Since the bandwagon for this has appeared...

[Gin]

Do you consider these 5 episodes to be the worst of South Park?(not my top 5 really)

Mr.Garrison’s Fancy New Vagina
Stanley’s Cup
I Should Have Never Gone Ziplining
A Million Little Fibers
Tweek X Craig

 

[Captain Cadaver]

Considering how much of a mess Season 20 was in it's unplanned 2nd half, the only one I'd say is worthy of being considered top 5 worst material would be the Ziplining episode, which is one of the only South Park episodes that I found boring and having zero rewatch value. As for whether I think the other episodes are bad...

Mr. Garrison's Fancy New Vagina is OK. It does have problems in being the start of the pointless Mrs. Garrison character arc that only served to make Garrison straight after several seasons and seeing footage of a penis getting mutilated is never good for a man to watch, but parts such as the Jewphin and the satire of pointing out the absurdity of plastic surgery and sex changes/transgenderism makes it a valuable episode, esepecially in the current society.

Stanley's Cup was alright. Not anything too good and doesn't have any rewatch value, but it at least shows it's worth by pointing out that not every underdog story is one of victory in reality.

A Million Little Fibers is one I actually like. It doesn't have any of the poignant satire of most episodes, but it serves as good absurdist humour/dumb fun and it was a nice change of pace to see an episode with the main 4 characters almost entirely absent.

Tweek X Craig is an episode I have some conflict in where my stance is on it. On one hand, forcing two characters to turn gay, much less two kids, is pretty cringe, yet it can be seen as a decent satire in how most media tends to normalise and force their liberal agendas on impressionable children and the part about Japan turning people gay through Yaoi was a good jab at the asinine nature of most Fujoshis. Overall, I'd probably place it closer on the dislike scale seeing as how the former notion of satire was already done far better in the Metrosexual episode.

 

[Six Trails]

What is your opinion on the Dragon Ball movies? More specifically, pre-Z movies.

 

[Captain Cadaver]

Most of them are just inferior versions of arcs in the series, so not really much to talk about. Legend of Shenron was a pretty bad as it's plot should've focused more on Pansy, yet she's thrown to the sidelines in a Kaioshit manner, not to mention Roshi's reasons as to not helping her or Oolong's for joining the gang being very weak. Sleeping Princess in Devil's Castle is one I didn't remember liking at all, but after reviewing it I found it to probably be the best of the original movie continuity trilogy as for it's inventive action and expanding on a small part of the series rather than rehashing it. Mystical Adventure was OK. I like the idea of the Budokai blending seemlessly into a RRA Arc equivalent and wish such had happened in the canon, plus Chaozu is more fleshed out here than in any other part of the series, yet it still isn't anything too good with Goku's power up coming out of nowhere and the segments with Arale lowering the tension to make Tao even more of a laughingstock than in the main series.
Finally, there's The Path to Power, which I'd say is a far better retelling than Legend of Shenron due to none of the characters acting too nonsensical and having some decent payoff in the main battle, even if Galu's rage boost was an asspull. As a tribute to the series, I'd say it did a better job than the other films with the combination of elements such as Bulma having her manga colour scheme or Goku's gi being a decent way to advertise GT without having a shameless tie-in.

Overall, whilst none of the Part 1 films are anything too great, I don't consider any of them to be completely worthless, making them on average far better than most DBZ films.

 

[GreatSaiyaman123]

Have you watched the Blackened Mantle?

 

[Captain Cadaver]

Yes. It was a well put together recut of the prequels and does fix a few of the dumb character moments such as Palpatine making it obvious of his Sith identity in the Darth Plagueis scene of the original, though I'd say Banditincorperated's rewrite of the prequels was far better as it wasn't hindered by making the best out of footage that still contained some flaws (ie. Grievous/Maul dying like a jobber either way and Dooku having no characterisation).

 

[GreatSaiyaman123]

I agree. Trying to reuse the original footage really limits the potential of the story. But why you think Grievous was taken out like a bitch?

As for Dooku's lack of characterisation, how you think Dooku's character could be improved but with him still being a fallen Jedi and leader of the Separatists?

Do you really think BanditIncorporated's version was that good? TPM and AotC were really good, but RotS was kind of poor besides Palpatine's storyline. Especially some pointless stuff like Anakin and Obi-Wan fighting together (OT Ben clearly has no hope Anakin could be turned) and the existence of a 3rd twin. I'm really looking forward to the possibility of that Vader vs Grievous movie.

 

[Captain Cadaver]

I agree. Trying to reuse the original footage really limits the potential of the story. But why you think Grievous was taken out like a bitch?

Considering this version of Grievous was previously Maul, seeing him be killed by a blaster makes his death a bigger act of incompetence than in the original.

As for Dooku's lack of characterisation, how you think Dooku's character could be improved but with him still being a fallen Jedi and leader of the Separatists?

So much as adding in a few more details from the EU would've gone a long way. For instance, inserting more about how pivotal Qui-Gon's death was and have him mention he may have stayed to reform the Jedi Order from within if the one who could help him were still alive, or some frustration at how the Council didn't send him to Naboo with Qui-Gon.

Do you really think BanditIncorporated's version was that good? TPM and AotC were really good, but RotS was kind of poor besides Palpatine's storyline. Especially some pointless stuff like Anakin and Obi-Wan fighting together (OT Ben clearly has no hope Anakin could be turned) and the existence of a 3rd twin. I'm really looking forward to the possibility of that Vader vs Grievous movie.

The character development he had for Talon and Maul, as well as the great twist of Windu's brother's heel turn were superb and the movie earns extra points for being a logical continuation of Episode II.
As for the Vader and Obi-Wan team-up, that can be justified by the 19 year gap between RotS and the OT. It makes far more sense for Vader's descent and solidification in the Dark Side to be a slow progression over several years, especially after the assumed death of his wife and children and Tarkin's advice after the team up. It's also fairly consistent with their dialogue in the original, seeing as how Vader's line of being the learner in their last meeting and Obi-Wan pointing out his gradual increase in mechanical parts as a lack of his humanity suggest their previous meeting as being nowhere near as damaging as on Mustafar, nor a sudden change after one instance.
The part about a third twin was weird and did seem unnecessary, though I'm willing to see what BI does with it in the future before calling it out as cheap, especially if he decides to do a much needed rewrite of the sequel trilogy to make Rey far less of an illogically overpowered Mary Sue.

 

[GreatSaiyaman123]

I think Vader's statement about being the learner before leans more towards a battle happening than a team up, given how he's saying that right before fighting Ben. Like, last time he got bested by Kenobi because he was still learning, but know it's Kenobi's turn to lose as Vader is the master know.

When did Obi Wan imply it was a gradual change? IIRC he just said that "He's more machine than man know", what actually implies Anakin had parts of his body replaced, what goes against what BI had on his story. I definitely think a final duel like the Mustafar one is how their last meeting went like.

I quite doubt we will ever see what BI has for the 19 years timeskip, as it's been about 2 years since he released RotS and said he would do an anthology film.


Which prequel villian do you think was the most underused on the movies? Maul, Grievous or Dooku?

 

[Captain Cadaver]

I think Vader's statement about being the learner before leans more towards a battle happening than a team up, given how he's saying that right before fighting Ben. Like, last time he got bested by Kenobi because he was still learning, but know it's Kenobi's turn to lose as Vader is the master know.

Whilst that makes sense, I don't see it as a necessary plot point. After all, the wording of "When I left you" sounds far less conflict-heavy than what the prequels show, in which "When we last fought" would make it a far more solid plot point.

When did Obi Wan imply it was a gradual change? IIRC he just said that "He's more machine than man know", what actually implies Anakin had parts of his body replaced, what goes against what BI had on his story.

Exactly. Obi-Wan's statement would imply Vader didn't become fully engrossed in darkness until he became primarily cyborg, and this happening gradually over a series of conflicts spanning almost two decades is far more believable and well paced than it happening all at once.

Which prequel villian do you think was the most underused on the movies? Maul, Grievous or Dooku?

