Jump to content

Cannon: sold to highest bidder


KnightPierce

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 72
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

... the New York post isn't a reputalbe paper.. it's a trash supermarket tabloid paper.

 

wow it was just one result. Try researching the topic yourself.

 

edit:

 

Rolling Stones, June 24, 1999

 

https://www.rollingstone.com/movies/news/jar-jar-binks-a-digital-star-is-born-19990624

 

Empire Online, 11 Jun 1999

 

https://www.empireonline.com/movies/news/jar-jar-gay-alien/

They even tried to retroactovely partially delete the article in 2015.

 

And more. Much much more.

 

The media without social media had full reign to say whatever it wanted to the public about Episode 1. I saw it in theaters and the media did not reflect the fan reception. People got mad mostly about episode 2 but by that time the damage was done, the hate spread to all things prequals including the media fall guy, jar jar binks.

Edited by KnightPierce
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the sake of trying to defuse this before it becomes another rage filled "I'm right your wrong thread", let me just offer this. We know Lucas had a different idea of Canon then Disney and honestly it's to be expected when you have two different leadership styles in play and two completely different world views. George viewed Star Wars as a saga for the Skywalker's and the people associated with them. Good would always triumph over evil in the end. Jedi were the good guys and Sith were the bad guys, Rebels were good Empire is bad. Disney is trying to explore the Gray area far more and this is an area that Lucas himself really hesitated to go into (he did by extension of the EU but not to a great extent) for fear of destroying the Light vs. Dark dynamic that made Star Wars what it is.

 

So what Disney is doing isn't wrong and what Lucas did is not right and vice versa. You simply have two different mindsets going on but the goal is the same. More Star Wars content. Disney primarily through movies and Lucas primarily through EU material.

 

You can agree or disagree with either style but when it comes to the Star Wars fan-base there truly is no right or wrong way to love it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Elements of canon were in the EU and that was clarified by Lucas and a staff he had hired to oversee the EU. This creative control method is why we used the term Canon with star wars.

 

 

This statement lets me know you have no idea how canon was discussed pre disney and how Lucas was used as the benchmark.

 

so i missed you responded to me but oh my....

 

So you really don't know what Star Wars canon is. We didn't use the term George Lucas did

 

 

I'll just leave this here for you https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Wars_expanded_universe#Publication_history

 

and yes I do know how Canon was discuses pre Disney it seems to be you are the one who doesn't understand how Star Wars canon works.

 

Edit oh also that Empire online "article" is a comment someone made... not an article it was also written in 2015 so unless George Lucas has a time machine don't know how read that and felt it was preasuring him

 

same with the Rolling Stone article it was written in 2002 after Attack of the CLones.

 

 

so keep em comming buddy

Edited by jarjarloves
Link to comment
Share on other sites

so i missed you responded to me but oh my....

 

So you really don't know what Star Wars canon is. We didn't use the term George Lucas did

 

 

I'll just leave this here for you https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Wars_expanded_universe#Publication_history

 

and yes I do know how Canon was discuses pre Disney it seems to be you are the one who doesn't understand how Star Wars canon works.

 

Edit oh also that Empire online "article" is a comment someone made... not an article it was also written in 2015 so unless George Lucas has a time machine don't know how read that and felt it was preasuring him

 

same with the Rolling Stone article it was written in 2002 after Attack of the CLones.

 

 

so keep em comming buddy

 

You took the date of a photo added to the article and not the article itself as its creation date. Can't even have this debate with you when you grossly lie about what you are seeing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the sake of trying to defuse this before it becomes another rage filled "I'm right your wrong thread", let me just offer this. We know Lucas had a different idea of Canon then Disney and honestly it's to be expected when you have two different leadership styles in play and two completely different world views. George viewed Star Wars as a saga for the Skywalker's and the people associated with them. Good would always triumph over evil in the end. Jedi were the good guys and Sith were the bad guys, Rebels were good Empire is bad. Disney is trying to explore the Gray area far more and this is an area that Lucas himself really hesitated to go into (he did by extension of the EU but not to a great extent) for fear of destroying the Light vs. Dark dynamic that made Star Wars what it is.

 

So what Disney is doing isn't wrong and what Lucas did is not right and vice versa. You simply have two different mindsets going on but the goal is the same. More Star Wars content. Disney primarily through movies and Lucas primarily through EU material.

 

You can agree or disagree with either style but when it comes to the Star Wars fan-base there truly is no right or wrong way to love it.

