make sense to pop into a neighboring star system and suck up that star to fire a beam at a planet from light-years away? Pop into the system you want to destroy, and suck up it's star. Let the planet tumple thru the cold vacuum of space. Assuming your starkiller doesn't implode from the far denser gravity well you've made by vacuuming up a star, firing a beam from a neighboring star system makes way less sense than just sucking up the star of the system you want dead... --- https://imgur.com/4fmtLFt http://s1.zetaboards.com/sba/ ~there's always free cheese in a mousetrap. <cite>WhiskeyDisk posted [p:909805909] in Do you sup... [t:77052521]...</cite> <quote>If we're going to geek out on how ridiculous the starkiller was compared to the death star... Ignoring the finances required...if you can suck up an entire star to power your ship...how the fuck does it make sense to pop into a neighboring star system and suck up that star to fire a beam at a planet from light-years away? Pop into the system you want to destroy, and suck up it's star. Let the planet tumple thru the cold vacuum of space. Assuming your starkiller doesn't implode from the far denser gravity well you've made by vacuuming up a star, firing a beam from a neighboring star system makes way less sense than just sucking up the star of the system you want dead...</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
dioxxys 10/02/18 1:13:16 AM #77:	BADoglick posted... It's really disingenuous to assume people didn't like the new star wars because of sexism. There are several legitimate reasons why people don't like it. Yeah, seems people love to use this as a scapegoat when ever someone speaks of how terrible the movie is. Its just a lazy way of deflecting criticism. <cite>dioxxys posted [p:909805943] in Do you sup... [t:77052521]...</cite> <quote><cite>BADoglick posted...</cite> <quote>It's really disingenuous to assume people didn't like the new star wars because of sexism. There are several legitimate reasons why people don't like it.</quote> Yeah, seems people love to use this as a scapegoat when ever someone speaks of how terrible the movie is. Its just a lazy way of deflecting criticism.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Revelation34 10/02/18 11:54:55 AM #78:	ParanoidObsessive posted... To be fair, 98% of the EU stories were pure liquid shit, and Disney was absolutely right to hose them down with fire and acid. They also get credit for clearly trying to salvage the few good ideas the EU ever had, considering Kylo is basically just Jacen and they did go out of their way to make Thrawn canon. The real problem is that when you pull ideas out of the original context and implement them poorly, they won't necessarily be as worthwhile as they originally were. What they say doesn't matter since they were already approved by Lucas. The original creator has more say of what is canon than somebody who he sells the rights to. --- Gamertag: Kegfarms, BF code: 2033480226, Treasure Cruise code 318,374,355, Steam: Kegfarms <cite>Revelation34 posted [p:909824020] in Do you sup... [t:77052521]...</cite> <quote><cite>ParanoidObsessive posted...</cite> <quote>To be fair, 98% of the EU stories were pure liquid shit, and Disney was absolutely right to hose them down with fire and acid. They also get credit for clearly trying to salvage the few good ideas the EU ever had, considering Kylo is basically just Jacen and they did go out of their way to make Thrawn canon. The real problem is that when you pull ideas out of the original context and implement them poorly, they won't necessarily be as worthwhile as they originally were.</quote> What they say doesn't matter since they were already approved by Lucas. The original creator has more say of what is canon than somebody who he sells the rights to.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Revelation34 10/02/18 2:15:09 PM #79:	darkknight109 posted... On a semi-related note: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/star-wars-last-jedi-was-targeted-by-russian-trolls-study-says-1148475 Some guy from Youtube says something and it's fact now? --- Gamertag: Kegfarms, BF code: 2033480226, Treasure Cruise code 318,374,355, Steam: Kegfarms <cite>Revelation34 posted [p:909831347] in Do you sup... [t:77052521]...</cite> <quote><cite>darkknight109 posted...</cite> <quote>On a semi-related note: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/star-wars-last-jedi-was-targeted-by-russian-trolls-study-says-1148475</quote> Some guy from Youtube says something and it's fact now?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Mead 10/02/18 3:24:03 PM #80:	Revelation34 posted... darkknight109 posted... On a semi-related note: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/star-wars-last-jedi-was-targeted-by-russian-trolls-study-says-1148475 Some guy from Youtube says something and it's fact now? https://www.researchgate.net/publication/328006677_Weaponizing_the_haters_The_Last_Jedi_and_the_strategic_politicization_of_pop_culture_through_social_media_manipulation --- If they drag you through the mud, it doesnt change whats in your blood <cite>Mead posted [p:909835101] in Do you sup... [t:77052521]...