That's a difficult question. I'd probably say Maul due to the fact that the other two at least presented some personality movie-wise. For the sake of making things more interesting, I'll exclude Maul due to his development in other areas of canon to decide which out of Dooku and Grievous ranks at the bottom.
In that scenario, I'd say Grievous. Not only is this assumed Jedi killer being taken out by a blaster due to dropping his guard highly anticlimactic and disappointing, but his performance overall was wasted entirely. At least Dooku had some cool moments in wrecking Anakin and Obi-Wan (twice for the latter) and taking on Yoda without getting stomped, as well as having some intrigue to him due to his complete allegiance to Sidious being debatable. Grievous on the other hand loses two hands seconds after his only lightsaber duel finishes, thus losing the coolest aspect of his design, and overall acts like an incompetent leader after Dooku's death. Not only does he let his pride get in the way when facing Kenobi and suffer because of it, but he sees nothing wrong with sending all the Separatist leaders to one planet for them to be sitting ducks. It also doesn't help that prior to the release of RotS, the 2003 Clone Wars series hyped him up as some unstoppable beast on par with top tier Jedi, yet the movie treats him as pretty expendable.

 

[GreatSaiyaman123]

Whilst that makes sense, I don't see it as a necessary plot point. After all, the wording of "When I left you" sounds far less conflict-heavy than what the prequels show, in which "When we last fought" would make it a far more solid plot point.

While that certainly is possible, i still think Vader refering to a duel is better, given how he's saying this right before fighting Ben. It's like he's coming full circle know, starting with Kenobi defeating Vader only for Vader to become stronger and ending with Vader killing Kenobi, but only for Kenobi to get stronger.

Exactly. Obi-Wan's statement would imply Vader didn't become fully engrossed in darkness until he became primarily cyborg, and this happening gradually over a series of conflicts spanning almost two decades is far more believable and well paced than it happening all at once.

But by the end of RotS Vader wasn't really fully embraced on the Dark Side either. Sure, he did some sick stuff to save Padmé, but he didn't really like the Dark Side considering it wasn't enough to save Padmé, which was the reason he joined in the first place. He learned to enjoy it through the years.

I think the Prequels would've went better if Anakin actually managed to save Padmé (Making him really being seduced by the Dark Side, not tricked into it and making sense with Leia's statement of remembering her mother) but going too deep into it and leaving the Order to join the Sith and the Empire.

That's a difficult question. I'd probably say Maul due to the fact that the other two at least presented some personality movie-wise. For the sake of making things more interesting, I'll exclude Maul due to his development in other areas of canon to decide which out of Dooku and Grievous ranks at the bottom.
In that scenario, I'd say Grievous. Not only is this assumed Jedi killer being taken out by a blaster due to dropping his guard highly anticlimactic and disappointing, but his performance overall was wasted entirely. At least Dooku had some cool moments in wrecking Anakin and Obi-Wan (twice for the latter) and taking on Yoda without getting stomped, as well as having some intrigue to him due to his complete allegiance to Sidious being debatable. Grievous on the other hand loses two hands seconds after his only lightsaber duel finishes, thus losing the coolest aspect of his design, and overall acts like an incompetent leader after Dooku's death. Not only does he let his pride get in the way when facing Kenobi and suffer because of it, but he sees nothing wrong with sending all the Separatist leaders to one planet for them to be sitting ducks. It also doesn't help that prior to the release of RotS, the 2003 Clone Wars series hyped him up as some unstoppable beast on par with top tier Jedi, yet the movie treats him as pretty expendable.

I agree. The cartoons introduce him as a fucking beast, but he's like a bitch on the movies. His fight with Kenobi is him in a nutshell: He's introduced as a menacing foe (That scene with him slowly walking to Kenobi while spinning the lightsabers) only for him to become fodder (Kenobi instantly cuts two of his arms and makes him run away).

Btw, why you think Grievous being killed by a blaster was poor? It's not like it was a random shot, Obi-Wan opened that whole on his chest and shot into Grievous's heart. It's not like Grievous left his guard down, he was about to kill Kenobi when he was shot.

