Hurin

I said "relatively conciliatory". . . meaning "more conciliatory than that which came before" and I still think it was. Sorry if my tone isn't coming across. This is like the first time in eons that Agent ONE has given any reasons for his thinking. . . but if you think Vegeta's post was even remotely about M7. . . uh, wow! That guy was obviously just looking for a reason to post his Leftist political views. . . which, last time I looked, was against the rules. He could have stopped with just: "The rhetoric used by those who hate M7 reminds of the black-and-white propaganda perfected by the fascists in the middle of last centurty". . . which is still distasteful. . . but the other 90% had nothing to do with Macross and was just that guy spouting Marxist Left-wing ideology. . . for about three pages Again, I'm sorry that you got so pissed when I merely stated why JBO was making fun of Vegeta. I don't think he should be called an idiot (and I said as much). But nor do I think his post should be immune from ridicule as there is a vast difference between what he wrote and the type of stuff the knee-jerk anti-M7ers write here. Last time I looked, political rants, together with comparing people to Nazis was frowned upon here. You can be conciliatory while not totally caving into the other person. That's what I was trying to accomplish by apologizing and making light of the whole thing in my last post. Vegeta isn't worth all this arguing and the beginnings of bad feelings between two members. Why don't we just let it go? Reading what I just wrote above, I don't see anything that screams for rebuttal. You're an old-timer around here, I've never had a problem with you before, and I respect you. So can we just let this go, please? H

The irony woudl likely be more apparent if you pulled your head out of AgentOne's ass, but... LOL! Agent One and I disagree pretty vehemently about 99% of the time. . . I agree with him, and say something nice about him just once, and I get this. That's too funny. I don't think anyone who pays even sporadic attention to even just very recent activity in these forums would consider A1 and I even cordial towards each other. Much less good buds. You amuse me. Again, why don't you reserve some of this misdirected hostility for the guy quoting Mein Kampf and calling people Nazis. Your need to continue this when I obviously offered a relatively conciliatory tone in my last post is amusing, but also disturbing. I don't know how I pissed you off so much. But I apologize for doing so and I suggest we move on now so that we don't contribute further to the imminent locking of this thread. H

Uh. . . you might want to take your own advice there. I think it's pretty clear who's all wound up here. Oh yeah, I'm furious over here. Okay, so we can all agree then that the only guy who needs to "lighten up" is the guy quoting Hitler when describing those with whom he disagrees? I mean, really. . . that is just too funny. . . and a new low. I mean, when a guy is quoting Hitler, and those who are making fun of him are the ones told to "lighten up". . . something is out of whack! H

Uh. . . you might want to take your own advice there. I think it's pretty clear who's all wound up here. H

Well, you didn't ask me this. . . but the guy's post is deserving of some heavy ridicule. . . or maybe it just deserved to be ignored. I can't decide. If I follow it correctly (and who's to know!). . . it goes something like: Those who hate M7 are engaging in propoganda. The Nazis engaged in propoganda. Here's some quotes from Hitler. The US engages in propoganda and everything it has ever stood against has been a figment of its psychotic populations' imaginations. There is a lot of inequality in the world. The US is a bunch of Nazis. M7 is like the "Real World." Brainwash. Now. . . even if we open our minds very wide and accept that this sorta stuff can be posted here. . . it's still utter BS. We've got a Marxist on our hands who just read Mein Kampf and now thinks everything he sees bears some relation to it and his worldview. H

Isn't Nike really big in Japan? Couldn't this explain it? As for the lack of accuracy. . . that's helpful when you're trying not to get sued for license infringement. H

I wouldn't say that. It just sounds to me like he's been enveloped in a lot of Left-wing rhetoric. To paraphrase one of our former Presidents: "It's not that he's stupid. It's that he knows a lot of things that just aren't so." H

Praise from Caesar!

Correct. And I've gone to great lengths in each of my posts to make a distinction between pointing to a figure on its own and saying: "See, it was popular". . . and looking at the difference between a movie and its sequel. I agree here as well. And I think that's what A1 is trying to say. But, again, I'm less interested in comparing TPM to ANH or RotJ than I am in comparing TPM to AotC. Couldn't that also be interpreted as a reason to suspect that TPM's numbers are inflated. . . since it was the only thing to watch for so long? No argument here. As I said before, there's probably other (or complementary) reasons for the drop-off between TPM and AotC.

