Anakin's path to darkness too steep! (SPOILERS)

[Brother Shatterstone]

I don't think your trying to be elitist, just like your saying your not, but this...

I am disappointed in them, and I am specifically disappointed that people are saying what they are saying in their reviews and then still giving the movie 4.5 stars, because if they really believe the things they are saying, I personally don't think they should give them those reviews."

Works very much against you... cause it really seems like your saying that shouldn't be able to give reviews because they don’t agree with you?

...because if they really believe the things they are saying, I personally don't think they should give them those reviews."

Really??? I hope not cause if that what you really mean then I'm very much sorry for you... Everyone is entitled to his or her opinions, and everyone in titled to give their own review. :\

 

[Henry]

Works very much against you... cause it really seems like your saying that shouldn't be able to give reviews because they don’t agree with you?

I read it rather as "Why are reviewers shooting holes in the movies, and then turning around and giving the movie 4 or 5 stars?" Tacky, however, only knows for certain if that's what he meant.

 

[takyris]

... cause it really seems like your saying that shouldn't be able to give reviews because they don’t agree with you?

That's a misreading of what I wrote. If someone absolutely loved the dialogue, thought the plot had no holes whatsoever, thought the love-scenes were top-notch, and felt that Anakin's fall was handled beautifully, then I have no problem with them giving it a 9 or a 10. You had no problems with the dialogue, the love scenes, the handling of Anakin's fall, the fact that a woman dies because of "losing her will to live", or anything else -- therefore, the assumedly high rating you gave the movie is completely fine with me. I disagree with you, but it doesn't bother me, unless you come after me under the assumption that I'm not understanding something because of my rating.

However, if someone says in their review that the dialogue was weak, the plot was forced in some places, and the fall could have been done better because of several noted errors (in the reviewers opinion), and then says, "But because this was a Star Wars movie with lots of lightsaber fights and I got to see Chewbacca, I gave it a 9," that's disappointing to me. The implicit (and, from some people here, quite explicit) inflation of rating because Lucas let you see the Falcon in one brief shot, or because the guy who plays Scorpy in Farscape gets to be a young Tarkin in the background -- stuff that isn't a reflection of the movie's merits as a film but a bump-up because of easter-eggs and fan-throw-ins -- is a little annoying to me, but understandable in a franchise, much like the big comics fans will bump up their rating of a comic-book movie if a minor character they like has a brief role (if Daredevil's alter-ego, the lawyer, defended Spider-man in a brief cameo, for example).

The implicit (and, from some people here, quite explicit) inflation of the rating because people either feel bad giving a Star Wars movie a low rating or feel that lame dialogue and stupid plotholes shouldn't bring down the rating of a movie when that movie has a sword with a glow-effect in it rather severely bums me out.

It's not because they disagree with me. I'm fine with a difference of opinion with people who disagree with me, like you, Shatterstone, provided that everything is mutually respectful and nobody puts words in anyone else's mouth. What I'm not fine with is people who have the same problems with the movie that I did but don't have the nerve to use any of the numbers below 6. I'm not saying that I'm going to try to stop them. I'm not saying that I want moderators to remove their posts. I'm saying that if you actually did have problems with the movie but gave it a cushy grade so that you could get into the nice comfortable part of the bell curve with all the people who had no problems whatsoever with the dialogue or the plot, that's disappointing to me. There's no objective system for rating, but in my ratings sytem, a movie with stuff that I have to grit my teeth to get through to the good parts is not a 9. If there are multiple parts that made me cringe for more than a few seconds, it's not even an 8 or a 7, even if there are really good parts elsewhere in the movie.

Giving anything above a 7 to Revenge of the Sith if you had problems with the dialogue or love-scenes or plotholes is effectively saying, "Dialogue, love-scenes, and coherent plots aren't important in films like this." And while, like I said, I won't report the post and try to get your vote blocked, I will quite honestly admit that that's pretty disappointing to me. If the world at large rates the movie that way (and the world at large seems to be doing so), that doesn't bode well for dialogue, love-scenes, or coherent plots (by the standards of people who had trouble with them) in SF movies in the future. The message that sends to studios is "Big effects, and write the plot around the effects, and get a hot chick to sleepwalk through the love story with."

Anyone willing to live with the crushing despair that comes from knowing that somewhere, Takyris is disappointed with their rating of the most recent Star Wars movie can go their merry way.



Really??? I hope not cause if that what you really mean then I'm very much sorry for you... Everyone is entitled to his or her opinions, and everyone in titled to give their own review. :\[/QUOTE]

 

[Henry]

Giving anything above a 7 to Revenge of the Sith if you had problems with the dialogue or love-scenes or plotholes is effectively saying, "Dialogue, love-scenes, and coherent plots aren't important in films like this." And while, like I said, I won't report the post and try to get your vote blocked, I will quite honestly admit that that's pretty disappointing to me.

That's what I thought you said.