 

[Captain Cadaver]

Btw, why you think Grievous being killed by a blaster was poor? It's not like it was a random shot, Obi-Wan opened that whole on his chest and shot into Grievous's heart. It's not like Grievous left his guard down, he was about to kill Kenobi when he was shot.

The way in which he readied his strike left him completely open when the logical action would be to jab forward and should've been far more cautious with his opened chest for someone with a reputation for running when at a disadvantage. Highly incompetent when he should've been aware his blaster was still in the vicinity and pretty uninspired when considering the way he was defeated was for similar reasons that Maul lost in TPM.

 

[GreatSaiyaman123]

Well, at least The Blackened Mantle explains Grievous's incompetence by having him being the same guy who lost a fight with Obi-Wan even though he had the High Ground

 

[GreatSaiyaman123]

I think i've asked this before, but just in case i'll ask it.

Which Clone Wars show did you like better? The 2003 one or the 2008 one?

 

[Captain Cadaver]

2008 by a gigantic amount. It had a vast array of theme exploration, good character development of both new and returning characters and really helped flesh out the setting and it's history.
2003 was just mindless action with very little actual story beyond a series of battles that didn't really amount to anything.

 

[Gin]

Have you played Persona 5?

 

[GreatSaiyaman123]

CC something i happened to came across with about the circumstances of when Anakin/Vader left Obi-Wan... The RotJ novelization has Obi-Wan telling Luke that he and Vader last saw each other while fighting over a Volcano. Apparently, Lucas had the Mustafar duel in mind since 1983.

 

[Captain Cadaver]

Have you played Persona 5?

No.

CC something i happened to came across with about the circumstances of when Anakin/Vader left Obi-Wan... The RotJ novelization has Obi-Wan telling Luke that he and Vader last saw each other while fighting over a Volcano. Apparently, Lucas had the Mustafar duel in mind since 1983.

That is interesting. However, it's hard to say whether or not that was Lucas' idea or an original idea from Kahn Lucas decided to use. After all, Kenobi also states in the novel that Padme died when Luke/Leia were four.
The novel also makes it clear that being enveloped in the Dark Side helped keep Vader alive, so by that point there was no conflict within him, suggesting his turn was in the original draft was still a rushed one.

 

[GreatSaiyaman123]

2008 by a gigantic amount. It had a vast array of theme exploration, good character development of both new and returning characters and really helped flesh out the setting and it's history.
2003 was just mindless action with very little actual story beyond a series of battles that didn't really amount to anything.

How would you rate both series?

That is interesting. However, it's hard to say whether or not that was Lucas' idea or an original idea from Kahn Lucas decided to use. After all, Kenobi also states in the novel that Padme died when Luke/Leia were four.
The novel also makes it clear that being enveloped in the Dark Side helped keep Vader alive, so by that point there was no conflict within him, suggesting his turn was in the original draft was still a rushed one.

I thought the novels after ANH where written by Lucas himself? Regardless, the novels do differ from the movies a bit, given on the same line he talks about Vader getting burn he also says Owen was his brother.

 

[Captain Cadaver]

How would you rate both series?

2003 Clone Wars - 4/10
2008 The Clone Wars - 7/10

I thought the novels after ANH where written by Lucas himself? Regardless, the novels do differ from the movies a bit, given on the same line he talks about Vader getting burn he also says Owen was his brother.

Lucas had creative control over certain areas of both the novelisations of the films and other EU works (eg. Cutting out Kahn's decisions to flesh out Leia's past in the RotJ novel, Telling Zahn not to make a race called the Sith in the Thrawn trilogy, etc.), but he left the majority of the work over to the authors who wrote them. It's hard to say what were ideas he had yet to plan out and which ones he found insignificant enough not to care about, given the pre-prequel EU has completely different stories for characters than the prequels (eg. Dark Force Rising implying Vader lost his organic right hand from the injuries sustained at the Battle of Yavin, Boba Fett having a completely different backstory prior to AotC, etc.)