Well, first, I'm not that retarded. . . because I do accept the premise that younger people go to movies more often. . . up to a point. Even as your article shows, it's 18-24 year-olds that are the most likely to go to a theater. One-year-olds aren't the most avid movie-goers. But, what I haven't seen you demonstrate is how this fits cogently into an argument that ressurects Uxi's assertion that The Empire Strikes Back was the least succesful movie and that The Phantom Menace was some incredible box office juggernaut. Surely, numbers that are not adjusted for inflation are more faulty than those that don't take into account your nebulous assertions about how home theater owners wait for the DVD. . . even in the case of Star Wars. . . and that because Star Wars viewers got old, they couldn't drag themselves out of their houses for one movie. You can say "take those figures with a grain of salt". . . but I don't think your assertions render the box office figures "useless". . . but then again, I wasn't the one who originally tried to score points off of them. So if you want to consider them useless, go ahead. . . because --adjusted for inflation or not-- they don't accurately reflect how well-enjoyed a movie was. But, again, the drop-off between Ep1 and Ep2 is 61 rungs on the ranking ladder. I don't think that can be explained away via everyone suddenly feeling their age.

I don't recall making a big deal out of the box office difference between RotJ and Ep1. And, I certainly don't see where this age concern has anything to do with the difference between the box office for AotC and TPM. Did all the people who got so excited and filled the theaters in droves for TPM suddenly become old and unwilling to visit a theater by the time AotC arrived? Would they have been so unwilling had TPM been better? I'm just not seeing your point. And, for the record, I think there are movies that transcend the usual demographics for movie-goers. And Star Wars would be at the top of that list. H

I'm not going to touch the standard Jar Jar love/hate stuff at the end. It just leaves me speechless. As A1 might say were he to hate Ep1 as much as he hates M7: I hate Jar Jar enough to murder someone over it. I just don't think Threepio ever elicited the sort of hatred that Jar Jar did. . . because Threepio (in the OT) never engaged in pratfalls, fart jokes, and scene-stealing lame-assness to the extent that Jar Jar did. Hell, Threepio's a little prissy and he gets in the way of Han getting some in ESB. . . but to me there really is no comparison. Something else that Jar Jar represents to me is an overall change in the seriousness with which Lucas took his own universe. As "scholars" of Tolkien have always said, it is the absolute internal consistency of the universe that Tolkien created that lends much of the magic and power to his works. At no point is the veil of reality ever lifted. Suspension of disbelief can become total as you immerse yourself in a world that is totally divorced from reality, yet has its own history, customs, legends, languages and all the atmospheric power that comes along with them. And, to his credit, with one or two minor exceptions, Peter Jackson didn't make the mistake of "lifting this veil" when he adapted those books into films. Lucas, I would argue, used to take a similar stance towards his Star Wars universe. There is no "winking" at the camera in IV and V. There are no references to things that do not belong in the Star Wars universe. At no point does he want you to doubt for a second that this story took place A Long Time Ago. . . In a Galaxy Far, Far Away. The atmosphere of IV and V was very Tolkien-esque in its establishment of an internally consistent universe with its own deep history. This began to change as the "winking at the camera" started a bit more subtley in VI (The ewok "Tarzan" scream comes to mind immediately). But, with Ep1, you find the gungans (of course, most notably Jar Jar) using American slang (or spanish) as their dialect ("ex-squeeze me" "Muy muy important", etc.) You have aliens from his friend's science fiction movies making cameo appearances for crying out loud! Late Edit: Oh, and the "death sticks"/cigarettes in Ep2. Let's not forget those. Now he's preaching about our current health problems to us in his movies. Lovely. That helps my suspension of disbelief!(End Late Edit) Yes, that irks me. Really, Jar Jar is the Rosetta Stone to understanding everything that went wrong with Star Wars and Lucas's turn away from the cool, and towards the kids. Jar Jar is the stargate. The alpha and the omega. He is. . . the Basara.

I'm not going to get sucked into this any further than two points: This may be the case for some people. Yet, as a kid, I loved RotJ first and foremost. But as I aged, it lost its luster until I now feel it is the weakest of the OT due to its descending into infantalism. Yet, I never lost my affinity for the other two movies (ANH and ESB). They have stood the test of time, age, and maturity. Why is that? I'd argue that it's because those two movies had a more adult (or at least teenage) "cinematic sensibility" that did not pander to the children so much that they simultaneously annoyed the adults. I see this: "You just prefer the OT because of nostalgia" argument all the time. But it simply just does not fit the facts with me or any of my Star Wars-oriented friends. And, finally, I'll leave it with this. ewilen put it so well and I am quoting it so much that I might as well make it my signature. . . but then how would people get their DYRL subtitles!?! Best, H

