Chefelf.com Night Life: Symmetrical Vader Mask - Chefelf.com Night Life

Jump to content

Star Wars Fan Convention

  • (3 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3

Symmetrical Vader Mask A Miscellaneous Complaint

#16 User is offline   Trumble Trickly Icon

  • New Cop
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 19
  • Joined: 07-December 04
  • Country:Nothing Selected

Posted 20 July 2005 - 03:24 PM

This forum is simply not "bash or get out." There are plenty of prequel fans here. Since a lot of people come here because of Chefelf's reasons there do tend to be more people who are not fans than are.

I've found most people here being perfectly willing to have amiable discussion about the prequels and their merits etc. That being said, coming into a topic and opening with something like, "Are you guys insane?" is not really a great way to win anyone over.

As far as putting a numerical value on movie based on rottentomatoes.com's assessment of various reviews I think that system is used far too much in debates when it's a completely meaningless system. Particularly when everything is either Good (+1) or bad (-1). Look at some of the reviews that are rated "fresh":

QUOTE
"A flawed masterpiece."


QUOTE
"For once, the words ‘A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away’ seem ironic, and it's hard to watch what follows without drawing comparisons to our own political landscape."


QUOTE
"Final installment still far cry from 70s pics."


QUOTE
"Got Wood? Christensen's stiff acting almost sink this digital ship. The last hour is absolutely brilliant."


QUOTE
"If only this had gotten out of the starting gate a little quicker, it would be an unqualified success."


QUOTE
"Growing up Star Wars is like growing up Catholic- no matter how bitter you might become, ya can't shake it. Last week I bought CHEEZ-ITs because R2-D2 was on the box."


C'mon. This is just a sampling of the positive reviews that add up to that 82%. I'm not a fan of 5 star scales either but that would be far more accurate than rottentomatoes.com. People put far too much stock in that site.
0

#17 User is offline   Paladin Icon

  • Soothsayer
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 780
  • Joined: 29-December 03

Posted 20 July 2005 - 03:36 PM

QUOTE
C'mon. This is just a sampling of the positive reviews that add up to that 82%. I'm not a fan of 5 star scales either but that would be far more accurate than rottentomatoes.com. People put far too much stock in that site.


I never read any real reviews of Episode III other than Chefelf's reasons to hate, but I had a damning sensation that there were people out there who said things as you pointed out. So I guess it isn't all frocks and jollies, eh?

QUOTE
I've found most people here being perfectly willing to have amiable discussion about the prequels and their merits etc. That being said, coming into a topic and opening with something like, "Are you guys insane?" is not really a great way to win anyone over.


There are some people out there who really don't care about winning people over, but rather simply want to make a point whether or not the person the are making the point to recieves it well or not I would say that these people are the type who would say 'the prequels are great and you suck because you hate them!'

People's motives can be very complicated, and making hasty conclusions can be quite stupid. Just a bit of advice.
0

#18 User is offline   Despondent Icon

  • Think for yourself
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 4,684
  • Joined: 31-October 03
  • Location:a long time ago
  • Interests:Laughter. Louis pups. Percussion. What binds us. Bicycling, Tennis.
  • Country:United States

Posted 20 July 2005 - 04:54 PM

I didn't know about the dueling Vader, but Whammikin had stilts in his boots. Read it from the (genuflect here, gushers) SW website.
0

#19 User is offline   DINVADER Icon

  • New Cop
  • Group: Junior Members
  • Posts: 13
  • Joined: 19-July 05
  • Country:United States

Posted 20 July 2005 - 05:12 PM

C'mon. This is just a sampling of the positive reviews that add up to that 82%. I'm not a fan of 5 star scales either but that would be far more accurate than rottentomatoes.com. People put far too much stock in that site.

Seriously, if were gonna start quoting negative lines out of positive reviews we need to also start quoting positive lines out of negative reviews too.


