Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Didn't they want the Jedi to trace the assassin back to Kamino so they could get the Clone army?

No, wait, thats not it, Palpatine genuinely wanted her to die.

mmm

Shits and giggles I guess.



He's a spy?



Clearly Count Dooku hacked the internets. ALL OF THE INTERNETS!



I get the feeling they do, theres just nothing they can do about it.



Though really the answer to all of these is simply bad writing.

And by her, I mean Padme. She was never meant to survive the explosion, and so there woud be no dart for them to trace in the first place.

N.
Though really the answer to all of these is simply bad writing.

No, that would be the answer to the Dark Knight's narrative issues.

Originally posted by RagingBoner
No, that would be the answer to the Dark Knight's narrative issues. You're antagonist powers have doubled since the last time you logged in, Count.

Don't insult the Dark Knight. The Dark Knight is awesome.

So are the prequels, until you examine them more deeply and realize that they have more plot holes than you can shake a lightsaber at.

Lucien
You're antagonist powers have doubled since the last time you logged in, Count.

Oh yeah, well your fail powers have tripled. excellent

Originally posted by RagingBoner
No, that would be the answer to the Dark Knight's narrative issues.



There are none.

You're just butthurt I'm kicking your ass in our private message debate.

N.


There are none.

I can only conclude that the world and all within it looks radically different when peeked from the snug confines of Christopher Nolan's ass crack.





hehehe





That debate began several minutes after the post you quoted began.

excellent

Originally posted by RagingBoner
I can only conclude that the world and all within it looks radically different when peeked from the snug confines of Christopher Nolan's ass crack.





hehehe



To claim The Dark Knight has more bad writing in it than AOTC requires a level of fanboyism so vast that it borders on frothing lunacy and renders anything you say completely invalid. I Dare you to justify some of the plot holes listed here.



No it didn't.

N.
To claim The Dark Knight has more bad writing in it than AOTC requires a level of fanboyism so vast that it borders on frothing lunacy and renders anything you say completely invalid.



Still struggling to successfully argue the Dark Knight's objective superiority? Your conflict amuses me.



o noez not ze dreaded dare




Yes, it did. You didn't reply to my PM argument until 10 minutes after that post was made; the discussion was going on before, but the debate didn't begin until then. Ergo, I logically had no reason to be butthurt. excellent




See how that works? It's almost like... a magic trick. Your point? It's gone!

Originally posted by RagingBoner


Still struggling to successfully argue the Dark Knight's objective superiority? Your conflict amuses me.

You think AOTC is superior to TDK?

facepalm What happened to you Gideon? you used to be cool....




I will stretch to a double dare if needs be.





The PM debate is simply a continuation of the discussion in your thread, so it undoubtably counts. Theres a reason you never attempted to answer me in the actual thread.

Cuz you're a chicken wuss.

N.
You think AOTC is superior to TDK?

I never said that.



I wear a tie now and it oppresses my soul.



u woodent!

I have protection against such feeble assaults.



Not when you identified and qualified the debate as the "private message debate". Our discussion in the thread didn't occur via PM, it occurred on the thread. Our PM debate began, according to my Inbox, at 7:44pm.

Victory is mine. excellent



Correct.

I don't have ze book on hand.

Originally posted by RagingBoner
I never said that.


You implied it:

'No, that would be the answer to the Dark Knight's narrative issues.'

Saying The Dark knight suffers from bad writing and AOTC doesn't certainly indicates which you believe to be superior.




Monster.



I took Epic Spell Penetration at level 20. Your defences are nothing to me.



I termed it as such merely becuase that was the format in which it was currently taking place. Again you take casual sentence wording much too seriously.

N.
You implied it:

'No, that would be the answer to the Dark Knight's narrative issues.'

Saying The Dark knight suffers from bad writing and AOTC doesn't certainly indicates which you believe to be superior.

