Which was worse?

Which was worse?

Schizophrenic Conspiracy Theorist Shirt $21.68

Homeless People Are Sexy Shirt $21.68

Schizophrenic Conspiracy Theorist Shirt $21.68

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Star Wars

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    hobbit: dumbass rendition of events that already happened in canon
    mouse wars: malicious, incompetent, woke hijacking of canon by an unrelated corporation that hates the franchise

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I managed to sit through all the Hobbit movies, I got halfway through the last Jedi and never bothered with the last one.

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I tried watching the first SW sequel and it was so boring and gay that I couldn't even finish it

    Hobbit was wholesome and comfy

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    It's the age old question of which is worse:

    Stupidity or Malice?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Both of them contributed to my race's genocide and I lost three family members to these films and had the ticket stub tattooed on my arm.

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Hobbit never interested me so never seen. Star Wars Rey Saga was only good first watches.

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Neither are worth watching

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Well, Star Wars at least tried something with TLJ, but the other two really drag the trilogy down.
    That Hobbit shit is more consistent. It's about as empty and ambitionless as TFA, but it stays that way rather than going up and then spiralling down into an abyss like ROS did.

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The Last Jedi doesn't have actual fans, only shills and contrarians. The sequel trilogy is worse.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >The Last Jedi doesn't have actual fans
      Well, depends on what you consider a "fan".
      TLJ is by far the most critically acclaimed of the sequels. And for pretty good reasons, all of which concern filmmaking and storytelling, rather than lorehomosexualry and fan theories.
      There are different ways to understand a film, and franchise fanboys watch things differently than general audiences or professional critics do. That's just how it is.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >all of which concern filmmaking and storytelling
        Kek

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Believe it or not, but TLJ does really well in these regards, contrary to what autistic manchilden on youtube tell you.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Believe it or not, but TLJ does really well in these regards
            I don't believe it but why don't you go ahead and enlighten me.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              >I don't believe it
              Well, then don't. Meanwhile, critics (scores above 90%) and general audiences (an A Cinemascore) do believe it.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                > Meanwhile, critics (scores above 90%) and general audiences (an A Cinemascore) do believe it.
                Then please explain to me how they believe it because I happen to think they are full of shit.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >explain to me how they believe it
                By actually knowing what makes a good film rather than comparing them to wookiepedia.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >By actually knowing what makes a good film
                Ok but I already said I think they are full of shit. I implore you to explain why the movie is good, point out the specific things general audiences and critics are supposedly picking up on. Can you not properly articulate why the film is good? You've already said it does well in storytelling and filmmaking so tell us why you think that.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >point out the specific things general audiences and critics are supposedly picking up on
                Story structure, buildup of tension, themes, characters arcs. All of which was expertly done in TLJ.
                Also, for critics and film enthusioasts: Cinematography, sound editing, scene editing, acting (the best acting in all of Star Wars, and Hamill's personal best performance ever), practical effects and costumes, CG effects, soundtrack (and mixing). Just to name the general categories.
                What fanboys instead care about, but no one else does: Franchise lore and precedents, idiotic Hollywood physics ("People immediately die in a vaccum", "no gravity in space"), headcanons, predictions and theories made on youtube and reddit beforehand, glorification of legacy characters, etc.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Story structure, buildup of tension, themes, characters arcs.
                >All of which was expertly done in TLJ.
                I don't agree. Please elaborate further on why you think those things were done well.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >I don't agree.
                Because you don't know much about those things, yes. TLJ has a pretty simple three-act-structure like most scripts nowadays, and does exactly what it needs to do there. Denying that just displays a lack of education.
                For the management of tension, I advise you to read up on Gustav Freytag's theory of dramatic writing. It is based on the traditional European five-act play, but can easily be applied to the (historically related) three-acter as well.
                The themes, well, TLJ spells its major out for you, even explaining some of the central conflicts related to them. Oh, and, no, "let the past die" is not a central message - the guy who says that is the villain. There is some thematic value to it though hidden in the middle-ground between that position and the complete brainless reverence for past legends that Rey starts out with. I encourage you to ponder that, and other middle-grounds between extreme positions presented. Because that's not only how TLJ does its themes, it's how themes are generally done. (Unlike morals and messages that are just simple statements you take at face value without overthinking them, like fairytales, fables and capeshit do.)
                And, well, do we really need to talk about what a character arc is? When a character starts at A and gradually turns to B, that's an arc. I think the best demonstration of that is Poe in TLJ versus Poe in the other two films (where he's entirely static).