If that's not good enough for you why not look at the vote at imdb.com? If these are not good enough, (Nearly 8 out of 10) what is? Out of almost 70,000 votes that's what EP3 gets. Only around 300 movies rank better out of 10s of thousands on the entire site. Of course, all that site is about, as with this one, is opinions whether they be good or bad, they are merely opinions, not facts. A fact is, most people who saw it liked it.


There are some people out there who really don't care about winning people over, but rather simply want to make a point whether or not the person the are making the point to recieves it well or not I would say that these people are the type who would say the prequels are great and you suck because you hate em!'

I see the same attitude also portrayed in here, but the other way around as well.
Just the same "The prequels suck and you suck because you like them!'
Then they start attacting a person's character and I.Q. because they like them.

This post has been edited by DINVADER: 20 July 2005 - 05:21 PM

0

#20 User is offline   Trumble Trickly Icon

  • New Cop
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 19
  • Joined: 07-December 04
  • Country:Nothing Selected

Posted 20 July 2005 - 06:03 PM

I'm not attacking you. Also, I'm not picking lines, I'm taking the entire quoted portion of the review that represents the "fresh" rating on the first front page of the ROTS review on rottentomatoes.com. I'm just saying that rottentomatoes, while an interesting site, is used far too often. Reviews cannot usually be broken down into a yes or no, good or bad type thing.

I don't trust imdb.com either. I'm not saying that most people don't like it. I'm simply saying that too much stock is put into things like imdb ratings and rottentomatoes. 8 out of 10 on imdb doesn't mean anything either. All it means is that out of the people who voted in that poll the average rating was 8 out of 10. So what?

It's like arguing which band is better based on a fan vote or album sales. You can't rank art or quantify it with numerical values.

So most people liked it or didn't like it. So what? Let's talk about what was good and what was bad. I have things I liked and disliked about ROTS but I can only back those things up with my opnion not some imaginary number that represents what other people thing of it.
0

#21 User is offline   DINVADER Icon

  • New Cop
  • Group: Junior Members
  • Posts: 13
  • Joined: 19-July 05
  • Country:United States

Posted 20 July 2005 - 06:43 PM

QUOTE (Trumble Trickly @ Jul 20 2005, 05:03 PM)
I'm not attacking you. Also, I'm not picking lines, I'm taking the entire quoted portion of the review that represents the "fresh" rating on the first front page of the ROTS review on rottentomatoes.com. I'm just saying that rottentomatoes, while an interesting site, is used far too often.  Reviews cannot usually be broken down into a yes or no, good or bad type thing.

I don't trust imdb.com either.  I'm not saying that most people don't like it.  I'm simply saying that too much stock is put into things like imdb ratings and rottentomatoes.  8 out of 10 on imdb doesn't mean anything either.  All it means is that out of the people who voted in that poll the average rating was 8 out of 10.  So what?

It's like arguing which band is better based on a fan vote or album sales.  You can't rank art or quantify it with numerical values.

So most people liked it or didn't like it.  So what? Let's talk about what was good and what was bad. I have things I liked and disliked about ROTS but I can only back those things up with my opnion not some imaginary number that represents what other people thing of it.



Fair enough, but plenty of bashers have used all this same stuff in the past to prove a point.".
0

#22 User is offline   njamilla Icon

  • Level Boss
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 283
  • Joined: 02-November 03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Washington, DC
  • Interests:Black belts: aikido, kendo, iaido, jodo. 1987 World Fencing Championships, World University Games participant. Writer: novelist, freelancer. Interestes: Renaissance, religious history, turtles.
  • Country:United States

Posted 20 July 2005 - 06:58 PM

I like to think of this as the intelligent basher's forum. Bashers with a reason.

And as has already been said, there are plenty of people here who like the prequels.

But stop talking about gushers and bashers. This is the symmetrical Vader's mask thread.