Interesting that you see fit to lecture me on inflating the importance of 'casual word choice' and yet you conclude I find one movie superior to another because of an implication? lawlz

There are multiple elements to a story, writing is simply one and even it can be divided into dialogue and plot, perhaps more. There are aspects of Attack of the Clones' writing that I find superior to the Dark Knight's, but not all. (Dialogue, for example, is overwhelmingly in favor of Nolan's work.)



Did you just go all Lady Gaga on me?



Penetration? Giggity



ur mom

Originally posted by RagingBoner
Interesting that you see fit to lecture me on inflating the importance of 'casual word choice' and yet you conclude I find one movie superior to another because of an implication? lawlz

And yet it is an undefeatable point, seeing as if you confront it you are confronting your own argument at the same time.

I wieenz.



Name one aspect thats better.



This is a bad romance.



you're so predictable.



u bastard

N.
And yet it is an undefeatable point, seeing as if you confront it you are confronting your own argument at the same time.



If this is what you need to tell yourself in order to avoid crying hard enough to smear your mascara or cut yourself even more deeply and risk staining that precious Joker shirt of yours, be my guest. Indulge in all of the double standards you like; it pleases me that I have to drive you to such desperate lengths and reaffirms my 'Merican superiority. excellent



nevar



I find overall story to be better. A looming war, a doomed romance, the decay of democracy and rising dictatorship.



Agreed, I never found the relationship between Harvey and Rachel to be especially compelling.



Ooh, a little fight in you. I like that.



How did you know my mother's nickname for me?

up Shut.

u no

Not really. Its easier when its layed out in list format.

But the video is much more fan lol

And the DK is much better movie then AOTC. If it wasn't a Star Wars movie it would be rated as a C level movie anyway.

Note: that first smile isn't suppose to be there to begin with...

Personally I'd give AOTC a D or an E. There are no likable characters, excruciatingly bad dialogue, a poorly executed and emotionally distant story line, weak themes, bad pacing, enormous plot holes, craptastic villians, bad directing, clinical and jarring set design, oh and fvcking awful acting performances.

The only good thing is the action, and even that is middling to poor.

I award it no points and may god have mercy on Lucas' soul.

Which isn't looming at all throughout the movie.



Again, at no point is the romance highlighted as 'doomed' in the movie. Not to mention the romance is just atrocious altogether.



Which was extremely poorly executed and is simply another example of Lucas dropping the ball with good potential. There is no impact, no weight in these themes.

'If only.... Senator Amidala were here.....'

facepalm

N.
Personally I'd give AOTC a D or an E.

Yeah, well you also think the Joker is complex.

The reality is that only one of us tries and succeeds to find both merit and criticism in both of the films and can articulate these reasons without relying on double standards or general emo-inspired rants when his opponent is not ensnared by the so-called allure and depth (lololololol) of a fictional clown; the other person is simply unwilling or unable to look beyond his preference and bias, slathering one film in accolade after accolade and burying the other beneath a mountain of pejoratives and criticisms: Essentially, he looks at one film as infallible (when it isn't) and the other as meritless (when it isn't), indicating that he, in fact, is the fanboy. You'd be this "other person" btw. (But I still love you.)

Originally posted by RagingBoner
Yeah, well you also think the Joker is complex.

He is.

Originally posted by RagingBoner
The reality is that only one of us tries and succeeds to find both merit and criticism in both of the films and can articulate these reasons without relying on double standards or general emo-inspired rants when one is not ensnared by the so-called allure and depth (lololololol) of a fictional clown; the other person is simply unwilling or unable to look beyond his preference and bias, slathering one film in accolade after accolade and burying the other beneath a mountain of pejoratives and criticisms: Essentially, he looks at one film as infallible (when it isn't) and the other as meritless (when it isn't), indicating that he, in fact, is the fanboy. You'd be this "other person" btw.

That was an especially long-winded way to say "no u."

N.
He is.

He's not. He's every bit as unambiguously evil as, say, Palpatine; neither of them are deep characters with especially 'complex' or 'deep' motivations. Doesn't prevent them from being good characters or good villains, but they ain't Magneto.



It was also entirely accurate, which is why debating the issue is pointless. You hilariously mention fanboyism earlier in this thread, but only one of us is able and willing to discuss the successes and pitfalls of both films. You are unambiguously pro-TDK and have nothing good to say about these films; which is fine, you're entitled to your preferences, but it makes the accusation of fanboyism all the more amusing. It makes me chuckle.

Originally posted by Darth Angel
Why don't you just post Mr. Plinket AOTC's review? It would be easier.

Because Plinket's points are almost all incorrect and ignore certain aspects of logic and the movie's story line. They are enjoyable though.


Anyway I'm not a fan of AotC (the only SW movie I actually dislike) but I don't see any of these as plot holes save for perhaps 12. Almost all of them can be explained away and, most importantly, they don't detract from the movie enjoyment or break the suspension of disbelief.

Originally posted by RagingBoner
He's not. He's every bit as unambiguously evil as, say, Palpatine; neither of them are deep characters with especially 'complex' or 'deep' motivations. Doesn't prevent them from being good characters or good villains, but they ain't Magneto.

Yes, he really is. Unambiguously evil? No complex motivations? Did you even watch the same movie as me? The movie is about he and Batmans struggle over the soul of Gotham City, the struggle between these two people and their two perceptions of the world. The Jokers motivations? To prove that humans are just as evil as he is deep down: 'I'm not a monster, I'm just ahead of the current.' Every single action he performs in calculated to turning people against one another: 'Once the chips are down, these civilised people will eat each other.' The bankheist, where every one of them turns on their fellows simply for a larger share, the 'tryouts' where he has 3 people kill each other for a chance of survival, turning the city against Batman, turning the city against the Squeeler, turning the two boats against each other, and finally, Harvey Dent. The Joker is constantly trying to prove that people are just like him, trying to justify his own madness: 'What we're you trying to prove, that deep down everyones just like you? You're alone.' And even when it turns out he's wrong with the boats, he shrugs it off because he's already proven that with a little 'push' the most noble and decent human being can become just as crazed and has murderous as himself. He isn't mad, he isn't a murderous monster, he's simply a man who sees the world for what it is. The movie is about him justifying his own madness. Because, yeah, he wants to see the world burn. But in his mind, so does everyboody else.

Can you tell me that Palpatine has as much depth as that?

Originally posted by RagingBoner
It was also entirely accurate, which is why debating the issue is pointless. You hilariously mention fanboyism earlier in this thread, but only one of us is able and willing to discuss the successes and pitfalls of both films. You are unambiguously pro-TDK and have nothing good to say about these films; which is fine, you're entitled to your preferences, but it makes the accusation of fanboyism all the more amusing. It makes me chuckle.


Why not attack my points rather than my character next time. It might not make you look as much of a whiner.

ares
I don't see any of these as plot holes save for perhaps 12.

Fett was a mercenary by trade; that he was contracted by the Separatists and also served as the template for the clone army is suspicious, but circumstantial. The Jedi had no idea that Count Dooku was the one funding the development of the army because they had no idea that Tyranus and Dooku are the same man.

Shouldn't that be Sifo Dias?

Also I added stuf to my above post just in case you missed it.

N.
Yes, he really is.

He's really not.





^ Glad to see you agree with me.



Yes, I'm aware of their personal battle and conflict.



Yes, he's a seducer, a tempter, a manipulator. Suspiciously similar, in that regard, to a certain fictional politician we all know and love....



Yup, yup, nothing new here. I did watch the movie, you know. (Many, many times... it's the only movie I've ever watched in ze theater more than twice.)



Certainly, because Palpatine's motivations are realistic and understandable (one could argue that, in this regard, he is much moreso than the Joker's).



As I quietly indicatedflat out told you, the reason that there's no point in arguing the merit of these two characters and these two films is because you aren't able, interested, or willing to see merit in both of them.

excellent

N.
Shouldn't that be Sifo Dias?

no

Sifo-Dyas, as indicated by Obi-Wan's discussion to the Kamino administrator, was a real Jedi Master who died prior to the events of the film. Sifo-Dyas made the order; Tyranus (Dooku) hired Fett to fill the role of template and funded the army.

Originally posted by RagingBoner
He's really not.

If you seriously believe that then you're a blind fool.



If he's proven right, can he really be seen as evil? The movie actually does support his worldview when you examine it. Even Batman becomes a murderer by the end. There is no way he is unambiguously evil.



Then I fail to see how you can call him a shallower character than Palpatine. His philosophy and conflict with Batman adds more depth to the movie than the entirity of Palpatines cliche 'UNLIMITED POWER!' bullshit.



facepalm

It isn't about him being a manipulater you dolt. Its about how his philosophy is reflected in his character interactions, actions and through the plot. Are any of Palpatines motivations laced into the spine of the text as much as the Jokers? Do they add as much depth into the narrative? Require as much critical analysis to percieve and understand?

Oh no, his motivation is 'UNLIMITED POWER!' Jesus Christ.......



Its hard to tell seeing how much you missed from the movie.



A) Being 'realistic and understandable' doesn't make it a good motivation. Jar Jar fvcking Binks motivations are realistic and nderstandable. He's still a loathsome waste of dialogue.

B) Haha, yeah right! I can't even begin to understand the level of sociopathy it would take to cause of the deaths of billions simply for personal power. Thats cartoon supervilliany.

C) 'UNLIMITED POWER!' remains the single worst motivation ever concieved for a villain (Not attacking Palps personally here. Its stupid whenever its done.). Its lazy and stupid. It requires no explanation, no deeper meaning, no character explanatio. He's evil because he wants power. You might as well say his motivation is just cuz.



No ones forcing you to reply.

I was waiting for something,

N.
If you seriously believe that then you're a blind fool.

^ Which you graciously provided right here.



You're not interested in a discussion and you're not interested in a debate. You're not willing to see potential merits in the opposition, you're not willing to see anything other than criticism in what you don't like. The reality is that you and you alone in this conflict are the fanboy, incapable of seeing anything other than what you want to: And it is painfully evident that you want to see the Joker being loved by all. Your love for the character is so deep that resistance clearly frustrates you, as you slip from being a good-natured joker (lulz) into a rather angry, rabid zealot and it is the reason why I don't take you seriously in this. Perhaps it's time to take remove your sweat-and-semen stained Joker T-shirt, the powder from your face, and have a doctor take a look at the tears you doubtlessly administered on the corners of your lips in an effort to emulate your precious, beloved idol. My work here is done.

Basically watch this and shut up.

N.
Basically watch this and shut up.

You don't need to try to convince me that The Dark Knight is a great movie or that the Joker is a great villain, N. As I made it very clear from day one, neither of these are in doubt.

In addition to being an extraordinarily astute judge of character, I'm capable of liking both Star Wars and The Dark Knight, Christopher Nolan and George Lucas, the Joker and Palpatine.

Try not to faint.

Originally posted by RagingBoner
I was waiting for something,



^ Which you graciously provided right here.

Not really. Saying the opposition is wrong is something that occurs in every debate. I fail to see how that it such a terrible thing to say that you're disgusted into silence. And I stick by my assertion. I've pointed out to you the depth in his character and you just ignored it. You're either hopelessly biased or willfully ignorant at this point.



Clearly wrong or I would not be engaging you in a debate.



Simply because I don't see anything othe than criticism for the character. He's a bad character. And all your arguments about his potentail merits are simply stretching attempted to justify your irrational love for the bad character that is Palpatine.

I've explained why he's a bad character already btw, so I'm not merely being biased. I genuinely believe and will support the belief that he's a terrible character.



Clearly not the case. I'm willing to back up why I love the character and why he succeeds in having depth and complex motivations. You're the one brushing off my arguments. I make a post explaining his character and depth and your response is simply 'yeah yeah shut up.' Thats why I'm getting somewhat angry with you. Because you're treating me like a child and I do not appreciate that level of disrespect.

Originally posted by RagingBoner
You don't need to try to convince me that The Dark Knight is a great movie or that the Joker is a great villain, N. As I made it very clear from day one, neither of these are in doubt.

In addition to being an extraordinarily astute judge of character, I'm capable of liking both Star Wars and The Dark Knight, Christopher Nolan and George Lucas, the Joker and Palpatine.

Try not to faint.

O RLY?

Originally posted by RagingBoner
Yeah, well you also think the Joker is complex.

N.
Not really. Saying the opposition is wrong is something that occurs in every debate.

Blax and I tried to explain to you that what you're seeking to assert cannot be objectively proven or concluded. But apparently your mind isn't as flexible you've proven the Joker's bumhole to be, because you're just not getting it. There is no right or wrong here when it comes to either Palpatine or the Joker being a superior character.





^ Because this isn't you disagreeing with the conclusion, this is you telling me I'm a fool for not agreeing with you. There's a critical difference, sweetheart.



You're not debating, you're ranting. If you were debating, you'd be interested in the other's side and willing to open your mind.



You can spew irrational love all you want and you can level accusations of fanboyism all you like; only one of us is visibly distraught and refuses to see the merits of the other side. Care to take a gander at which one of us that is?



I'm treating you like a child because you're acting like one and it's tragically hilarious. Only a child behaves in such a manner: NO UR STUPID FOR NOT AGREEING WITH ME ON A SUBJECTIVE ISSUE AND BOWING BEFORE THE GREAT NOLAN'S FEET LETS GO CARESS THE MAJESTIC SOIL COVERING HEATH LEDGER'S CARCASS-

Why would I want to debate it with you?

N.
O RLY?

YARLY

Originally posted by RagingBoner
Blax and I tried to explain to you that what you're seeking to assert cannot be objectively proven or concluded. But apparently your mind isn't as flexible you've proven the Joker's bumhole to be, because you're just not getting it. There is no right or wrong here when it comes to either Palpatine or the Joker being a superior character.

Which would be why am I solely trying to prove to you his depth as a character based upon his role in the movie, his motivations etc. I don't give a damn about your opinion. But factors such as character motivations, his actions in the plot and how they relate to him as a character are objective. Unless you're planning on ignoring them too.



Actually I'm calling you a fool for ignoring every word I'm saying and showing to you.




I am interested in the other sides arguments, I would love to have a serious critical discussion with you on the topic. Which is why I'm ragging on you for just one finger saluting me and pissing on me every chance you get.



You havn't offered any merits as of yet. What exactly am I refusing to see here?



I really don't know. Why are you still talking to me if all you're going to do is insult me?

The Joker is not supposed to have a clear motivation. He parodies this idea that he can easily be explained with a simple motivation or backstory. That's part of what makes the Joker unique.

But at the risk of sounding like the wannabe mod, back on topic?

K I'll entertain

Originally posted by Fortitude
1. Why didn't Padme's security detect the bomb that was so blatantly planted there? Or was it a missile?

If it was so blatantly obvious what was it? Honestly what do you see there?



What? How do you know Zam was watching her... And how would she see no that it was a decoy she killed immediatly afterwards? And where is this missle you speak off?



She was just "blown up" and dying, someyhing tells me she might not be thinking straight.



The window seems to be some sorta "force field" not glass.



By sending bugs she can do it quietly without others noticing (also Jango told her to use them). Simple really. As for Padme sleeping next to the window... I remind you it's not made of glass plus she had two Jedi who have a "danger sense" allowing them to know when she is in danger be it from bugs or gunfire.



He was scanning where he thought he heard the noise.



A guess. He is a Jedi who tracks criminals down regularily. Thus he would know how they typically act.



Why not? Less work for him.



Because Kenobi saw Zam's speeder and were in a speeder at the time. There wasn't one around when Jango flew off.



Maybe because he wanted the Jedi to get to Kamino. Or maybe because he didn't think it would be traceable, I mean the analysis droids were unable to place it.



Because he prefers it. Or it could be cover.



Because the internet is so trustworthy right? But the holonet isn't even in the movies so it's a moot point.