Well, I don't think there were many Star Wars fans who waited for DVD to see The Phantom Menace. But, by your logic (which I don't agree with), there were a lot of people who waited to see Attack of the Clones on DVD. Again, I would argue that this is because the Star Wars fanbase had become disillusioned between the two movies. I don't know many people who wait for DVD where a movie they are excited about (or an "event" movie such as a Star Wars film) is concerned. But, regardless of all that, we can at least agree that Uxi can't baldly assert that Empire Strikes Back was the least successful Star Wars film. H

Well, I'm now forced to just spout off short snippets like you guys. Because, we're willing to listen to people say: "They're all the same" all day long. And there seems to be a lot of people who love to just pop in to say it in every Star Wars thread. But a guy who tries to argue the opposite is usually told to shut the hell up. I've come to accept it. No need to tell me why it happens. The Lucas Suck-o-Meter: 100% means no suckage. 0% obviously means full suckage. Don't bother arguing with this meter. I'm not claiming it's scientific and must be refuted. It's just the way I see things. Obviously, I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything anymore. Hurin's Star Wars Suck-o-meter 100 - NO SUCKAGE 95 - 90 - Empire Strikes Back 85 - A New Hope 80 - 75 - 70 - 65 - 60 - Return of the Jedi 55 - Attack of the Clones 50 - 45 - 40 - 35 - 30 - The Phantom Menace 25 - 20 - 15 - 10 - 05 - 00 - FULL SUCKAGE I'm hoping for a solid 80 for Episode III! Damn him, Lucas actually has be believing in him again!

Well, as the guy who pretty clearly (though ashamedly) said something along those lines, I'd like to explain myself a bit: Graham, I hear ya. I am a Tolkien (books) fan. And one of my friends is an newly minted English Professor who simply will not read Tolkien based on his preconceptions of it and its standing in his area of expertise. No amount of convincing will get him to try it. Indeed, I even gave him a $60 faux-leatherbound edition. . . which he promptly used to prop up his desk! Yes, opinions formed from ignorance are irritating. However, we all do it. How many times have we all seen a movie trailer and said: "That looks like the stupidest thing I've ever seen. . . you couldn't pay me to see it." And, then how likely are you to see it if a bunch of people you know see it and hate it? In a perfect world, we'd all have time to get a first-hand taste of everything before we pass judgement. But, in a lot of cases, we go with our gut, our knowledge of our own tastes, whatever information we can gather (incomplete as it may be) and the advice of people whose opinions we value. . . and then we ration out our attention (and resources) where we are most likely going to acheive gratification. As someone who has not seen M7, I have refrained from commenting on it in the past. In this case, however, I made an exception because (1) I wanted to give some praise to A1 for so verbosely supporting what he was saying rather than just citing his own "awesomeness" as proof. It's not often that he does that, but when he does, he usually has some good points to make. And (2), I wanted to slip that SW reference in there. Now, no, I haven't seen M7. But I've read a helluva lot about it. . . from the timeline, to reviews, screenshots, lineart, fan art, A1's rants, Keith's defenses. . . and after all that, I decided to pipe in to say that, knowing myself, and seeing how even M7's defenders describe it, it doesn't seem like something I would enjoy. I know myself, and, even as a kid, I wasn't easily able to overlook the Jar Jars, Wonder Twins, Spikes, Snarfs, Short-Rounds, and other lameness that surrounds otherwise cool things throughout the era of popular entertainment. Based on all this, and the descriptions of M7 by both its supporters and detractors, I'm pretty confident that I would strongly dislike M7 and resent its place in Macross canon the same way I resent sub-par chapters in the other fictional worlds that I enjoy. And, while I probably will some day see M7, I'm in no rush to spend $70 on bootlegs right away in a probably futile attempt to prove myself wrong! But, as someone who hasn't seen the show, I retract my earlier statement because, obviously, I can't be 100% sure that I would dislike it. H

Well, I've had mixed experiences with them. Sometimes their items arrive in perfect condition and packaged well. Other times, the item's (internal) box is a bit squished. Also, they tend to jack up their prices for things like this that are getting rare. But, if you want it now, and you're willing to pay $25 in markup, then check out Treasure Island Sports. Love 'em or hate 'em. . . they have things in stock when everyone else has sold out. But, they make you pay out the nose for them. H P.S. Oh, and they're generally referred to as FAST Packs. I don't want to sound anal or anything. But "Booster pack" is an entirely different thing and there is no toy for it. I think "booster packs" only appeared in one episode ("Viva Maria") and they are used to help a valkyrie reach orbit.

