Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
Really? because you have direct insight into Lucas' head and know what he does for money vs what he does simple because he wants to? I'll admit I have no more insight into his thoughts than you do, but I have the sense not to assume Inknow anything about the motives of someone I've never even met and who has the ability to act creativly vs financially since he and his family are no doubt set for life in terms of money.
Warboss Imbad Ironskull wrote:Really? because you have direct insight into Lucas' head and know what he does for money vs what he does simple because he wants to? I'll admit I have no more insight into his thoughts than you do, but I have the sense not to assume Inknow anything about the motives of someone I've never even met and who has the ability to act creativly vs financially since he and his family are no doubt set for life in terms of money.
So you admit you posted a load of bull. That's a start.
You don't need that much insight to see when someone is just being a money-grubber. Don't idolize him just because he's behind something you love - he knows he has a solid way of making money, no matter how low he sinks it. He might not need the money but that doesn't mean he will act creatively. Thinking so is rather naive.
anonymous @ best Warhammer Miniature wrote:i vote the choas dwarf lord as they are the greatest dwarfs n should get there own codex
Warboss Imbad Ironskull wrote:Really? because you have direct insight into Lucas' head and know what he does for money vs what he does simple because he wants to? I'll admit I have no more insight into his thoughts than you do, but I have the sense not to assume I know anything about the motives of someone I've never even met and who has the ability to act creativly vs financially since he and his family are no doubt set for life in terms of money.
So you admit you posted a load of bull. That's a start.
You don't need that much insight to see when someone is just being a money-grubber. Don't idolize him just because he's behind something you love - he knows he has a solid way of making money, no matter how low he sinks it. He might not need the money but that doesn't mean he will act creatively. Thinking so is rather naive.
Ah but if you actually understood what I had said you'd realise that your post is just as much bull as mine because you do not know him any better then I do. Just like you don't know anything about me.
I'm sorry that having my own personal opinion makes me seem naive but the fact is neither you nor I have any idea what it's like to have that much money or to be in his situation. The second half of your post proves just what kind of a person you are and it makes me pitty you. I feel sorry for someone who can't help but think about the worse in someone when you have no more insight into them then your own personal opinion (which is not conclusive). You for example have proven that you are an
Ah but if you actually understood what I had said you'd realise that your post is just as much bull as mine because you do not know him any better then I do. Just like you don't know anything about me.
I'm sorry that having my own personal opinion makes me seem naive but the fact is neither you nor I have any idea what it's like to have that much money or to be in his situation. The second half of your post proves just what kind of a person you are and it makes me pitty you. I feel sorry for someone who can't help but think about the worse in someone when you have no more insight into them then your own personal opinion (which is not conclusive). You for example have proven that you are an
Oh do forgive me for being so bilious, but I salute thee for having discerned my personality from two posts alone. Yes, the curtain falls, I'm the Sith Lord Bane.
Denying that I don't know him any better than you do is more of the same crap. You can't assume that, since you don't know what I've read about him, what I've seen about him, and as such, you repeatedly fall under the same error, which is that we are working on the same knowledge base. I saw interviews, documentaries (I even read his wikipedia article ) and the guy just strikes me as someone who doesn't even know what he's doing there. He has zero talent for directing. He's like Miller, the guy who wrote the Dark Knight, 300, Sin City. Hell of a comic book writer - He did Spirit and the movie was terrible. But that doesn't make him a money-grubber, true. Putting the original trilogy for the third time in the movies with *bonus* threedee makes me think that. Was he even there when they added CGI to it?
That's as lame as throwing any movie with marginal extra content into the movies again. You know, like Avatar.
On a personal note, I didn't take offence on being called a , but save me the melodrama. Just because I don't idolize the guy who basked on the glory of releasing one of the greatest sci-fi trilogies and subsequently puts out nothing but crap doesn't make me a cold hearted bastard. Having his face for a dart board doesn't, either.
You wanna know who else was a sell out? (But this one was a real artist)
Salvador Dali
EDIT: I'm hands up for a KOTOR movie, too. If only
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2010/10/28 15:31:41
anonymous @ best Warhammer Miniature wrote:i vote the choas dwarf lord as they are the greatest dwarfs n should get there own codex
I loved the Thrawn books, I knew I liked Thrawn as soon as he gave the little speech to the star destroyer captain about 'I'm not vader, I'm not going to kill a capable officer because he does not succeed'.
Ah but if you actually understood what I had said you'd realise that your post is just as much bull as mine because you do not know him any better then I do. Just like you don't know anything about me.
I'm sorry that having my own personal opinion makes me seem naive but the fact is neither you nor I have any idea what it's like to have that much money or to be in his situation. The second half of your post proves just what kind of a person you are and it makes me pitty you. I feel sorry for someone who can't help but think about the worse in someone when you have no more insight into them then your own personal opinion (which is not conclusive). You for example have proven that you are an
Oh do forgive me for being so bilious, but I salute thee for having discerned my personality from two posts alone. Yes, the curtain falls, I'm the Sith Lord Bane.
Denying that I don't know him any better than you do is more of the same crap. You can't assume that, since you don't know what I've read about him, what I've seen about him, and as such, you repeatedly fall under the same error, which is that we are working on the same knowledge base. I saw interviews, documentaries (I even read his wikipedia article ) and the guy just strikes me as someone who doesn't even know what he's doing there. He has zero talent for directing. He's like Miller, the guy who wrote the Dark Knight, 300, Sin City. Hell of a comic book writer - He did Spirit and the movie was terrible. But that doesn't make him a money-grubber, true. Putting the original trilogy for the third time in the movies with *bonus* threedee makes me think that. Was he even there when they added CGI to it?
That's as lame as throwing any movie with marginal extra content into the movies again. You know, like Avatar.
On a personal note, I didn't take offence on being called a , but save me the melodrama. Just because I don't idolize the guy who basked on the glory of releasing one of the greatest sci-fi trilogies and subsequently puts out nothing but crap doesn't make me a cold hearted bastard. Having his face for a dart board doesn't, either.
You wanna know who else was a sell out? (But this one was a real artist)
Salvador Dali
EDIT: I'm hands up for a KOTOR movie, too. If only
You want me to save you the melodrama? then how about you save everyone the time by not posting your hypocritical BS about how I can't possibly know anything about you from two posts yet you can know enough about George Lucas from reading articles, documentaries seeing interviews to absolutly determine what kind of personality he has and why he does the things that he does. I didn't know that you had a psychology degree and have the skills to determine a persons entire being with a brief glimpse into their lives.
Or on the same note that you make a comment about me "having discerned your personality from two posts alone" yet the same dosen't apply to you in terms of calling me naive and assuming that I idolize George Lucas? I do not Idoloize Lucas but I am not as cynical as you and when the thought comes to me that a person who will possibly never run out of money from a franchise he created has the option to act creativly or financially I will give him the benefit of the doubt and say that he will act creativly. Especially since nothing has pointed to him being a greedy person who is only out to make a more money besides your own opinion. As far as me being naive if I had said "no I think George Lucas does what he does completly on the love of creating things and does not want nor does he recieve any money for what he does" that would have been naive. But having the opinion that someone does what they do simply because they love to do it is not being naive.
And then you go on to make this statement as well "You can't assume that, since you don't know what I've read about him, what I've seen about him, and as such, you repeatedly fall under the same error, which is that we are working on the same knowledge base." So tell me with all of your insight how do you know that I have not read and seen everything you have if not more? Aren't you "falling under the same error" as you put it? Your entire post is nothing but hypocritical statements directed at me and yet you are doing the very things you accuse me off.
So my referance of you being a did not stem from your opinion of George Lucas but instead from the idea that you seem to think you are more informed then anyone else about a person you have only read about (by the way Wikipedia isn't the best source of information and only a naive person would believe what they read on the site) and that you can throw accusations at others and be free from them hitting back at you when you do it yourself.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2010/10/28 23:03:10
I didn't call you naive, at least not on purpose. I meant to say that it was a naive opinion, or concept. Also, a naive person/opinion doesn't necessarily deal in extremes. But if you did understand it as an insult, I am sorry.
And having a bigger information base does contribute towards making an opinion. I'm not saying that to prove I know better than you or the next guy, I'm saying that because it is true.
I also didn't call George Lucas "The 21st century Hitler", I just said he was out for the money - I didn't gave you a detailed profile based on what I saw, just what I took from it. I also gave you a few pratical examples about how he managed his "creation". You gave me nothing besides your own "Zen" stuff, that he might be a nice guy, etc.
On the point of looking superior, and not wanting to derail this thread any further, I will point out to your "I pity you" stuff on your post. Anything else on that, if you think that it needs to be discussed, you can take to P.M.
And the part about Wikipedia... No comments.
anonymous @ best Warhammer Miniature wrote:i vote the choas dwarf lord as they are the greatest dwarfs n should get there own codex
Unless a person actually makes some sort of indicator that they are joking it is hard to tell in a text based discussion. Now right now I will apologise to you as I'm currently on an actual computer where as before I was on my phone. This has allowed me to realise that the person I am talking to is not the person who made the original statement about Lucas being in it for the money. The reason I am apologising is because some of my comments where made believing that you where the same person and where in referance to things that you didn't say.
I didn't call you naive, at least not on purpose. I meant to say that it was a naive opinion, or concept. Also, a naive person/opinion doesn't necessarily deal in extremes. But if you did understand it as an insult, I am sorry.
I do not see being called naive as an insult but none the less when someone says that my opinion or concept is naive (which in extension is actually calling me naive because how can a person have a naive thought without being naive themselves) simply because of a differance in opinion I can argue against it which is what I have done.
And having a bigger information base does contribute towards making an opinion. I'm not saying that to prove I know better than you or the next guy, I'm saying that because it is true.
Yes it is true but you have no way of knowing if you actually have a larger information base then anyone you are having a discussion with and people should not conduct themselves as if they do.
I also didn't call George Lucas "The 21st century Hitler", I just said he was out for the money - I didn't gave you a detailed profile based on what I saw, just what I took from it. I also gave you a few pratical examples about how he managed his "creation". You gave me nothing besides your own "Zen" stuff, that he might be a nice guy, etc.
And I never said you did call him a Hitler. I myself gave practical and logical examples as to why he may do what he does with an artistic value over a monetary one. And as far as my "Zen" stuff, really?. I would like for you to go back and tell me where it is exactly I mentioned him being a nice guy or said anything that is in any way "Zen" stuff? I mean did I quote Buddha? did I ask everyone to hold hands and pray for universal unity because every person has goodensss deep down inside/ no i didn't. I've simply said that neither you, Tyyr or I know him well enough to be able to accuratly say why he would do something with a definitive answer. You choose to believe that he is greedy and would do it more to make money based off of what you have read about him. I basing my belief off of the fact that he is a multimillionare who most likely has no monetary needs would be free to act creativly disagree with you.
Now as for the original person I was discussing this with (Tyyr) he posted this "There's one thing some people are forgetting, Lucas isn't doing Star Wars for the art. He's in it for the money. If he thinks he can make Ep 7-9 and make a buck, he'll do it." This statement has no indicators that it is simply an opinion being expressed and is made as if Tyyr is stating a fact. While it may very well have been Tyyrs opinion it should not have been written as an absolution because again none of us know Lucas well enough to be able to judge why he does things. This is what I tried to point out to Tyyr but it failed to sink in, in turn the conversation turned from me and him to me and you which isn't so much about stating what is fact and opinion but is instead a differance in opinion and the reasonings behind it.
So again I apologise for my confusion on who I was talking to. But I would also like to reiterate that unless you know him personally and have known him for years or there is actual evidence supporting your opinion (such as criminal charges for fraud or money laundering or something like that) no one can say why Lucas would do anything definitivly. Opinions are fine as long as you actually state them as if they're opinions and not facts.
generalgrog wrote:WOW Star wars is serious bidness!!
It's almost as serious(and entertaining) as watching two star trek nerds go at it.
GG
With the usual bystander crowd that's composed of large, smelly individuals who live in a basement and dress like Mr. Spock?
Sign me in
Imbad, you don't have to take things so seriously. You have your opinion, for which you demand rather a lot in order to prove incorrect (ie that I talked to him personally, etc) - and which I did not refute, he might be Mother Theresa of Calcuta for all I know or care - but that does not mean that he's above making a penny. Virtually every aspect of Star Wars has been turned into something marketeable, and that has resulted in a downgrade in quality (if it ever was high ) as Star Wars flooded every possible medium. You don't do something like that to your "brain" child. He has proven - and not only to me, mind you - that he, above all else, wants to make a quick buck.
Instead of saying "He's so rich he doesn't care about money", I'd rather say, "He's so rich he doesn't care".
anonymous @ best Warhammer Miniature wrote:i vote the choas dwarf lord as they are the greatest dwarfs n should get there own codex
FM Ninja 048 wrote:I think no matter how bad we sa it looks we'll all go see it if it comes out
Count me out.
QFT. I sat through Jar-jar. I stomached Mannequin Skywalker in Episode II. But, after, "NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!" I gave away all my Star Wars stuff to a childhood friend who had sold theirs at a garage sale years before.
If it happens to be on TV when I'm in a hospital waiting room or something in the far, far future in a galaxy far, far away I might watch it. But, pay?!
I have learnt to let go of my Gungan Bigotry and crappy FX hatred to embrace Georges vision for Star Wars.
Star Wars films are family movies, they always were, looking at them with the same critical eyes as I would a Sergio Leone film or even Coppolas Godfather is totally missing the point.
Star Wars films are ultimately Georges' films, he wants to make the sort of thing he would have enjoyed when he was a kid, crappy adventure movies. Screw his liking of Kurosawa, he loves serialised adventures.
Hypothetically, if George had made 4,5 and 6 and had hidden them away for 30 or so years then was able to release them into theatres today what reaction would they get?
I'm betting, with no prior knowledge, a lot more hate than the prequels do now from 'fans'.
I could see it being another huge hit....But I really detest computer graphics....I'd prefer it to be in the style of the old movies, where they actually made models...
The White uniform was for the rank of "Grand Admiral". Vice-Admiral is a lower rank than Admiral.
) and the guy just strikes me as someone who doesn't even know what he's doing there. He has zero talent for directing. He's like Miller, the guy who wrote the Dark Knight, 300, Sin City. Hell of a comic book writer - He did Spirit and the movie was terrible. But that doesn't make him a money-grubber, true. Putting the original trilogy for the third time in the movies with *bonus* threedee makes me think that. Was he even there when they added CGI to it?