</cite> <quote><cite>Revelation34 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>darkknight109 posted...</cite> <quote>On a semi-related note: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/star-wars-last-jedi-was-targeted-by-russian-trolls-study-says-1148475</quote> Some guy from Youtube says something and it's fact now?</quote> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/328006677_Weaponizing_the_haters_The_Last_Jedi_and_the_strategic_politicization_of_pop_culture_through_social_media_manipulation</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
darkknight109 10/02/18 3:31:29 PM #81:	Revelation34 posted... What they say doesn't matter since they were already approved by Lucas. The original creator has more say of what is canon than somebody who he sells the rights to. Well, for one, this is entirely a matter of opinion and not even one that Lucasfilm agrees with. More importantly, though, the whole idea of canon - especially how Star Wars handles it, with multiple "layers" of canon - when talking about a fictional storyline has to be one of the dumbest things I've ever heard of. Trying to argue about which story is "more real" than which other story is really stupid when the entire thing is a work of fiction. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! <cite>darkknight109 posted [p:909835551] in Do you sup... [t:77052521]...</cite> <quote><cite>Revelation34 posted...</cite> <quote>What they say doesn't matter since they were already approved by Lucas. The original creator has more say of what is canon than somebody who he sells the rights to.</quote> Well, for one, this is entirely a matter of opinion and not even one that Lucasfilm agrees with. More importantly, though, the whole idea of canon - especially how Star Wars handles it, with multiple "layers" of canon - when talking about a fictional storyline has to be one of the dumbest things I've ever heard of. Trying to argue about which story is "more real" than which other story is really stupid when the entire thing is a work of fiction.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Blighboy 10/02/18 3:33:34 PM #82:	I dont think Star Wars does canon layers anymore. I'm pretty sure everything under the Disney label is considered the same canon. --- https://i.imgtc.com/IoWAUSb.jpg <cite>Blighboy posted [p:909835655] in Do you sup... [t:77052521]...</cite> <quote>I dont think Star Wars does canon layers anymore. I'm pretty sure everything under the Disney label is considered the same canon.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Revelation34 10/02/18 5:13:32 PM #83:	Mead posted... link too long Same exact guy as the other link. darkknight109 posted... Well, for one, this is entirely a matter of opinion and not even one that Lucasfilm agrees with. More importantly, though, the whole idea of canon - especially how Star Wars handles it, with multiple "layers" of canon - when talking about a fictional storyline has to be one of the dumbest things I've ever heard of. Trying to argue about which story is "more real" than which other story is really stupid when the entire thing is a work of fiction. That's how fiction works though. --- Gamertag: Kegfarms, BF code: 2033480226, Treasure Cruise code 318,374,355, Steam: Kegfarms <cite>Revelation34 posted [p:909840964] in Do you sup... [t:77052521]...</cite> <quote><cite>Mead posted...</cite> <quote> link too long </quote> Same exact guy as the other link. <cite>darkknight109 posted...</cite> <quote>Well, for one, this is entirely a matter of opinion and not even one that Lucasfilm agrees with. More importantly, though, the whole idea of canon - especially how Star Wars handles it, with multiple "layers" of canon - when talking about a fictional storyline has to be one of the dumbest things I've ever heard of. Trying to argue about which story is "more real" than which other story is really stupid when the entire thing is a work of fiction.</quote> That's how fiction works though.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
darkknight109 10/02/18 6:05:40 PM #84:	Revelation34 posted... That's how fiction works though. No, it really, really doesn't. Fiction is fiction - it never happened, so arguing over which parts of it are "real" is pointless; none of it is real. If you don't like a certain part of it, ignore it and pretend it doesn't exist and move on with your life. It's that simple. It just annoys me to see overly-obsessive nerds arguing "Obviously this story isn't canon because it does not fit my one true vision for how the franchise should work!" as though that means anything at all or that other people should take them seriously. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! <cite>darkknight109 posted [p:909843752] in Do you sup... [t:77052521]...</cite> <quote><cite>Revelation34 posted...</cite> <quote>That's how fiction works though. </quote> No, it really, really doesn't. Fiction is fiction - it never happened, so arguing over which parts of it are "real" is pointless; none of it is real. If you don't like a certain part of it, ignore it and pretend it doesn't exist and move on with your life. It's that simple. It just annoys me to see overly-obsessive nerds arguing "Obviously this story isn't canon because it does not fit my one true vision for how the franchise should work!" as though that means anything at all or that other people should take them seriously.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Blighboy 10/02/18 6:56:22 PM #85:	In a practical sense, Star Wars canon is mostly a set of rules that authors are or are not allowed to contradict when publishing official works. So back in the old EU, George was allowed to overwrite anything, TV and games could over write the books and comics, and novel and comic authors were not allowed to contradict anything. In the new EU, it's supposedly a more unified system looked after by Disney where nothing contradicts anything else. Not really a declaration of what is real. Just a set of rules to enforce consistency within the narrative. --- https://i.imgtc.com/IoWAUSb.jpg <cite>Blighboy posted [p:909846510] in Do you sup... [t:77052521]...</cite> <quote>In a practical sense, Star Wars canon is mostly a set of rules that authors are or are not allowed to contradict when publishing official works. So back in the old EU, George was allowed to overwrite anything, TV and games could over write the books and comics, and novel and comic authors were not allowed to contradict anything. In the new EU, it's supposedly a more unified system looked after by Disney where nothing contradicts anything else. Not really a declaration of what is real. Just a set of rules to enforce consistency within the narrative.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Revelation34 10/03/18 1:05:12 AM #86:	darkknight109 posted... No, it really, really doesn't. Fiction is fiction - it never happened, so arguing over which parts of it are "real" is pointless; none of it is real. If you don't like a certain part of it, ignore it and pretend it doesn't exist and move on with your life. It's that simple. It just annoys me to see overly-obsessive nerds arguing "Obviously this story isn't canon because it does not fit my one true vision for how the franchise should work!" as though that means anything at all or that other people should take them seriously. Then by that logic something not created by an original creator is canon including fanfiction. --- Gamertag: Kegfarms, BF code: 2033480226, Treasure Cruise code 318,374,355, Steam: Kegfarms <cite>Revelation34 posted [p:909866546] in Do you sup... [t:77052521]...</cite> <quote><cite>darkknight109 posted...</cite> <quote>No, it really, really doesn't. Fiction is fiction - it never happened, so arguing over which parts of it are "real" is pointless; none of it is real. If you don't like a certain part of it, ignore it and pretend it doesn't exist and move on with your life. It's that simple. It just annoys me to see overly-obsessive nerds arguing "Obviously this story isn't canon because it does not fit my one true vision for how the franchise should work!" as though that means anything at all or that other people should take them seriously.</quote> Then by that logic something not created by an original creator is canon including fanfiction.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
darkknight109 10/03/18 2:21:54 AM #87:	Revelation34 posted... Then by that logic something not created by an original creator is canon including fanfiction. Sure. I mean, if you really like it and think it adds to the original story, why not? I'm not going to tell you you're wrong. Decide for yourself what your favourite story is. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! <cite>darkknight109 posted [p:909869437] in Do you sup... [t:77052521]...</cite> <quote><cite>Revelation34 posted...</cite> <quote>Then by that logic something not created by an original creator is canon including fanfiction.</quote> Sure. I mean, if you really like it and think it adds to the original story, why not? I'm not going to tell you you're wrong. Decide for yourself what your favourite story is.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Revelation34 10/03/18 2:54:32 AM #88:	darkknight109 posted... Sure. I mean, if you really like it and think it adds to the original story, why not? I'm not going to tell you you're wrong. Decide for yourself what your favourite story is. Then they'd be wrong since that's not what canon means. --- Gamertag: Kegfarms, BF code: 2033480226, Treasure Cruise code 318,374,355, Steam: Kegfarms <cite>Revelation34 posted [p:909870302] in Do you sup... [t:77052521]...</cite> <quote><cite>darkknight109 posted...</cite> <quote>Sure. I mean, if you really like it and think it adds to the original story, why not? I'm not going to tell you you're wrong. Decide for yourself what your favourite story is.</quote> Then they'd be wrong since that's not what canon means.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