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >TLJ has structure and does exactly what it needs to do
                >TLJ's management of tension, I advise you to read up on a third-party book
                >The themes? well, TLJ spells its it out for you even explaining some of the central conflicts related to them.
                >do we really need to talk about what a character arc is? I think the best demonstration of that is when Poe has one between films
                What a whole lot of words to say pretty much nothing of value. Thanks for the book rec though.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Sorry, but, yes, you really need to educate yourself on the topic of dramatic writing before we can talk about how a singular film handles dramatic writing in detail. There's no way around it, unless you want to come across like one of those youtube essayists whose only qualification is being fat and uneducated.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >you really need to educate yourself on dramatic writing because I can't actually articulate any of my points
                It's okay hon

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >because I can't actually articulate any of my points
                But I did. Very clearly.
                The problem is that you cannot even see that, namely because you lack the basic education needed to do so.
                When I say something follows a "three-act-structure" neatly, that does say all that needs to be said, and anyone who knows about drama structure understands exactly what is meant. You seem to think it means nothing but the script having three chapters or something like that (which is actually not the case). For someone with a decent education in literary theory however, "three-act-structure" has very clear implications of when and how things like exposition and climaces happen, when plot is revelaed, how a peripetia is conducted and where to expect mirroring, parallelism and echoes in both plot and themes.
                Now, of course, when I say TLJ nails all of that in the way you'd expect from a three-act play, that is a pretty comprehensive statement, and it allows you to attack it on pretty much any of those specific points I listed, argue how you think it does not follow the three-act framework in one point or the other. But you cannot do that, can you? That's why you don't try attacking the point, but instead cry about me making the point in the first place. You simply don't understand the point, and that's what you consider unfair.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >That's why you don't try attacking the point
                I'm not attacking the point because I'm not interested in arguing against you or refuting your points; I merely want to know your viewpoint. You merely stating something is true by pointing out the existence of general elements without offering specific examples or observable evidence to support that those general elements are utilized well, then falling behind the cover of "well if you had any education on the topic you'd just readily know my viewpoint" is quite the opposite of actual articulation and is showcasing how devoid of substance your long tirades are.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >I merely want to know your viewpoint.
                Well, as stated in my last post, I've given a very clear explanation of my viewpoint, in as much detail as a post with a 2000-character limit allows. It's not my fault you don't understand basic literary theory.
                >without offering specific examples
                You mean like when I said that Poe having a clear character arc in TLJ versus him not having one in TFA and ROS was an example?
                If you demand an example for the three-act structure, that just shows, again, that you have no idea what we are talking about here: The whole film is the example for that. You can't just take one element of it and say that it exemplifies the structure of the whole. I mean, sure, I could go through the whole storyline and pinpoint "this here is exposition" or "the main climax happens right here" or "this is where act 1 introduces the theme of failure for Luke, and this is where act 3 repeats it for Rey and Kylo". But, again, 2000-character limit.
                Besides, all of those points are very trivial observations, none of which you couldn't make yourself if you knew what to pay attention to.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Well, as stated in my last post, I've given a very clear explanation of my viewpoint
                No your explanation is actually succinctly summarized with your own words here
                >Besides, all of those points are very trivial observations
                And alongside the fact that you seem to think I'm refuting your observations to be true rather than just asking you to expound on their usage in the film seems to imply to me that you are at best, incapable of making poignant points, and at worst, moronic. But go ahead and be content that I'm just an uneducated rube shitposting for his own pleasure since we're just going in circles

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >succinctly summarized with your own words here
                What's wrong about something being trivially to observe? That you think an argument must point out some intricate hidden mystery rather than clearly visible empirical facts does explain why you are so quick to believe youtubers spouting bullshit about "feminist agendas" or "bought Disney shills" that actually aren't anywhere to be found, but cannot fathom that an obviously well-made film gets praise from critics and general audiences.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >"let the past die" is not a central message - the guy who says that is the villain
                >Disney did this to the OG Star Wars by stomping on all of its characters and letting them die

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >by stomping on all of its characters and letting them die
                Letting characters die is not a refutation of those characters. Quite the opposite, actually: It's tying a bow on their respective storylines, bookending them, rather than keeping them alive to be exploited in further tie-in material. Why do you think Harrison Ford already wanted Han Solo to die back in 1983?
                Of course, Star Wars being Star Wars cannot help keeping exploiting them by adding needless middle-parts of those stories nonetheless.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Embarrassing post

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >shills and bots
                Cool.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Remember when the background of the throne room was a flat red screen? That's so much better than having an actual set that needs to be made by actual humans for maybe weeks at a time.
            Why can't other movies steal this innovating idea?