However, one can be nitpicky while still objectively realizing that a movie has all the elements that make it great entertainment: Action, nice allegory and allusion, stylish scenery, and beautiful musical score. This would still net a decent score (say, 7 or 8 like ENWorld seems to warrant) but not be completely happy with it. These are the people who are being nitpicky for nitpicky's sake, because they love it so much. The fact that it wasn't the best of the series doesn't mean it wasn't good. You're also dealing with the fact that it's fresher in their minds than the other movies right now on average, so there's a memory bias that goes on too.

Example: There have been gaming sessions that have gone by where I recognize that NOTHING got done - we cut up, chatted, did little in-character other than a shopping trip, and out of comparison to other gaming sessions it sucked; however, the fact is that we still gamed and had a good time. It was still entertaining.

My Take? I liked it, and would solidly rate it #2 or #3 out of 6, right behind Empire Strikes Back, and possibly A New Hope.

 

[Brother Shatterstone]

Takyris, aye that made alot more sense. Sorry for not understanding the first time around.

To me a rating is more than its mechanical nature… It comes down to one thing and one thing only… Was I entertained? Very much so.

My only darn complaint is that after viewing it three times at the theater I want to see it again and I still haven’t figure out what Padmé says at the very end…

“blah blah blah blah blah name… No I know, I know.” (I think...)

 

[Jeremy Ackerman-Yost]

Taky, you may have a point. But then, most people are not nearly as objective as they pretend to be. I'm certainly not. Ultimately, I walked out of all 3 of the prequels with happy feelings in my tummy. My brain interpreted this as "me likee."

That's as far as I need to go with it.

Sure, I can talk all about the good and bad points, the plot holes or lack thereof. I can give you a detailed analysis of the parts I didn't like for all 3 of them. I can tell you how I (in my clearly superior wisdom) would do them "better."

But I probably can't tell you in a logical manner why I liked it. I just did.

It's much easier to sound smart when you're tearing something down than when you're building it up.

No wonder it's so fashionable to hate things on the internet.

 

[Ankh-Morpork Guard]

My only darn complaint is that after viewing it three times at the theater I want to see it again and I still haven’t figure out what Padmé says at the very end…

“blah blah blah blah blah name… No I know, I know.” (I think...)

[sblock]"There is still good in him...I know...I know there's still...."[/sblock]

But you didn't hear it from me, and you should probably see it again just to make sure you get the EXACT wording just right.

 

[exile]

Anakin was inherently/predestined to be evil

I'd like to propose a theory that Anakin's fall was not too fast because he was inherently/predestined to be evil. If you harken back to Episode I, you'll recall Shmi Skywalker stating that "there was no father". Back then, I though it might mean that Anakin was the product of rape or maybe that this was some attempt to portray him as a Christ figure. I was finally treated to a much more satisfactory answer in Episode III when Palpatine shared the tale of Darth Plaguis the Wise, saying something to the effect that Darth Plaguis learned to create life. This leads me to believe that Anakin was some sort of "test tube Sith" made out of midichlorians and grown inside Shmi. If he was made using the Dark Side, would it nots tand to reason that he was in fact inherently evil?
Chad

 

[Jeremy Ackerman-Yost]

I'd like to propose a theory that Anakin's fall was not too fast because he was inherently/predestined to be evil. If you harken back to Episode I, you'll recall Shmi Skywalker stating that "there was no father". Back then, I though it might mean that Anakin was the product of rape or maybe that this was some attempt to portray him as a Christ figure. I was finally treated to a much more satisfactory answer in Episode III when Palpatine shared the tale of Darth Plaguis the Wise, saying something to the effect that Darth Plaguis learned to create life. This leads me to believe that Anakin was some sort of "test tube Sith" made out of midichlorians and grown inside Shmi. If he was made using the Dark Side, would it nots tand to reason that he was in fact inherently evil?
Chad

When did everyone decide that Lucas wasn't allowed to use mythic concepts anymore?

The man has said it was indeed supposed to be a virgin birth, why MUST it be a Sith conspiracy instead? What's wrong with prophecy and predestination in Star Wars?

Plus, if he was inherently evil, doesn't the end of the whole saga make a LOT less sense? If anything, I would suspect the opposite was true.

 

[Trickstergod]

When did everyone decide that Lucas wasn't allowed to use mythic concepts anymore?

The man has said it was indeed supposed to be a virgin birth, why MUST it be a Sith conspiracy instead? What's wrong with prophecy and predestination in Star Wars?

Plus, if he was inherently evil, doesn't the end of the whole saga make a LOT less sense? If anything, I would suspect the opposite was true.

Many people find the virgin birth thing obnoxious at the very least, sacriligeous at worst. I prefer a Sith conspiracy because, while I don't mind destiny completely, I prefer it not to be so heavy-handed nor for the Force to necessarily have a will of its own.

As for Anakin being inherently evil, it makes his fall make much more sense and makes his redemption all that more the powerful. The circumstances behind his redemption are plausible and an inherent tendency to evil gives his throwing it off all that stronger of a message about ideals overcoming nature.