A little stupid but RB has a good answer for this.



Blinded by love.



Might have something to do with flying through an asteroid field. Anyway not so much a plot hole as a physics error.



Rockets=laser perhaps.

Then you should have no problem agreeing to certain terms, then.

This isn't a peace treaty RB. If you want to talk to me then we'll talk.

N.
This isn't a peace treaty RB. If you want to talk to me then we'll talk.

I'm uninterested in debating the issue with someone who has the self-control and behavioral consistency of a 7-year-old with cerebral palsy, which is pretty much how you've conducted yourself. You want an open-minded discussion without insults from me, I want the same from you.

Or you can indulge your wounded pride, say no, and b1tch about me in the Video Game forum so more.

Then no.

N.
Then no.





haermm

Reported for being a sock.

Now that was just plain nasty.

Maybe it'll teach you not to be such a prick in the future.

I rather doubt it. Y SO SERIOUS?

Gee, I wonder.

N.
Gee, I wonder.

Well now if you don't know what's the matter, how am I expected to be sensitive? srug

http://i63.photobucket.com/albums/h153/jedipriestess/notagain-1.gif http://i63.photobucket.com/albums/h153/jedipriestess/notagain-1.gif http://i63.photobucket.com/albums/h153/jedipriestess/notagain-1.gif for gods sake, dont you people have lives off the computer? Dumbest damn conversation ever.

Jah, sorry for that. Personal crap.

Interesting user-name up there. lol

Excellent observations.

A few comments-

Originally posted by Fortitude
4. Why did Padme sleep next to the window? She wants to use herself as bait, but clearly wants to live too. She survived only because Zam was an idiot and decided to send slow moving bugs through a window instead of just parking her speeder near Padme's apartment and shooting her dead.

Exactly. Zam even has a sniper rifle for pity's sake.

Originally posted by Fortitude
6. How did Obi Wan know that she went in there to run, not to hide?

True. Heck, for all he knew maybe she planned to sneak out through a back door.

Originally posted by Fortitude
7. Why would Jango Fett get hired to do something, only to hire someone else to do it?

That seemed odd to me too.

Originally posted by Fortitude
13. Why does Padme have no problem with Anakin committing mass genocide?

Yeah that's one of my biggest problems with this movie.

Oh I see Nephtys and RagingBoner are having some kind of love affair on here... When's the wedding?

Originally posted by ares834
She was just "blown up" and dying, someyhing tells me she might not be thinking straight.

That I admit is fair enough.

Originally posted by ares834
The window seems to be some sorta "force field" not glass.

Based on what? See below

Originally posted by ares834
As for Padme sleeping next to the window... I remind you it's not made of glass

Did you just blink and miss the parts where-

A) Zam's droid cuts a hole in the window.

B) The window SHATTERS when Kenobi leaps through it.

So yes, the windows are made of glass

Originally posted by ares834
A guess. He is a Jedi who tracks criminals down regularily. Thus he would know how they typically act.

Except that he doesn't say it's a guess. He says it as if he knows it as a fact.

Originally posted by ares834
Why not? Less work for him.

Because it also means he has to share the money.

Not to mention why would a bounty hunter be hired to kill a senator? A bounty hunter is not an assassin; a bounty hunter's job is to catch bail jumpers.

Originally posted by ares834
Blinded by love.

Besides the fact that she never displays any sense of attraction or connection towards him thrughout the movie (indeed she seems disgusted by Anakin more than anything else), not being concerned at all by the fact that he slaughtered an entire tribe, including innocent women and children, and displayed no remorse at all, crosses the line from legitimate "blinded by love" (like a woman staying with an abusive spouse) to making Padme look almost like a brainwashed cultist.


Originally posted by ares834
Rockets=laser perhaps.

What?

A laser is a beam of light. A rocket is a solid object propelled by a chemical fuel. How, by any stretch of the imagination, are they supposed to be the same thing?

That's like saying

chalk=cheese perhaps.

