ryboto
Sophomore
@ryboto
Posts: 776
Likes: 724
|
Post by ryboto on Mar 8, 2017 17:20:48 GMT
All the politics do is show you how Palpatine manipulated the Republic. It doesn't even take up all that much screen time! Sure, they represent a lull and to some a 'dull' moment in the films, but what percentage of the films take place in the senate? What percentage revolves around political discussion? People are keen to point out it had 'boring' politics as if that's all the trilogy ever shows you and as if that's all it's about. How do you know? Do you have some kind of breakdown of the screen time? and you can throw this "what percentage of the films take place in the senate?" right out the window. A scene doesn't have to take place in the senate for it to have revolved around politics. That's just a shaky argument. The entire plot of the TPM revolved around a political situation. The plot exists solely because of a political standoff. There are scenes in that movie and the next two that are nothing but dialogue about politics. Freakin' politics. Do you know the extent of this type of scene in the original trilogy? About three minutes in the first movie when the Imperial officers are sitting around the table talking about how the Emperor just disbanded the Senate. Here you go, all the scenes with Palpatine, 11:40, or approximately 8.6% of the total running time. These include non-political scenes, so for pure politics from Palpatine alone, the number drops. How many more political scenes exist without Palpatine present? Enough to bump that above 10%? Why is this so awful to you? It's how Palpatine came to power. Maybe it undermines the pace. It's definitely different than just having Rebels fight a Galactic Empire, but it's not out to repeat the same tropes(unlike the ST).
|
|
|
Post by kuatorises on Mar 8, 2017 19:25:21 GMT
How do you know? Do you have some kind of breakdown of the screen time? and you can throw this "what percentage of the films take place in the senate?" right out the window. A scene doesn't have to take place in the senate for it to have revolved around politics. That's just a shaky argument. The entire plot of the TPM revolved around a political situation. The plot exists solely because of a political standoff. There are scenes in that movie and the next two that are nothing but dialogue about politics. Freakin' politics. Do you know the extent of this type of scene in the original trilogy? About three minutes in the first movie when the Imperial officers are sitting around the table talking about how the Emperor just disbanded the Senate. Here you go, all the scenes with Palpatine, 11:40, or approximately 8.6% of the total running time. These include non-political scenes, so for pure politics from Palpatine alone, the number drops. How many more political scenes exist without Palpatine present? Enough to bump that above 10%? Why is this so awful to you? It's how Palpatine came to power. Maybe it undermines the pace. It's definitely different than just having Rebels fight a Galactic Empire, but it's not out to repeat the same tropes(unlike the ST). The scenes with Palpatine aren't the only ones that involved politics, LOL. Come on. We both know that. You even said it. And I am not sure why you were throwing out percentages. I never said it made up most of the movie, I just said that there was too much of it. Why is this awful to me? It's boring. It's out of place in this franchise. Its execution is flat and uninteresting. This is not what anyone wanted to see when they went to the theater in 1999 and saw the franchise return to the big screen for the first time in 16 years. And I say this as someone who unabashedly thinks TPM is by far and away the best of that trilogy.
|
|
ryboto
Sophomore
@ryboto
Posts: 776
Likes: 724
|
Post by ryboto on Mar 8, 2017 19:55:46 GMT
The scenes with Palpatine aren't the only ones that involved politics, LOL. Come on. We both know that. You even said it. And I am not sure why you were throwing out percentages. I never said it made up most of the movie, I just said that there was too much of it. Why is this awful to me? It's boring. It's out of place in this franchise. Its execution is flat and uninteresting. This is not what anyone wanted to see when they went to the theater in 1999 and saw the franchise return to the big screen for the first time in 16 years. And I say this as someone who unabashedly thinks TPM is by far and away the best of that trilogy. I can't recall though, and I've seen the film recently, how many more scenes were there without Palp that were political? Maybe 1 on Naboo?? Honestly, look at the percentage. It's less than 10% of the movie. 10 minutes is too much out of 136? Why fixate on it if that's the case? Additionally, if every movie was about what you want to see, then we'd have some pretty uninteresting movies, right? Lucas owned the franchise. This was the story he wanted to tell. It's the narrative of Palpatine rising to power. I think the arc is fantastic. Specifics of the execution get a bit ugly, and hard to watch at times, sure. The visual direction and character driven plot work much better for me than the action/plot driven thing JJ created.
|
|
shinnickneth
Junior Member
@shinnickneth
Posts: 2,514
Likes: 1,782
|
Post by shinnickneth on Mar 8, 2017 21:59:09 GMT
In his belly you will find a new definition of pain and suffering as you are slowly digested over a thousand years.
|
|
|
Post by Hauntedknight87 on Mar 8, 2017 22:14:35 GMT
In his belly you will find a new definition of pain and suffering as you are slowly digested over a thousand years.
|
|
|
Post by Nightman on Mar 9, 2017 23:13:25 GMT
Maybe it's time they consider not uniting in a giant one galaxy government, and instead let planets/solar systems govern themselves, forming alliances as necessary.
This would also mean that script may have either been fake or heavily changed. Good.
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Mar 10, 2017 5:23:53 GMT
Maybe it's time they consider not uniting in a giant one galaxy government, and instead let planets/solar systems govern themselves, forming alliances as necessary. This would also mean that script may have either been fake or heavily changed. Good. SYSTEMS' RIGHTS!
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Mar 10, 2017 5:27:35 GMT
The scenes with Palpatine aren't the only ones that involved politics, LOL. Come on. We both know that. You even said it. And I am not sure why you were throwing out percentages. I never said it made up most of the movie, I just said that there was too much of it. Why is this awful to me? It's boring. It's out of place in this franchise. Its execution is flat and uninteresting. This is not what anyone wanted to see when they went to the theater in 1999 and saw the franchise return to the big screen for the first time in 16 years. And I say this as someone who unabashedly thinks TPM is by far and away the best of that trilogy. I can't recall though, and I've seen the film recently, how many more scenes were there without Palp that were political? Maybe 1 on Naboo?? Honestly, look at the percentage. It's less than 10% of the movie. 10 minutes is too much out of 136? Why fixate on it if that's the case? Additionally, if every movie was about what you want to see, then we'd have some pretty uninteresting movies, right? Lucas owned the franchise. This was the story he wanted to tell. It's the narrative of Palpatine rising to power. I think the arc is fantastic. Specifics of the execution get a bit ugly, and hard to watch at times, sure. The visual direction and character driven plot work much better for me than the action/plot driven thing JJ created.
|
|