darkknight109 10/03/18 3:08:36 AM #89:	Revelation34 posted... darkknight109 posted... Sure. I mean, if you really like it and think it adds to the original story, why not? I'm not going to tell you you're wrong. Decide for yourself what your favourite story is. Then they'd be wrong since that's not what canon means. I'm aware of what canon means, I'm just pointing out how incredible stupid it is when applied to an entirely fictional universe. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! <cite>darkknight109 posted [p:909870610] in Do you sup... [t:77052521]...</cite> <quote><cite>Revelation34 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>darkknight109 posted...</cite> <quote>Sure. I mean, if you really like it and think it adds to the original story, why not? I'm not going to tell you you're wrong. Decide for yourself what your favourite story is.</quote> Then they'd be wrong since that's not what canon means.</quote> I'm aware of what canon means, I'm just pointing out how incredible stupid it is when applied to an entirely fictional universe.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Revelation34 10/03/18 3:19:46 PM #90:	darkknight109 posted... I'm aware of what canon means, I'm just pointing out how incredible stupid it is when applied to an entirely fictional universe. So that means you hate fiction entirely. --- Gamertag: Kegfarms, BF code: 2033480226, Treasure Cruise code 318,374,355, Steam: Kegfarms <cite>Revelation34 posted [p:909896521] in Do you sup... [t:77052521]...</cite> <quote><cite>darkknight109 posted...</cite> <quote>I'm aware of what canon means, I'm just pointing out how incredible stupid it is when applied to an entirely fictional universe.</quote> So that means you hate fiction entirely.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
darkknight109 10/03/18 7:06:32 PM #91:	Revelation34 posted... darkknight109 posted... I'm aware of what canon means, I'm just pointing out how incredible stupid it is when applied to an entirely fictional universe. So that means you hate fiction entirely. Nope. Fiction is fine; it's just overly obsessive nerds fussing about what is and is not canon that's really dumb. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! <cite>darkknight109 posted [p:909908466] in Do you sup... [t:77052521]...</cite> <quote><cite>Revelation34 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>darkknight109 posted...</cite> <quote>I'm aware of what canon means, I'm just pointing out how incredible stupid it is when applied to an entirely fictional universe.</quote> So that means you hate fiction entirely.</quote> Nope. Fiction is fine; it's just overly obsessive nerds fussing about what is and is not canon that's really dumb.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Revelation34 10/04/18 6:41:29 AM #92:	darkknight109 posted... Nope. Fiction is fine; it's just overly obsessive nerds fussing about what is and is not canon that's really dumb. You're trying to change the definition of the word canon. That was my point with the last post. --- Gamertag: Kegfarms, BF code: 2033480226, Treasure Cruise code 318,374,355, Steam: Kegfarms <cite>Revelation34 posted [p:909933924] in Do you sup... [t:77052521]...</cite> <quote><cite>darkknight109 posted...</cite> <quote>Nope. Fiction is fine; it's just overly obsessive nerds fussing about what is and is not canon that's really dumb.</quote> You're trying to change the definition of the word canon. That was my point with the last post.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
darkknight109 10/04/18 6:47:36 AM #93:	Revelation34 posted... darkknight109 posted... Nope. Fiction is fine; it's just overly obsessive nerds fussing about what is and is not canon that's really dumb. You're trying to change the definition of the word canon. That was my point with the last post. If you typed more than one sentence per post, you might actually get your point across. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! <cite>darkknight109 posted [p:909934028] in Do you sup... [t:77052521]...</cite> <quote><cite>Revelation34 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>darkknight109 posted...</cite> <quote>Nope. Fiction is fine; it's just overly obsessive nerds fussing about what is and is not canon that's really dumb.</quote> You're trying to change the definition of the word canon. That was my point with the last post.</quote> If you typed more than one sentence per post, you might actually get your point across.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1, 2

Poll of the Day > Do you support kathleen kennedy getting a 3 yr extension? (+) Yeah! (+)

Poll of the Day > Do you support kathleen kennedy getting a 3 yr extension?