Originally posted by chilled monkey
Did you just blink and miss the parts where-

A) Zam's droid cuts a hole in the window.

B) The window SHATTERS when Kenobi leaps through it.

So yes, the windows are made of glass

True. However, the droid does not cut a holw in the glass it somehow seperates it with the light. Plus it still doesn't change the fact




Big deal. I ofen say a guess of mine without saying its a guess. But if you don't like that explenation than he uses the force. Vader does the same thing in ESB when he says that the Rebels are on Hoth.




So what? The guy is rich and he doesn't want to get his hands dirty messing with Jedi. Really it's not hard to explain. Assassin Guilds opperated the same way.



Simple. Bounty Hunters operate diffrently in SW than they do in real life.




Did you watch the same movie? Did you miss all the scenes on Naboo (I don't blame you if you did)? It's clear that she is attracted to him.





I was talking about "slang" in Star Wars. For example, people often call blaster bolts "lasers" in SW despite the fact that they aren't. The Clone could have easily meant ammunition when he was saying rockets.

Originally posted by ares834
True. However, the droid does not cut a holw in the glass it somehow seperates it with the light. Plus it still doesn't change the fact


Actually, whether or not the window was shielded is a red herring. Even if the window was, the droid should still have simply shot Padme through the window after it stripped the shielding. And if it failed, it could have self destructed or have gone off somewhere random instead of leading back to its master.



It's a stupid guess. Zam could have gone in there through a secret escape route, or she could have buddies in there to help her.



Then why would Tyrannus bother hiring somebody that's just going to hire (presumably spending far, far less, since Jango had to make a profit) another underling to do his work? Jango hardly seems like the lazy man to me, and Dooku hardly seems like an idiot.



Yeah, apparently, they're so stupid that they can't just shoot a ****ing missile at the Senator's room.



Attracted, yes. That doesn't make it realistic or sympathetic at all.



There is a very clear reason why somebody would describe a blaster as a laser. There is no reason why somebody would describe a laser as a rocket, especially since there is a very important differentiation in the military, and you can't really run out of lasers, can you?

Honestly I'm not even going to bother responding... I have lost all respect for Lucas and plan to not defend him any longer.

Sow hen's the wedding?

The butthurt is strong with this thread.

And all the story relevance stuff I mentioned covers about 10-15 minutes in total of what we saw in the prequels, and were either superfical, forced or rushed in execution.

Yes, I agree. That is why I don't really get it? How can one fumble the ball on the crucial story elements?

Originally posted by queeq
Yes, I agree. That is why I don't really get it? How can one fumble the ball on the crucial story elements?

well george lucas managed it, only he can answer your question fully.

But it touches on my point that the prequels were written and directed by an accountant, a business man, who's looking to superficially attract as many movie goers as possible, without going into the emotional depths and care of story and character.
That's also another reason why I think Attack of the Clones is the worst in the series, cause it looks like a cheaply made film.

But probably the worst thing about Attack of the Clones, is that (More than the other two prequels) it is written in complete reverse to the cinematic rule of "Show, don't tell". There's too many things we're expected to believe because we're told it's true, without emotionally connecting with it. It's what I said in an earlier thread about Anakin's relationships with Obi-Won and Padme. Basically George saying "I don't how to write real dialogue or characters relationships and development so you're just gonna have to take my word that it's true" and there's other elements with regards to the Politics, the Jedi, and the Sith, which are in the film that we're expected to know about without it being explained to us.
Sloppy, lazy, emotionless and rather patronizing writing.

I say probably the worst, but there's so many things massively wrong in the film that i'd end up making a huge list.

Which'd be as long as the movie itself. hehehe

Originally posted by queeq
Which'd be as long as the movie itself. hehehe

Yeah, n Possibly longer lol

I stand by when I say that the only people who like this film are people who just like flashy colours n effects on the screen, lightsaber fanboys, or really young kids.

I think, If you're older than 10, to get through this film with any enjoyment you have to turn your brain off or take hallucinogenic substances, as well as fast forwarding past the Anakin and Padme dialogue scenes.