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              >an actual set
              That throne room was an actual set. Unlike pretty much anything in the prequels.
              Not sure why you take offense at a particular design choice.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Black person it's a red screen. It looks like the prequels if they forgot to add in the CGI backgrounds. It also has that fight everyone immediately dickrode for choreography, but looks extremely moronic if you watch any individual character. Key jingling visual clutter for morons.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >it's a red screen.
                Yeah, now take a good look at any wall in your apartment. Chances are, it's a single colour as well. Most people actually live in pretty minimalistic surroundings nowadays. And maybe read up on what throne rooms looked like historically. A royal aula was usually just a huge empty room, not outfitted with much furniture.
                What would you prefer in Snoke's room? A collection of Ikea shelves? Prizes and medals from his horseback riding career? Family photos?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >choreography, but looks extremely moronic if you watch any individual character.
                I encourage you to watch any group fight in any film that way. Those old chinese kung-fu flicks are filled with group fights, where characters basically just stand around in a circle and wait their turn to attack the main character, and they do a much worse job of hiding it than TLJ does. US films aren't any different in that regard. I don't think I've seen a single Jackie Chan group fight that's not "guilty" of this.
                If you want realistic choreographies where everyone attacks at once, I fear that would result in a complete mess on-screen and a clear loss for the protagonist every single time.

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    This post is peak reddit.

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The better question is if the prequel trilogy or Hobbit trilogy is worse. It's been too long since I've seen either so I couldn't say, but I know people were able to edit the Hobbit into something better.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Well, the Hobbit trilogy is itself a prequel trilogy, so ...

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >but I know people were able to edit the Hobbit into something better
      fan edits are always worse. it's biased subtractive editing. the original editors and directors intentions are what's best. it's what they all chose and agreed upon. if you feel the need to cut scenes out then maybe you just don't like the movie. not everything is perfect and there will always be someone to complain

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >if you feel the need to cut scenes out then maybe you just don't like the movie
        Yeah like everyone else

  12. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Hobbit was bad but not offensively bad.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >not offensively
      Probably because no one cared about it to begin with.
      With Star Wars, people were way more invested from the beginning than anyone ever was in LotR. Everytime something new came out for Star Wars after 1977, there was a good portion of the fanbase that rebelled against it.

  13. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Hobbit Trilogy = Force Awakens > Last Jedi > Rise of Skywalker

  14. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Hobbit still had some cool moments and amazing soundtrack

  15. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I couldn't make it past 30 mins of the first LOTR film and never bothered with the Hobbit.
    That's just because it's not my thing. Whereas Star Wars is just an absolutely pile of shit.
    It was crap originally, the sequels were laughable, and the reboot is woke slop for Reddit men-children who like lego.

  16. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Nu Wars. Hobbit 1/2 were interesting enough and they don't ruin LOTR. Nu Wars, if you accept them as canon, simultaneously ruin the prior saga while offering nothing new whatsoever and ending on a terrible note. It was a huge waste of opportunity.

  17. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Every franchise thing is just garbage, be it movies, books, shows, games, it's all just trash slop, some might be interesting at the start but it just gets milked and it quickly just becomes trash, I'm glad I'm not a ''fan'' of anything

  18. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    didn't you make the same thread last time but swapped the sequel movies with the prequels?

  19. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I've not seen the sequel trilogy (or the prequels for that matter) but they do seem quite a lot worse than the hobbit films, although i'm not familar with the source material for the hobbit to know just how much they screwed up.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >I've not seen
      >but they do seem quite a lot worse
      Kek. Absolute reddit mentality right there.

  20. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    TFA: ANH brainless copy paste
    TLJ: OT directionless disser
    TROS: last minute wrap up

    Nothing can be objectively be worse than this. It's obvious it was clearly done as a cash grab, for the zero efforts they still banked on them thanks to the initial OT gays bait. There is no direction, no story. Those disney morons can't even come up with a basic story and this trilogy exposed them. Then they had to resort to good old controversy tactics to keep the smoke around those movies.

  21. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The Hobbit films are worse, but Star Wars did worse thematically because they were always movies. Mark Hammill, Harrison Ford and Carrie Fisher ARE Star Wars. Not to say it can't expand beyond them, but when you bring them all back you're shooting for a true Star Wars film, undisputed canon. Bilbo can and will be recast again.

  22. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The first Hobbit movie is decent.

  23. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    first two hobbit movies are worse, last star wars movie is worse

  24. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Hobbit trilogy is an unpolished gem.
    Star wars is hot garbage.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Freeman is not a good bilbo and armitage is too young for Thorin. How do you polish that?

  25. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    TLJ is the only "good" move in that picture.

  26. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The Hobbit: Obvious cash grab. Clearly bad because it was stretched and rushed. Made an attempt at keeping the spirit of the LotR films while failing to keep the spirit of the book
    Star Wars: Studio cutting open the golden goose. Ideas taken whole cloth from the original trilogy. Seemingly wanted to insult fans of both the original and prequel trilogies. No real story direction due to the pissing contest between the directors.

  27. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Hobbit was slop but nuwars was worse

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *