Since the bandwagon for this has appeared...

[Captain Cadaver]

Why do you think media is so obsessed with subverting expectations despite how poorly it worked with last jedi and the last of faggotry 2?

Probably a case of having not learned their lesson, considering how quickly creators are these days to blame the fans rather than their own capabilities. This is especially true of both of these examples where Disney and Naughty Dogs called anyone going against them as "toxic".

So how was the second Death Star built within such a quick timespan? We see a full blueprint in AotC so it couldn’t have been because of planning. Was the second Death Star being built alongside the first or something?

It's generally a lot easier to build a replica after the prototype. The fact that the Empire had also nearly destroyed the Rebellion would make gathering necessary resources or converting existing ones without weakening their military far easier. On top of that, we aren't given evidence of the second Death Star being as powerful as the original when it wasn't complete yet and the most we saw its laser capable of was destroying some fighters and cruisers, not to mention Palpatine was using it as bait for the Rebellion rather than his ace in the hole.

But literally nothing important happens. Had Vader arrested them entering Bespin he would have succeeded all the same.

It's still something very out of character for Vader to wait about so long with the entire film presenting him as wanting quick and efficient results, therefore still being a noticeable flaw.

In fact, wasn’t Vader using them as bait for Luke? That justifies his waiting. Even if he had no reason to, it’s really as relevant as what hairstyle Leia was sporting at the time.

He couldn't even sense Luke on Dagobah, so he'd have no idea how long it'd take. Moreover, if wanting to lure Luke out through sensing what his friends were going through, that adds even more incentive to capture them immediately and simply prolong their imprisonment.

 

[Fantastische Hure]

wot do u think of this music (if u can & want to answer)?

Spoiler

 

[GreatSaiyaman123]

Do you think Clone Wars should be watched on release or chronological order?

I won't start watching it until you show me the way

 

[Captain Cadaver]

wot do u think of this music (if u can & want to answer)?

Spoiler

The more electronic aspects of it give it a unique identity from prior series in the franchise to make it stand out and work well in the more technology-focused era of 5Ds, with it presenting a good balance between lighter and more serious tones.

Do you think Clone Wars should be watched on release or chronological order?

I won't start watching it until you show me the way

Chronological if possible, but the lazy method of the release order is fine seeing as how it won't be too difficult to piece the continuity together.

 

[Papasmurf]

Which are the Star Wars movies worth watching? I know everything after Disney got the rights to the franchise has been trash, but I'm thinking about getting into the franchise over summer break and would like some recommendations.

 

[GreatSaiyaman123]

Would you say Zam Wessel shooting that drone instead of Obi-Wan is a plothole?

 

[Captain Cadaver]

Which are the Star Wars movies worth watching? I know everything after Disney got the rights to the franchise has been trash, but I'm thinking about getting into the franchise over summer break and would like some recommendations.

The first 6 in numbered order are the only ones worth watching (as well as maybe the movie for The Clone Wars as an intro to the series). Other than that, the franchise is worth exploring more so through expanded material such as The Clone Wars tv series, video games like Knights of the Old Republic, etc.

Would you say Zam Wessel shooting that drone instead of Obi-Wan is a plothole?

No. That would only be the case if assuming Zam was aiming for the drone, which needn't be the case on a fast target when sniping wasn't suggested to be her forte as a bounty hunter compared to more covert methods of assassination.

 

[Ultimate Cell]

Do you drive?

 

[GreatSaiyaman123]

Thoughts on 12 Angry Men?

 

[Papasmurf]

Actor Yusuke Iseya admits to possessing cannabis, police say

During a search, the police allegedly found four bags containing 20.3 grams of cannabis in a desk drawer with a street value of around u00a5120,000.

www.japantimes.co.jp

Apparently the reason Aoshi won't be in the Jinchu arc movie adaptation is because his actor (who also played Jotaro in the Part 4 adaptation, and Rikiishi in the Ashita no Joe adaptation) was arrested and convicted of cannabis use. Why do you think they couldn't have just let him out on bail to take part in the film? The fact that Misao will be in the film but the much more power relevant Aoshi won't is pretty damaging in regards to the film's integrity and faithfulness to the original manga.

 

[Captain Cadaver]

Do you drive?

Not currently.

Thoughts on 12 Angry Men?

The film's a masterpiece in deductive reasoning and critical thinking with how it essentially revolves around looking at evidence logically and breaking down the validity of a case, holding incredible importance as both an advice to creators on the quality of a script and in the wider perspective of not being willing to look at things from first impressions or at the surface level. Practically a perfect film and one which's importance to cinema can't be overlooked. 10/10.

Actor Yusuke Iseya admits to possessing cannabis, police say

During a search, the police allegedly found four bags containing 20.3 grams of cannabis in a desk drawer with a street value of around u00a5120,000.

www.japantimes.co.jp

Apparently the reason Aoshi won't be in the Jinchu arc movie adaptation is because his actor (who also played Jotaro in the Part 4 adaptation, and Rikiishi in the Ashita no Joe adaptation) was arrested and convicted of cannabis use. Why do you think they couldn't have just let him out on bail to take part in the film? The fact that Misao will be in the film but the much more power relevant Aoshi won't is pretty damaging in regards to the film's integrity and faithfulness to the original manga.

Unfortunately, it isn't really something that could be treat with leniency as Japan's anti-drug laws are notoriously strict (eg. foreigners with drugs being deported regardless of circumstances). I agree that it's pretty inconsistent when considering the other scandal related to Kenshin with Japanese law considering holding cp and, thereby, allowing that industry to prosper being treat as less damaging than drug use which is absurd, though I can the film as still working without Aoshi as his role in the Jinchu Arc was one that could be easily filled and it's not as though the previous films didn't take liberties when it came to manga faithfulness (eg. the entirety of the first film and most of the third act of the third).

 

[Papasmurf]

I'm hoping they at least give some form of excuse as to why Aoshi isn't with Misao, like the "he's off on a mission somewhere" excuse Watsuki gave for Aoshi's absence in the Hokkaido-hen cashgrab series. Aoshi's rivalry with Kenshin for the title of the strongest was better than Kenshin's rivalries with Saito or Enishi (although the latter is debatable as to whether Enishi is a true rival or a foil/archenemy) imo, and it is a shame that it's sidelined so much in the live action version.

 

[GreatSaiyaman123]

The film's a masterpiece in deductive reasoning and critical thinking with how it essentially revolves around looking at evidence logically and breaking down the validity of a case, holding incredible importance as both an advice to creators on the quality of a script and in the wider perspective of not being willing to look at things from first impressions or at the surface level. Practically a perfect film and one which's importance to cinema can't be overlooked. 10/10.

A vert accurate depiction of power level debates, isn’t it?

 

[Captain Cadaver]

Only in the case of breaking down how pointless power level/gap debates are .

 

[Keedounan]

Are there some cases in which you disagreed with the critical reception of a work? Why do you think it is?

 

[Papasmurf]

If you have the time this weekend, can you comment on the DBGT Maximum chapters you haven't read? Curious to know your opinions on the past 3 chapters.

 

[Captain Cadaver]

Are there some cases in which you disagreed with the critical reception of a work? Why do you think it is?

The one that comes to mind immediately are the Star Wars prequel trilogy. Most of the critical responses either completely miss the point of what Lucas was going for (particularly when complaining about his style of dialogue and acting) or parrot common complaints that really just amount to not paying attention to what's conveyed pretty clearly (eg. complaining about The Phantom Menace's focus on politics despite how essential it was to the plot and raw political discussion only making up 3 minutes at most of a 122 minute film, or complaints midichlorians demystify the Force when they aren't the Force itself and only offer a concise explanation to the power system, not to mention the double standard of these people also complaining about Anakin's virgin birth when that offers even more mystification of the Force). In the case of audience outcry at the time, a lot of it also has to do with older fans having built up a perception of what the series was from their headcanon and being disappointed they didn't get what they wanted, rather than analysing if what was presented was consistent with both itself and what the original trilogy had established.
Sticking on the focus of Star Wars as an example and moving to the opposite end of the spectrum, you have many critics praising The Last Jedi despite how absolutely broken the film is with undeniable world-breaking plot holes, inconsistent and poorly written characters, an absolutely pointless and overly convenient side quest and what themes it tried to explore being handled in the most inconsistent manner. Despite that, critics rate it quite high with it being at a 90% reviewer score on Rotten Tomatoes. In this case, the divide between the critics and audience as well as the lack of attention to these flaws in the reviews show how most official "critics" can be easily bought to spin a narrative and avoid the genuine issues. It's not surprising when marketing a movie, especially one produced by a big corporation, requires positive press, but it does show how little value paid critics hold in modern times.

There are many other examples in which either the main critical response or the general consensus of the audience can be seen as wrong, but these two cases are prime examples of the different reasons as to why a work can either be perceived unfairly or be praised unnecessarily.

If you have the time this weekend, can you comment on the DBGT Maximum chapters you haven't read? Curious to know your opinions on the past 3 chapters.

I can try to read through the rest of Chapter 8 (think I'm about halfway through) today, but probably won't be able to get back to you on the other 2 until Monday as I'll be a bit busy tomorrow and possibly later today.

 

[Keedounan]

The one that comes to mind immediately are the Star Wars prequel trilogy. Most of the critical responses either completely miss the point of what Lucas was going for (particularly when complaining about his style of dialogue and acting) or parrot common complaints that really just amount to not paying attention to what's conveyed pretty clearly (eg. complaining about The Phantom Menace's focus on politics despite how essential it was to the plot and raw political discussion only making up 3 minutes at most of a 122 minute film, or complaints midichlorians demystify the Force when they aren't the Force itself and only offer a concise explanation to the power system, not to mention the double standard of these people also complaining about Anakin's virgin birth when that offers even more mystification of the Force). In the case of audience outcry at the time, a lot of it also has to do with older fans having built up a perception of what the series was from their headcanon and being disappointed they didn't get what they wanted, rather than analysing if what was presented was consistent with both itself and what the original trilogy had established.

That sounds awfully like people's (initial) reaction to The Last of Us' leaks. Many people's complaints were less about the internal consistency of the plot and the characters than it was about what they really wanted. The more I saw discussions around this game, the more I realized that plenty of people had a weird, idealized perception of some characters, and thus can't understand some of their decisions.

Another case I can think of is Breaking Bad. There's a shocking amount of people (though not necessarily the majority) who don't understand the point behind Walter White's character. He's seen more as the "badass criminal" than the borderline monster who seriously damages his family and everyone around him, fawning over everything he does or say instead. They even fail to see that his motivations were ultimately selfish, even though he has been given the opportunity to both pay for his treatment and a lucrative job that would help him support his family as early as the first season. Tellingly, Skyler is mostly hated for constantly opposing or arguing with him, even when her remarks are more than fair.

Sticking on the focus of Star Wars as an example and moving to the opposite end of the spectrum, you have many critics praising The Last Jedi despite how absolutely broken the film is with undeniable world-breaking plot holes, inconsistent and poorly written characters, an absolutely pointless and overly convenient side quest and what themes it tried to explore being handled in the most inconsistent manner. Despite that, critics rate it quite high with it being at a 90% reviewer score on Rotten Tomatoes. In this case, the divide between the critics and audience as well as the lack of attention to these flaws in the reviews show how most official "critics" can be easily bought to spin a narrative and avoid the genuine issues. It's not surprising when marketing a movie, especially one produced by a big corporation, requires positive press, but it does show how little value paid critics hold in modern times.

There are many other examples in which either the main critical response or the general consensus of the audience can be seen as wrong, but these two cases are prime examples of the different reasons as to why a work can either be perceived unfairly or be praised unnecessarily.

Indeed. And this is exactly why, more than anything else, making your own informed opinion of the works rather than looking at the critical response or general consensus, will get you further. One could end up being surprised at how many people can miss about the story or the characters. Sometimes, the right move is even questioning one's own understanding of them. Your reevaluation of Vegeta and Goku (particularly the latter, since I always saw Vegeta as the greatest) has shown me that.

By the way, do you actually believe critics are paid as often as people claim? It seems unlikely that one can bribe so many people without being noticed, and quite frankly, it appears to be a claim that comes up whenever a fan disagrees with positive critical reception.

 

[Papasmurf]

I can try to read through the rest of Chapter 8 (think I'm about halfway through) today, but probably won't be able to get back to you on the other 2 until Monday as I'll be a bit busy tomorrow and possibly later today.

I'll probably write another chapter today, so you'll have 3 chapters to catch up on Monday then. Not that I mind if you take your time.

 

[Captain Cadaver]

Tellingly, Skyler is mostly hated for constantly opposing or arguing with him, even when her remarks are more than fair.

In my experience, the hate for Skyler comes more from her blatant inconsistencies (eg. smoking while pregnant, suddenly being against Walt's goals in Season 5 despite being all on board in Season 4) and her generally bad nature towards him (the cheating quite early on and even some more demeaning attitudes towards Walt even back when he could be seen as innocent in the audience's eyes. That's not to say she's worse morally than Walt of course, but the show doesn't really present the ideas of her being a hypocritical character as well as some others. I see it as Gilligan trying to take inspiration from Carmela Soprano from The Sopranos being a hypocritical yet sympathetic housewife caught up in a life of crime, but doesn't quite reach the same heights due to Skyler's hypocrisy being less intrinsically linked to her background.

By the way, do you actually believe critics are paid as often as people claim? It seems unlikely that one can bribe so many people without being noticed, and quite frankly, it appears to be a claim that comes up whenever a fan disagrees with positive critical reception.

On the individual level, not extremely often. On the company level, however, there's clearly a need to fit an agenda when it comes to marketing and positive press and many of those that are highly praised by such critics sometimes without a valid critique. This is very noticeable when it comes to things such as how it ties into the Oscars (even leaving aside the embarrassment that was this year's award ceremony) with how certain film's are given high praise as long as they fit a certain narrative regardless of what genuine problems there is in the plot. A good example would be Black Panther, very notable when the Oscars have an obvious bias against superhero films when it comes to awards. The film has some very clear problems in its writing such as the world building for Wakanda having many problems, T'challa regressing a lot from Civil War and having nowhere near as strong a character arc, problems in Killmonger's plans, etc. to the point it's at worst a poorly written film and at best an average superhero flick, yet it got praised for such vague and contradictive reasoning as its themes on race (despite them only working through Wakandans being written as unrealistically benevolent compared to any real world nation given similar resources) and falsely advertised as finally having a superhero film that represents black identity (which, even leaving aside the obvious that the Blade trilogy have been around over a decade, the narrative spun by the Oscars is a pretty racist one in essentially saying black people need a black character to relate with, especially with the outrage they'd have if someone swapped the race to white in that statement ).
Moreover, these kind of treatment and reviews of films in placing themes and representation before more clearly quantifiable aspects such as writing, acting, direction, etc. is such a far cry from the Roger Ebert era that it's pretty clear the focus of most critics is to fit a certain viewpoint and going against it can lead to problems when it comes to one's job. This is definitively shown with how Cliff Bleszinsky was ostracised from Gears of War from 4 and onwards despite being one of the original members of the creation team due to his comments about how the new entries' focus on diversity and the mainstream over telling a coherent story, or how it was proven many of the Rotten Tomatoes positive ratings of The Last Jedi and Captain Marvel at the time of their respective releases were bots. Even for those not intentionally going along with it, the best faith explanation that can be given of a lot of modern critics is having been taught to prioritise on certain things whilst ignoring core aspects of reviewing from previous generations of film or having a narrow understanding of the film industry and its history in general.

I'll probably write another chapter today, so you'll have 3 chapters to catch up on Monday then. Not that I mind if you take your time.

Will probably be a lot longer than I expected in my response, but I'll get to it, eventually... .