"Stay on topic!"
Author: Sword Fighting in the Star Wars Universe.
0

#23 User is offline   Chefelf Icon

  • LittleHorse Fan
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Admin
  • Posts: 4,528
  • Joined: 30-October 03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New York, NY
  • Country:United States

Posted 20 July 2005 - 07:16 PM

Thank you, Nick!

Isn't it asymmetrical stuff that makes Star Wars seem so organic and cool, anyway? The Nebulon B or medical frigate, the Millennium Falcon, B-wings... cool and interesting designs that kind of break free from the traditional ships we'd seen in Sci Fi to that point.
See Chefelf in a Movie! -> The People vs. George Lucas

Buy the New LittleHorse CD, Strangers in the Valley!
CD Baby | iTunes | LittleHorse - Flight of the Bumblebee Video

Chefelf on: Twitter | friendfeed | Jaiku | Bitstrips | Muxtape | Mento | MySpace | Flickr | YouTube | LibraryThing
0

#24 User is offline   Rick McCallum Icon

  • New Cop
  • Group: Junior Members
  • Posts: 29
  • Joined: 10-June 05
  • Country:Ireland

Posted 21 July 2005 - 03:16 AM

aye! that's right mate... look at c3po or r2d2... they are not symetric are they?... is Lucas going to ''special edition'' the OT again to make them look symetric?
0

#25 User is offline   Paladin Icon

  • Soothsayer
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 780
  • Joined: 29-December 03

Posted 21 July 2005 - 03:24 AM

QUOTE
I see the same attitude also portrayed in here, but the other way around as well.
Just the same "The prequels suck and you suck because you like them!'
Then they start attacting a person's character and I.Q. because they like them.


Actually, when I first came here, all I really wanted was to voice my opinion on the Star Wars prequels and criticise it the same way as the others do. Bashing the people who liked it never had anything to do with it and I frankly don't care if a group of people think that the prequels are the greatest movies ever. I think of this as an intellectually stimulating activity and to socialize with the people over here. Nothing more, and nothing less.

QUOTE
Isn't it asymmetrical stuff that makes Star Wars seem so organic and cool, anyway? The Nebulon B or medical frigate, the Millennium Falcon, B-wings... cool and interesting designs that kind of break free from the traditional ships we'd seen in Sci Fi to that point.


I agree. The ships in Star Wars were definately far better than most of the others that I've seen on so many other Sci-Fi movies and video games. This is what makes it so distinctive and interesting. Now, after the PT, I don't think that is true any more. sad.gif
0

#26 User is offline   njamilla Icon

  • Level Boss
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 283
  • Joined: 02-November 03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Washington, DC
  • Interests:Black belts: aikido, kendo, iaido, jodo. 1987 World Fencing Championships, World University Games participant. Writer: novelist, freelancer. Interestes: Renaissance, religious history, turtles.
  • Country:United States

Posted 21 July 2005 - 07:20 AM

Everybody's in love with perfection. Every age and generation will find that technological asset which serves as a motor for their civilization. The Greeks had the demos. The Romans had civilization. The Chinese had Confucian order. The people of the Renaissance had humanism. The 18th & 19th century had steel. The 20th century had socialist and militarist order. We have nuclear physics and the computer.

I've said this a million times, so forgive me if I repeat myself for the regulars. It's the imperfections which are most interesting to see -- because it is most human. People tell me I should like sword fighting video games, but I hate them because every attack or slash is perfect. When I watch a martial artist, it's the imperfections that I see. And this isn't a bad thing. In striving to reach perfect movement in a kata -- a form -- there are tell tale signs of imperfection which make us human.

So when I watch someone do a sword fighting form, I watch intently for their unique style. I watch what they bring to a standard set of movement.

It's the same for everything in nature. No tree grows "perfectly." Every particle in a cloud is an exp​ression of its connection to the universe.

So does Vader's symmetrical face mask make a statement? Sure it does if the intent had been that GL wanted Vader's physical appearance to reflect the growing industrial standardization of the Empire. But we know that's not the case. It's a props person taking pride in the fact that he "discovered" that Vader was asymmetrical and that he, with his technology, was going to "fix" the problem.