Sigh, well don't I feel like an idiot? Here I spent all this time assailing Uxi's interpretation of box office figures while assuming they were accurate. Yet, when you look at the actual box office when adjusted for inflation, The Empire Strikes Back comes in at #2 (among Star Wars movies) just behind its immediate predecessor, Episode IV: A New Hope. And, bringing up the rear for the OT, as expected, is Episode VI: Return of the Jedi. Episode 1 is in fourth place. Episode 2 is last (again, among Star Wars films). Here's a list of each movie, it's all-time rank among all movies, and its gross adjusted for inflation: 2 --- Star Wars (1,113,247,500) 12 -- The Empire Strikes Back (613,629,000) 14 -- Return of the Jedi (587,871,300) 19 -- The Phantom Menace (530,138,300) 80 -- Attack of the Clones (334,177,900) Sources are here and here. Silly me for assuming Uxi's figures were accurate. Anyways, that's one helluva drop-off for Attack of the Clones. It's immediate predecessor (TPM) was #19. Attack of the Clones is #80! But, I really don't fault Attack of the Clones for this. Rather, I think most people still had a sour taste in their mouth after Phantom and had given up on Star Wars. Far from supporting Phantom, the adjusted box office figures actually paint a fairly gloomy picture of its effect on the franchise. Does anyone seriously want to make the argument, however, that --then or now-- The Phantom Menace was/is more popular than Attack of the Clones? After all, look at that difference in ranking! No, I still don't think that you can use box office figures to demonstrate how well-received a movie was by those who viewed it. . . but the difference between box office returns for the latter two movies do show a softening of the Star Wars fanbase. I would argue that this was because Phantom Menace disappointed so many. But, I'm sure there might be other plausible reasons. Man, I wish I had checked these figures a lot earlier! H

Some would say the same about Macross. Though they'd be wrong. . . just as you are wrong (IMHO) about Star Wars. You and I have been over this before. So let's not do it again here. And indeed, should we feel compelled to do so, that thread is still open (miracle!). But really, with apologies for ewilen for dragging him into this, nobody has ever said it better than he did here. But, I'll refrain from quoting him in this thread. Let's just agree to disagree here. I couldn't resist poking a little fun because of the similarities of the arguments and didn't intend to restart the debate.

That is a perfect post. And, I hope it's not too ignorant of me to say that it's posts like this that have made me steer clear of M7 and spared me the horror of it. After all, if I didn't like MII, and M7 is supposedly worse according to nearly everyone, how much will I hate M7!?! Now, if everyone will permit me a bit of fun-poking: If you take A1's point #2 above and replace M7 with "Episode 1" and Macross with "Star Wars". . . you basically get what I've been saying about Star Wars for years.