 

There is nothing to diffuse. Kids that did not grow up during the time of the extended universe and understood how canon worked as a mechanic of lucas' creative team does not understand how Disney attempts to abuse its purchase of the franchise in stating retroactively what is canon and supported story arcs. Hell even when they announced the "official" new canon they said Clone Wars and Rebels would be canon, but its clear that did zero tie ins to the movies with the lore created from Clone Wars (not produced by disney) and further push rebels (produced by disney) to justify the direction they want to go but still not support the shows with the films story-line.

 

Canon makes sense when their is ONE creative head dictating intents he has or had. In a CORPORATION it makes zero sense to continue the fallacy that something is canon or not. Its now more or less like comics: Frank Miller's Batman is Iconic to batman, certain runs create his mythos. Other authors may place batman in different scenarios are make him a time travelling character (See Metal story arc) but those do not reshape what batman means to people. Lucas original run for star wars is iconic, to the point where it was difficult for lucas to create more films for it without outcry from a very critical pre soical media news organizations that saw a boom in the late 90s and 2000s in throwing accusations around and how negative press generated revenue.

 

So I disagree with you so called attempt to diffuse anything. Disney is taking Star Wars in a direction it wants to, doesnt mean it can wave a hand and tell me to accept it as offical history of a fictional universe. Their interpretation of star wars is nearly worse than that of episode 2 and 3.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is nothing to diffuse. Kids that did not grow up during the time of the extended universe and understood how canon worked as a mechanic of lucas' creative team does not understand how Disney attempts to abuse its purchase of the franchise in stating retroactively what is canon and supported story arcs. Hell even when they announced the "official" new canon they said Clone Wars and Rebels would be canon, but its clear that did zero tie ins to the movies with the lore created from Clone Wars (not produced by disney) and further push rebels (produced by disney) to justify the direction they want to go but still not support the shows with the films story-line.

 

Canon makes sense when their is ONE creative head dictating intents he has or had. In a CORPORATION it makes zero sense to continue the fallacy that something is canon or not. Its now more or less like comics: Frank Miller's Batman is Iconic to batman, certain runs create his mythos. Other authors may place batman in different scenarios are make him a time travelling character (See Metal story arc) but those do not reshape what batman means to people. Lucas original run for star wars is iconic, to the point where it was difficult for lucas to create more films for it without outcry from a very critical pre soical media news organizations that saw a boom in the late 90s and 2000s in throwing accusations around and how negative press generated revenue.

 

So I disagree with you so called attempt to diffuse anything. Disney is taking Star Wars in a direction it wants to, doesnt mean it can wave a hand and tell me to accept it as offical history of a fictional universe. Their interpretation of star wars is nearly worse than that of episode 2 and 3.

 

again with the "kids" stuff... after you have been proven wrong already on that point as there are plenty of adults who prefer the new canon to the EU. And that is a stupid argument either way. But whatever, you have proven time and again that your bias dictates your argument not reason or logic. It about you, you, you... The owner of the license can absolutely decide what is established canon and what is not (what we now call Legends) and it has done so. Cry me a river why dont you...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I disagree with you so called attempt to diffuse anything. Disney is taking Star Wars in a direction it wants to, doesnt mean it can wave a hand and tell me to accept it as offical history of a fictional universe. Their interpretation of star wars is nearly worse than that of episode 2 and 3.

 

Yes they can.

Because they own it.

And they have a creative team, the Story Group, that manages continuity.

That continuity is now the current, official canon.

Legends is an alternative canon of its own that happens to share elements (The first six movies and The Clone Wars) with the current canon.

But right now, "Disney" (Lucasfilm actually) gets to decide what is official.

You can choose to ignore their stories and stick to Legends but it doesnt change the current state of affairs. Your word has no weight regarding official canon, only your own "headcanon"

 

Also, you've completely ignored the quotes from Lucas himself where he basically said that he didn't care one bit for the EU and would retcon it at his leisure (See the Clone Wars according to the Thrawn Trilogy, the situation of Mandalore in the Clone Wars, etc...)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

again with the "kids" stuff... after you have been proven wrong already on that point as there are plenty of adults who prefer the new canon to the EU. And that is a stupid argument either way. But whatever, you have proven time and again that your bias dictates your argument not reason or logic. It about you, you, you... The owner of the license can absolutely decide what is established canon and what is not (what we now call Legends) and it has done so. Cry me a river why dont you...