One of the first things that struck all of us (if we saw SW originally in 1977) was that the spaceships and the planets were beat up and used. It wasn't that utopian world where all ships were symmetrical. Space -- a haven from our own imperfect world. A place of undying hope. 1977 was a post-Vietnam and post-Nixon world. I had no understanding of those events, but that environment was a world out of which SW was created. Similarly, I could make the same case for the prequels. They are probably reflective of its time period.

GL has a certain method to his madness. But it's not always consistent. And I don't think a symmetrical Vader mask was high on the priority list.
Author: Sword Fighting in the Star Wars Universe.
0

#27 User is offline   Chefelf Icon

  • LittleHorse Fan
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Admin
  • Posts: 4,528
  • Joined: 30-October 03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New York, NY
  • Country:United States

Posted 21 July 2005 - 09:01 AM

Which is what is so concerning. The man who once snuck in and smeared dirt on all the spaceship models is now paying someone a salary to create a symmetrical Vader mask.

And everything is squeaky clean now, much like all other Sci Fi we've seen. The thing that makes Sci Fi so boring and unrealistic. I guess Lucas would use the excuse that things were cleaner before the Empire. I'm not buying it. I sure would have liked to see some of that philosophy in the prequels.
See Chefelf in a Movie! -> The People vs. George Lucas

Buy the New LittleHorse CD, Strangers in the Valley!
CD Baby | iTunes | LittleHorse - Flight of the Bumblebee Video

Chefelf on: Twitter | friendfeed | Jaiku | Bitstrips | Muxtape | Mento | MySpace | Flickr | YouTube | LibraryThing
0

#28 User is offline   CptSeaMonkey Icon

  • New Cop
  • Group: Junior Members
  • Posts: 16
  • Joined: 09-June 05
  • Country:United States

Posted 21 July 2005 - 11:39 PM

The funniest thing about the mask is that, as it turns out, Vader doesn't even need the thing to breathe. He just wears it because it's scary looking.
0

#29 User is offline   njamilla Icon

  • Level Boss
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 283
  • Joined: 02-November 03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Washington, DC
  • Interests:Black belts: aikido, kendo, iaido, jodo. 1987 World Fencing Championships, World University Games participant. Writer: novelist, freelancer. Interestes: Renaissance, religious history, turtles.
  • Country:United States

Posted 22 July 2005 - 03:55 PM

QUOTE (CptSeaMonkey @ Jul 21 2005, 11:39 PM)
The funniest thing about the mask is that, as it turns out, Vader doesn't even need the thing to breathe.  He just wears it because it's scary looking.


Never thought of that.

In a fanfic I wrote a long time ago, I made a connection with an idea that Alderaan had a long tradition of masks in its many cultures so that the idea of a man hidden behind a mask (whatever its form) was not a symbol of darkness or evil, but of the reality that we all wear masks of a sort.

It's funny that GL rarely speaks on the philosophical aspects of his saga. Even during the days when Joseph Campbell was around, it was Campbell who made all of the connections, not GL.

Of course, with the prequel, GL's precision (midi-chlorians and a prophecy) fall far short of the philosophical interpretations that came out of the OT. I didn't agree with all of the Campbell mythologicizing, but academics gave SW some credibility. Today it's all about niggling about silly details.
Author: Sword Fighting in the Star Wars Universe.
0

#30 User is offline   Giff Icon

  • Level Boss
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 273
  • Joined: 28-May 05
  • Country:United States

Posted 22 July 2005 - 06:08 PM

QUOTE (njamilla @ Jul 22 2005, 12:55 PM)
...but of the reality that we all wear masks of a sort.


That instantly made me think of Ben Stein in the film "THE MASK"

"we all wear masks metaphorically speaking...."
0

  • (3 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3


Fast Reply

  • Decrease editor size
  • Increase editor size