Consensus. The critics pretty roundly bashed the movie. And there were groans of disappointment from the fan community immediately. . . which grew as the hype died down and the fanboys took off their Jedi outfits and looked at the movie critically. Slipping? I've been talking qualitatively since this began. Uxi is saying that more people liked Phantom Menace than is commonly believed. And he's using box office figures to try to demonstrate that. I don't think box office figures are a useful metric for determining how well-liked a movie was (and we seem to disagree about whether "popular" and "well-liked" are synonymous). The odd part is that I think you and I nearly agree on this point. But we're arguing over semantics. And Pearl Harbor did very well at the box office too. But it was a terrible movie. But, nevertheless, people went in droves to see it because it was announced as "the summer movie" that was a must-see. And Pearl Harbor didn't have nearly the advantage in fan-base, hype, and sequel-status that Ep1 had. This is where you lose me. I don't see how they contribute to its popularity. Yes, they are contributing to its box office receipts. But to its popularity?!? That's essentially making the argument that BO is synonymous with popularity. And I doubt that you intend to go that far! If I'm a fat, greasy fanboy who does nothing more than bash Ep1 and spread anti-Lucas propoganda on his website all day, but then feel compelled to get off my @ss and check out those cool lightsaber scenes or Jedi Council interactions. . . how am I contributing to the film's popularity? I may be contributing to its BO. . . but that is not the same thing. Yes, it was/is divisive. . . and it is probably the least popular movie among the Star Wars movies. And it became so just about the second that Jar Jar appeared on the screen. The movie is obviously different in tone and subject matter, and to many Star Wars fans, that equates with not being as good. But, that is a matter of opinion. Again, I don't think that the movie was "well-liked" or "appreciated" (by your definition) by the majority of the people who saw it. I think the parents walked out thinking "well, my kid seemed to enjoy it". . . the kids walked out asking for Jar Jar toys and squeeling with glee. . . and the old-school Star Wars geeks walked out thinking "WTF was that? Now let me get another ticket so that I can see that lighsaber duel again." Yes, but let's keep in mind that there are fanatics on both sides of the prequel issues. There are tons of fanboys who, to me, are even farther along the spectrum towards fanatic who defend each and every aspect of each film. They're like little Lucas groupies. Uh, I'm a huge Tolkien (books) fan (note my name and website). And I can tell you that, much as with Star Wars, there are Tolkien fanatics who despise the movies and wish that they could go back to being able to buy a paperback edition of The Fellowship of the Ring without Elijah Wood's mug on the cover! But, to sum up, I think Ep1's box office draw was due mainly to hype and its status as a Star Wars film, regardless of its quality. I don't think the box office returns say anything about how well regarded it was by its audiences and therefore, I don't think it's a useful metric for guaging its popularity. History is replete with movies that did well at the BO, but are universally panned by critics as well as the masses. Star Wars Episode 1, due to the unprecedented media hype, its blockbuster pedigree, and its rabid fanbase, is the penultimate example of this phenomenon. . . outstripping every "popular" (by box office numbers), but sucky movies up to that time. It's really this simple: Box office returns show how many people saw the movie. Not how many people enjoyed/appreciated (per the 1st definition of popular) it. In my view, to attach any other meanings to its box office returns given the peculiar nature of such a long-awated and hyped film isn't advisable. Best Regards, H P.S. Well, you were right about my thread. Already closed.

You're claiming that there is a correlation between BO and a film's popularity. If a film is "popular" it is "liked" and/or "appreciated" according to your own definition. By that definition: popular=liked=appreciated=enjoyed. I'm saying that there were indeed a lot of people who saw the film (even twice, I'm one of them) and gradually, after the coolness of a few scenes wore off, realized that the rest of the movie is absolute, insufferable crap. Now you dismiss this argument as "childish nonsense". . . though I don't see any evidence to the contrary. So, we'll just have to agree to disagree. I just know that I came to that conclusion about the movie on my own without being brainwashed by the "childhood raping" hordes after I realized that a few cool scenes did not make the rest of the movie palatable. And, sadly, my two tickets are counted in that total much like a lot of dissillusioned Star Wars fans. No, you didn't, but I was addressing Uxi's implication that ticket sales mean that most people liked the movie. I don't think that you can make that argument and I don't think that BO numbers prove it. We're talking about sequels here, people. A sequel bases a large part of its BO on the sucess of its predecessors. To say that Episode I gathered such a large audience based on its own merits as a stand-alone film is just silly. People saw it because it was Star Wars and it was hyped beyone any movie release in history. Uh, okay. Again, okay. By how many people still enjoy the movie after the hype wears off. By its standing in the fan community? If you want to make the argument that Ep1 is popular among kids and non-fans, go right ahead. But, to a lot of people who are so easily dismissed by you, Ep1 just represented the low-point of Star Wars that began with Return of the Jedi. . . and I just don't see how Box Office numbers prove anything one way or the other.

Not calling you a troll exactly. But you must admit that you post things merely to get a rise out of people from time to time. That's troll-ish behavior. Though, doing it from time to time doesn't necessarily make you a troll. I told you a long time ago that my mom retired and we sent the conjoined (preferred term!) twins Miko and Suma, to the local circus. No matter how many times you ask, they won't do it! As for the rest of it and my "bad attitude" (hello irony). . . I'll be emailing ya. We now return this thread to its regularly scheduled broadcast. . . H

Guys, seriously, I'm asking you nicely. Will you please just leave this thread alone. It does no harm to you by existing and may very well save other threads from being hijacked. I truly don't understand why you can't just go your own ways and/or choose to take part in a discussion constructively. H

This is all very funny considering you're currently debating me as we speak over here, thereby hijacking another thread. . . Yet you would rather continue hijacking that thread and crapping all over this one rather than discussing it here. If you don't want to discuss it, if you don't want to read it, then don't! But why would you want to continue hijacking the Clone Wars thread? Well. . . Here's what Max Jenius told me to do when I asked for some Star Wars discussion forums other than MW to discuss these things because MW: H