 

Categorically wrong. You look at non - annonymous reviews on youtube and the hate is very real from even fans that liked TFA.

 

You are one of these kids that think Gross Revenue is the sign people like the movies. Its the Star Wars BRAND selling those tickets, not the scripts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes they can.

Because they own it.

And they have a creative team, the Story Group, that manages continuity.

That continuity is now the current, official canon.

Legends is an alternative canon of its own that happens to share elements (The first six movies and The Clone Wars) with the current canon.

But right now, "Disney" (Lucasfilm actually) gets to decide what is official.

You can choose to ignore their stories and stick to Legends but it doesnt change the current state of affairs. Your word has no weight regarding official canon, only your own "headcanon"

 

Also, you've completely ignored the quotes from Lucas himself where he basically said that he didn't care one bit for the EU and would retcon it at his leisure (See the Clone Wars according to the Thrawn Trilogy, the situation of Mandalore in the Clone Wars, etc...)

 

DC owns Batman, and these use time travel and other devices all the time to change storylines, but that does not change the mythos of the characters considered by fans to be iconic. Disney cannot by ownership steer fans to accept their bad writing because they piggy back off a brand they bought. It does not change the iconic nature of the original story and the intent of its creator. They are systematically destroying the plot development of the original trilogy by reversing the character progression of classic characters and you think people will accept that? Not a chance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

DC owns Batman, and these use time travel and other devices all the time to change storylines, but that does not change the mythos of the characters considered by fans to be iconic. Disney cannot by ownership steer fans to accept their bad writing because they piggy back off a brand they bought. It does not change the iconic nature of the original story and the intent of its creator. They are systematically destroying the plot development of the original trilogy by reversing the character progression of classic characters and you think people will accept that? Not a chance.

 

But you have long left the territory of canon.

You talk of iconic and of Batman, and earlier you mentionned "The Dark Knight Returns". Know what? No matter how "iconic" TDKR is, it's non-canon to the mainline Batman. It's Frank Miller's own continuity.

Mainline Batman will never grow bitter and old and fight Superman in a (faked) death battle.

Something iconic doesn't need to be canon.

 

It does not change the iconic nature of the original story and the intent of its creator.

 

Irrelevant to the discussion at hand. Even in the new trilogy the OT still happened and the characters are still the "same" (But 30 years older and with a ton of additional baggage.)

 

They are systematically destroying the plot development of the original trilogy by reversing the character progression of classic characters and you think people will accept that? Not a chance.

 

They did it in Legends and they managed to keep it going for nearly 30 years. Food for thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Categorically wrong. You look at non - annonymous reviews on youtube and the hate is very real from even fans that liked TFA.

 

You are one of these kids that think Gross Revenue is the sign people like the movies. Its the Star Wars BRAND selling those tickets, not the scripts.

 

I don't care that some people didn't like it... There are plenty of good reviews on YouTube also. By all accounts more then half the people liked it which makes a simple majority. Just cause the same people keep whining over and over doesnt make them right. Also, the critics liked it... And these guys are more qualified to talk about the quality of a movie then a know-nothing fan who is upset the storyline didn't turn out like he wanted it to. You have no authority as far as movie making goes, no authority as far as star wars goes, and no authority to speak for anyone else other then yourself. You didn't like the movie... I don't care. And kid, don't presume you know anything about me...

Edited by Valceanu
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But you have long left the territory of canon.

You talk of iconic and of Batman, and earlier you mentionned "The Dark Knight Returns". Know what? No matter how "iconic" TDKR is, it's non-canon to the mainline Batman. It's Frank Miller's own continuity.

Mainline Batman will never grow bitter and old and fight Superman in a (faked) death battle.

Something iconic doesn't need to be canon.

 

 

 

Irrelevant to the discussion at hand. Even in the new trilogy the OT still happened and the characters are still the "same" (But 30 years older and with a ton of additional baggage.)

 

 

 

They did it in Legends and they managed to keep it going for nearly 30 years. Food for thought.

 

The characters are not the same. Han Solo's entire plot progression over three films was that from selfish smuggler on the run to rebel hero and toppler of the empire who lead an assault on the death stars shield generator. This was completely reversed. The First order comes out of no where and in one film, despite having their much bigger death star destroyed now rule the galaxy? The Republic should not have been the underdogs from the start of the film. Han Solo reverted back to a selfish smuggler who abandoned his family and only after feeling guilt tries to stop his whiny son who ultimately cuts him down to prove how evil he is. With this story arc I can't see how anyone would care about a young han solo movie.

 

Luke goes from one of the most hopeful characters in star wars, literally the NEW HOPE himself, does everything to turn his genocidal father to the light side and succeeds. Yet we are to believe Luke would attempt to kill Kylo Ren for turning to the dark side and becoming hopeless when he fails to stop him? It makes zero sense for his character we saw over 3 films in the OT.

 

Honestly, can you say you are not being paid to defend the new films on the forum? Because I find it hard to believe you are a real person.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't care... There are plenty of good reviews on YouTube also. By all accounts more then half the people liked it which makes a simple majority. Just cause the same people keep whining over and over didn't make then right. Also, the critics liked it... And this guys are more qualified to talk about the quality of a movie then a know-nothing fan who is upset the storyline didn't turn out like he wanted it to. You have no authority as far as movie making goes, no authority as far as star wars goes, and no authority to speak for anyone else other then yourself. You didn't like the movie... I don't care. And kid, don't presume you know anything about me...

 

You know, back when I was watching a video aiming at adressing the Flat Earth Society and its history, I was reminded of something interesting: The Youtube algorithm tends to present you with videos that are similar to those you have been watching recently.

Put in our obnoxious friend's case and it works as is: He watches a negative review of TLJ, possibly leaves a like and a review. The algorithm searches another video with similar advertised content and opinion. He watches it, agrees still, possible like and comment and so the cycle continues.

He doesn't see the positive reviews because he can't, Youtube isn't even listing it for him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't care that some people didn't like it... There are plenty of good reviews on YouTube also. By all accounts more then half the people liked it which makes a simple majority. Just cause the same people keep whining over and over doesnt make them right. Also, the critics liked it... And these guys are more qualified to talk about the quality of a movie then a know-nothing fan who is upset the storyline didn't turn out like he wanted it to. You have no authority as far as movie making goes, no authority as far as star wars goes, and no authority to speak for anyone else other then yourself. You didn't like the movie... I don't care. And kid, don't presume you know anything about me...

 

AngryJoe 2.9 Million Subs with this video at 1.7 Million views.

 

Awesome Channel 1 million views poking at the plot holes with over 700k views

 

Come on show me these glowing reviews you claim exist and if they are by any big youtubers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know, back when I was watching a video aiming at adressing the Flat Earth Society and its history, I was reminded of something interesting: The Youtube algorithm tends to present you with videos that are similar to those you have been watching recently.

Put in our obnoxious friend's case and it works as is: He watches a negative review of TLJ, possibly leaves a like and a review. The algorithm searches another video with similar advertised content and opinion. He watches it, agrees still, possible like and comment and so the cycle continues.

He doesn't see the positive reviews because he can't, Youtube isn't even listing it for him.

 

This is very true actually... All of the video reviews I've seen are positive for the most part. Even the one from "Silent Bob" ... Can't remember the name of the actor lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't care that some people didn't like it... There are plenty of good reviews on YouTube also. By all accounts more then half the people liked it which makes a simple majority. Just cause the same people keep whining over and over doesnt make them right. Also, the critics liked it... And these guys are more qualified to talk about the quality of a movie then a know-nothing fan who is upset the storyline didn't turn out like he wanted it to. You have no authority as far as movie making goes, no authority as far as star wars goes, and no authority to speak for anyone else other then yourself. You didn't like the movie... I don't care. And kid, don't presume you know anything about me...

 

AngryJoe 2.9 Million Subs with this video at 1.7 Million views.

 

Awesome Channel 1 million views poking at the plot holes with over 700k views

 

With much much more!

 

Come on show me these glowing reviews you claim exist and if they are by any big youtubers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is very true actually... All of the video reviews I've seen are positive for the most part. Even the one from "Silent Bob" ... Can't remember the name of the actor lol.

 

It literally says his real name in the title of his review, which is an hour and half long ramble. What part of the review did you agree with?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes yes Kevin Smith. Unlike you I don't have them prepared in advance to use in an internet argument. And no I didn't listen to all of it cause unlike you I actually have a life. Just bits and parts. But for both videos the tone was that while the movie had it's flaws (and the EU has plenty more to be clear) it was an enjoyable movie. Simple as that...

 

 

 

Both overall positive reviews.

 

Oh, and then there are the critics who actually know a but about the art of movie making and who have had overwhelmingly positive reviews. You can claim conspiracy theories but you have to prove them to have any sort of credibility. And you can't.

Edited by Valceanu
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes yes Kevin Smith. Unlike you I don't have them prepared in advance to use in an internet argument. And no I didn't listen to all of it cause unlike you I actually have a life. Just bits and parts. But for both videos the tone was that while the movie had it's flaws (and the EU has plenty more to be clear) it was an enjoyable movie. Simple as that...

 

 

 

Both overall positive reviews.

 

Oh, and then there are the critics who actually know a but about the art of movie making and who have had overwhelmingly positive reviews. You can claim conspiracy theories but you have to prove them to have any sort of credibility. And you can't.

 

Did you watch the videos?

 

Negatives in that first video you posted.

 

-Pacing issues

-Kanto Bite sequence should not be in the film

-Finn subplot was bad

-Animal Cruelty lines out of place

ETC

 

Honestly did you just search for reviews you thought were glowing positive and paste them here?

 

Kevin Smith literally just rambles off the plot of the movie for an hour and half. What part did you see as a positive review?

Edited by KnightPierce
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did you watch the videos?

 

Negatives in that first video you posted.

 

-Pacing issues

-Kanto Bite sequence should not be in the film

-Finn subplot was bad

-Animal Cruelty lines out of place

ETC

 

Honestly did you just search for reviews you thought were glowing positive and paste them here?

 

Kevin Smith literally just rambles off the plot of the movie for an hour and half. What part did you see as a positive review?

 

Mate are you slow? Nobody ever said the movie was perfect. Even I thought the bit with Leia floating through space was stretching it (though technically even a regular person can survive in space for around a minute) and I agree that the part with the casino planet could have been shortened or scrapped altogether... But overall the movie is enjoyable. That's it. I don't need to dissect it every which way. That is also backed up by the polls that were conducted which clearly show a high approval rating for the movie with the majority of viewers either loving or liking the movie...

Edited by Valceanu
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did you watch the videos?

 

Negatives in that first video you posted.

 

-Pacing issues

-Kanto Bite sequence should not be in the film

-Finn subplot was bad

-Animal Cruelty lines out of place

ETC

 

Honestly did you just search for reviews you thought were glowing positive and paste them here?

 

Kevin Smith literally just rambles off the plot of the movie for an hour and half. What part did you see as a positive review?

 

Nobody spoke of glowing reviews. Just positive overall.

I have a positive opinion and yet I still think the points mentionned above are not great.

Films are rarely all good or all bad.

But pointing out flaws =/= negative review

Also, forgot this one from Angry Joe where he openly admits that emotions made him mispeak about the movie:

 

As we've said: Stop living in your bubble of Youtube haters and "paid critics" and watch reviews that disagree with you, you may find it interesting to escape your echo chamber for a few minutes.

Doesn't mean you'll suddenly like the film, you are, after all, entitled to your opinion, but at least you won't be a (lying) broken record about universal hate against the movie anymore since you'll have seen quite a few positive reviews.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nobody spoke of glowing reviews. Just positive overall.

I have a positive opinion and yet I still think the points mentionned above are not great.

Films are rarely all good or all bad.

But pointing out flaws =/= negative review

Also, forgot this one from Angry Joe where he openly admits that emotions made him mispeak about the movie:

 

As we've said: Stop living in your bubble of Youtube haters and "paid critics" and watch reviews that disagree with you, you may find it interesting to escape your echo chamber for a few minutes.

Doesn't mean you'll suddenly like the film, you are, after all, entitled to your opinion, but at least you won't be a (lying) broken record about universal hate against the movie anymore since you'll have seen quite a few positive reviews.

 

You literally didnt watch Angry Joes follow up. Still had lots of issues with the film in that too.

 

I'm glad you linked it so people will watch it and see that you are full of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mate are you slow? Nobody ever said the movie was perfect. Even I thought the bit with Leia floating through space was stretching it (though technically even a regular person can survive in space for around a minute) and I agree that the part with the casino planet could have been shortened or scrapped altogether... But overall the movie is enjoyable. That's it. I don't need to dissect it every which way. That is also backed up by the polls that were conducted which clearly show a high approval rating for the movie with the majority of viewers either loving or liking the movie...

 

I enjoy bad films too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You literally didnt watch Angry Joes follow up. Still had lots of issues with the film in that too.

 

I'm glad you linked it so people will watch it and see that you are full of it.

 

Did I say that he was positive and had no issues?

Did I?

Because if you claim I did, you are the one full of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


×
×
  • Create New...